Response to the BoSTES. Stage 6 English Draft Writing Brief

Transcription

1 Response to the BoSTES Stage 6 English Draft Writing Brief The English Teachers Association of NSW is an association with a membership of 1600 individual teachers of secondary English additional 350 English faculties. In preparing this response we held a consultation at the state conference in Sydney where key ideas were posted by attendees a follow-up, more detailed consultation meeting of interested attendees a meeting of the Curriculum Assessment Committee to aggregate these responses others that had come by . Suite of courses Members were supportive of the suite of courses proposed for Stage 6. They were particularly relieved to see the retention of Extension 2 of English Studies. Questions were raised about Fundamentals of English, its role as a support course for English Stard its place in the context of English Studies. Given the strong support for flexibility in admission to the Stard course from English Studies, the BoSTES might consider how Fundamentals could be used to assist in this process. Rationale for the courses As no rationale for the study of English in the Stage 6 Curriculum has been included in the Draft Writing Brief, ETA members would like to advocate for the following aspects of the current rationale to be included English as the matory subject in Stage 6 students reflecting on their reading learning understing that these processes are shaped by the contexts in which they respond to compose texts students perceiving understing their world from a variety of perspectives. The second third points above seem to be missing from the rationales in the Draft Writing Brief the ETA believes that these are a natural progression from the statement in the rationale of English K-10 The English K 10 Syllabus enables teachers to draw on the methods of different theoretical perspectives models for teaching English to assist their students to achieve the syllabus outcomes at the highest levels (p.13) of Outcomes EN5 7D, EN5 8D EN5 9E. Members recognised the similarity of the rationales for the individual courses to those of the current Stage 6 syllabus. However, substantial concerns were raised at the absence of 1. the integration of the modes of reading, writing, speaking, listening, viewing representing 2. Students are encouraged to value a range of approaches to texts. The first of these is an important statement about the ways in which meaning is made, both cognitively as written texts are sometimes imagined visually or aurally, in contemporary texts, particularly digital texts. This is a key element of the current Stage 6 English syllabus as outlined in the explanation of language modes in the Key Terms in the Study of English (p.8).

2 The second is already included in the rationale for English in the 7-10 syllabus, as stated previously, a natural progression of Stage 5 Outcomes 7 8. It also allows students to reflect on their own approaches to texts in the light of others they have been exposed to, so enriching their metacognitive processes. A suggestion was made that there needs to be a clearer connection between the first sentences of the Stard Advanced course rationales, which focuses on language, the distinction of English as a subject. While other disciplines deal with content of texts, English focuses on how language structures of texts are wrought by composers to convey meaning for effect. Because this idea is absent, too many of the proposed units focus on the what of texts rather than the how the why of composition response. Aim Objectives Question were raised as to why the Aim of the Advanced course was different to the Aims of the other courses, yet the Objectives the same what the substantive difference is between value the English language in its various textual forms to become thoughtful, imaginative effective communicators in a diverse changing society to make meaning in ways that are imaginative, creative, interpretive, critical powerful. (Advanced Aim only) It is suggested that the idea of how language is used to shape understing of ourselves the world be incorporated into the Aims of all English courses that the differences in the endings of the Aims be resolved into one statement appropriate to all courses. Outcomes Members recognise the extreme difficulty in differentiating between the development of students in English from the Preliminary to the HSC course between courses in particular outcomes. The relationship between the Stage 4/5 the Stage 6 outcomes is clearly evident in the Draft Writing Brief but this poses the problem of how to raise the difficulty articulate the progression. Below are a few comments from members on the development of the Stard Advanced courses. The use of critically assess of EN52A is barely distinguishable from the evaluate of proposed Outcome 2. strategically works well as a differentiator between Advanced Preliminary HSC courses specific range of skills in the Preliminary Advanced course seems to be less deming that the wide range of processes etc required at Stard. One way of resolving the issue of a clear progression is to move away from the direct relationship with the Stage 5 outcomes to identify new ways of seeing student achievement. For example Outcome 1 in the current syllabus, requires students to demonstrate understing of the relationships between composer, responder, text context. This is demonstrated through students responding composing, the key idea in both EN51A Outcome 1 in the Draft Writing Brief, but is significantly evidently more deming. This may avoid using such subjective terms as sophisticated nuanced.

