Literacies for Learning in FE Project structure

2 universities

4 colleges

16 curriculum areas

32 units

100 students

Preston College Lancaster and Morecambe College

Anniesland College Perth College

LancasterLancaster University UniversityUniversity of Stirling

Travel & TourismCatering & Hospitality Media StudiesChild Care

Certificate in Child Care and Education

Diploma in Child Care and Education

NVQ 1Intro to C&H

NVQ 2 Food and Drink Service

Working Overseas

BTEC ND Travel & Tourism

AS Media Studies

Access to HE: MediaStudies

Four students

Four studentsFourstudents

Fourstudents

Fourstudents

Fourstudents

Fourstudents

Fourstudents

Level 2 Level 3 Level 1 Level 2 Level 2 Level 3 Level 3 Level 2

Two stages in the research• Actions for understanding:

research and reflections on(A) The reading and writing which students encounter in college (B) The reading and writing involved in students’ everyday lives outside college

• Actions for change:(C) Tutors made small changes in their practice to improve (A) in the light of (B)

Categories of literacy practices in learning vocational subjects in Further Education (A)

• Literacy practices for learning (e.g. reading and making notes from a text book)

• Literacy practices for assessment (e.g. producing an essay or a report)

• Evidence-providing literacy practices (e.g. completing a log book or portfolio)

• Literacy practices relating to the workplace (e.g. writing food orders; reading to children)

The washback effect

• All literacies for learning were shaped and constrained by assessment requirements

• The form, content, focus and delivery of assessment often determined thecurriculum and the way it was taught

• As a result, these features in turn tend to affect the skills set which is the outcome of learning.

(B) The reading and writing involved

in students’ everyday lives outside college

• FE students CAN and DO read and write abundantly in their everyday lives;

• Not only staff but also students were surprised to discover this

Literacies in everyday life

Literacy practices which students identify with tend to have the following characteristics:

• Mostly multi-modal, e.g. involving speech, music, gesture, movement, colour, pictures, symbols

• Mostly multi-media, e.g. including sound, electronic and paper media

• Shared, interactive, participatory – virtual and/or real• Non-linear, i.e. involving complex, varied reading paths• Agentic or student being in charge• Purposeful to the student• Clear audience perceived by the student• Generative, i.e. involving sense-making and creativity• Self-determined in terms of activity, time and place

Comparison of workplace, home and pedagogic literacy practices

Workplace and home literacy practices

• Mostly multi-modal • Mostly multi-media• Shared, interactive,

participatory• Non-linear• Agentic• Purposeful• Clear audience• Generative

Pedagogic literacy practices• Mostly mono-modal• Mostly paper-based • Individual, non-interactive,

solitary• Linear• Non-Agentic• Ambiguous purpose• Ambiguous audience• Information provided

Fine tuning literacies for learning

• Changes in practice which engaged with students’ everyday literacy practices tended to increase students’ engagement, recall and confidence

• Changes in tutor practice not necessarily innovative but could be new to particular staff and students involved, e.g. Mind maps

• Not all students wished to engage with their everyday literacy practices

Changes made by tutors to literacy for learning practices

• Made students more aware of their own everyday reading and writing practices which could be used for learning

• Made communication aspects of learning more explicit

• Made reading and writing on courses more relevant to learning and to the futures for which students were preparing

• Made reading and writing on courses more resonant with students’ own literacy practices

Things to think about in our discussion

• How do we avoid teaching to the test?

• How easily can the messages from literacy be used with numeracy/maths/ICT teaching and learning?

• Where does a ‘problem solving approach’ fit with the findings?

• How can a social practice model fit with a functional skills model?