3 Module options The ETA is unable to suggest clear preferences for any suite of options as members found issues with the way in which they were conceived or combined. Extrapolating from their comments, the Curriculum Assessment Committee can make the following general suggestions. Stard Advanced courses Members of the ETA have consistently stated that the current HSC course is too full the pressure to complete the basic requirements of the modules does not allow for sufficient skill development opportunities for writing for discussion. They also stated that in an attempt to cover the three modules, deep conceptual understing could be compromised. Members would like to see only 3 components of the HSC course a common content 2 modules with electives. They recognise that this would mean that each module would need to be conceived more broadly such suggestions as Experience of Shakespeare would place undue emphasis on one, albeit important, element of an English course. Members urged that related texts not be examined in the HSC in Stard English but many saw that since they enabled students to make connections between texts, they should be retained for school assessment purposes. Similarly, they wanted space in the syllabus for more creative writing but members were divided as to whether it should be examined or not. Those that wanted creative writing examined believed that unless it were, it would be ignored in the pressure to meet examination requirements. It was suggested that one way to address this issue was through monitoring the writing process students work be submitted with a process reflection, as done in Extension 2. The module options in the Draft Writing Brief were met with a range of responses. There was however a general concern expressed about the separation of modes in the electives (Reading to Write, Visual, Multimodal Digital Communication). Members believe that the strength appeal of the study of English comes from the comparison of texts in different modes to highlight aspects of the discipline such as point of view, subjectivity, narrative etc. Another broad conviction was that students should have the opportunity to study literary texts in all modules in every course. They said that caging literature in its own module as suggested in the Draft Writing Brief, risks losing richness in all opportunities for comparison or contrast with in form, function purpose, a key approach to learning. Similarly, such fundamental processes as close study, wide reading, composition critique need to be built into the work of each module. A further comment on general issues around the module options was that some were too narrow in scope for a syllabus document. The identification of topics, in such proposals as the Lscape series, moves away from the current focus of modules on aspects, concepts or processes which underpin the discipline of English namely, close study/ textual integrity of texts (Mod B) comparing texts context (Mod A) representing understing the material world (Mod C) representing understing concepts (AoS). It is recommended that each module should clearly address distinct aspects of the discipline, key concepts processes of English, so that when combined, students underst the nature purpose of the subject as a whole. It is also suggested that each module description articulate its learning purpose. Teachers students need to be aware of what they are learning through the activities of the module why.

4 For example in Textual Conversations (Preliminary Advanced), students identify, interpret, analyse evaluate the textual features, conventions, contexts values of two prescribed texts that resonate with each other Students explore individual common relationships between the text its contexts of production reception how these contexts shape the representations evident in the text affect responses to the text. The purpose of the learning about English is stated in how these contexts shape the representations evident in the text affect responses to the text. But in Comparison of texts (Advanced HSC) students identify, interpret, analyse evaluate the textual features, conventions, contexts values of two prescribed texts from the same genre or two texts composed by the same author. Students explore individual common textual features, concepts values evaluate the effectiveness of these aspects. They compose a range of critical, interpretive imaginative texts in a range of modes mediums for different audiences. Students do a lot here but to no stated purpose; no reason is given as to why students should engage in comparison of texts in a genre or by one author. These are likely to have different learning purposes anyway. At Preliminary, students are learning about the effects of context on meaning but here there is a risk that the HSC module could be taught at a lower conceptual level than the Preliminary one. Extension Members recognised that Text, Culture Values needed broadening to enable teachers to lay the necessary groundwork for Extension 1 in the HSC year. There was no support for an independent research project of substance but there was recognition that research methods smaller research tasks products could be integrated into course work. The members were highly supportive of the current structure approach of the HSC Extension 1 2 courses. Members did not want to see common content in HSC Extension 1 were keen to retain the creative response. They viewed the proposed study Powerful Non-Fiction as too narrow an unnecessary segmentation of types of texts, particularly given that passionate expression, argument, persuasion commentary can be taught very effectively through fictional texts as well. The list of possible modules for Extension 1 occasioned no comment except that again, the learning purpose linked to the rationale of the subject as a whole needed to be articulated. There was an overwhelming rejection of a proposed examination for Extension 2. Members only concern for Extension 2 was that the approaches to the development marking of the major works needed to be reconsidered. English Studies Members see English Studies as an important course for keeping students at school. Students, even those who are disengaged in other subjects, find their work in English Studies interesting relevant. Members were keen to retain the course as it sts with more support from the BoSTES to help them underst stards of student achievement. There was no support for a common core with the Stard course a unanimous outcry against an examination for English Studies students. Teachers believe that this route would, on one h diminish the Stard course, on the other make a clear statement that pathways other than those to tertiary education are not valued.

5 Some members wanted more fluidity in moving students from English Studies to Stard a suggestion was made that perhaps a student s undertaking Fundamentals of English with English Studies may be a requirement for this to occur. EALD Members state that the EALD course needs to be primarily an English course, one designed for students for whom English is an additional language, not an English language or literacy course. For this reason, they believe that literacy activities, listening speaking, writing, digital multimedia texts literature which have been placed in discrete modules need to be integrated into all modules. Modules, like in the other courses need to be defined through the concepts processes of English as a disciplinary study, not as a language. Assessment Given the open nature of this section of the Draft Writing Brief, the ETA would simply like to reiterate concerns raised in other consultations earlier sections of this response. Members frequently draw attention to the burden placed on teachers students by a deming continuous internal assessment program would also like to see assessment made simpler in the way the modes reflect the breadth of the syllabus urge that related texts not be examined in the HSC in Stard English do not want an examination component for English Studies students do not want an examination component for the Extension 2 course. The ETA thanks the BoSTES for the opportunity to participate in this important consultation recognises the work that has gone into the Draft Writing Brief goes into this entire process of syllabus development.