1. What is the relationship between pedagogy, student engagement and literacy? Daniel Bayer Tim McLeod, Nikki Nardelli, Sue Richards

2. Background 3 levels of schooling (R-12)  Early/ Primary,  Middle and  Senior Years Category 2 SES

3. Context The student cohort consists of students who enroll for a range of reasons Curriculum Choice Distance Travellers Vocational At Risk Medical (62%)

4. Middle Years Review Integrated, interactive, online units with a student interest focus Team of teachers Individual Learning Plans Differentiated curriculum

5. Literature review There is considerable research supporting the fact that literacy is integral to effective learning in all curriculum areas and across all phases of learning Indeed Literacy is essential for students' life-long learning and for their active participation in work, family and civic life in this highly complex and networked world. DETE Queensland Government, 2012, Literacy the key to Learning

6. Literacy focus National Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians (MCEETYA 2008) Australian Curriculum State Literacy directorate East Adelaide Region Priority 1 Improved outcomes in Literacy and Numeracy iLit training

7. Literacy focus OAC Literacy Plan R – 12 PALLS training Site Improvement Plan Staff training (Stepping Out, First Steps, Phonics)

8. Action Research Qualitative data Middle Years profile. Parent, student and teacher questionnaires. Student Engagement Matrix. observation and anecdotal comments on the implementation of various strategies. anecdotal records of student progress and attitudes

9. Action Research Quantitative Data student PAT Reading and Spelling. Individual Learning Plans. Attendance. Work return.

10. Base Line data

11. No. of students % of students Significantly disengaged25 Partly disengaged1124 Moderately engaged1942 Very engaged818 Extremely engaged511 Student Engagement Data

12. No. of students % of students Signifcantly disengaged613 Partly disengaged1329 Moderately engaged1942 Very engaged716 Extremely engaged00

13. No. of students % of students Significantly disengaged12 Partly disengaged1329 Moderately engaged2147 Very engaged1022 Extremely engaged00 Student Engagement Data

14. No. of students % of students Wave 32228 Wave 22025 Caution1722 Wave 12025 Diagnostic Data

15. No. of students % of students Wave 31724 Wave 22534 Caution1419 Wave 11723 Diagnostic Data

16. No. of students% of students Wave 34049 Wave 22429 Caution1012 Wave 1810 Diagnostic Data

17. Like school comparison ReadingOACSES 2 schools Wave 328%5% Wave 225%10%

18. Intervention Action based on Base Line data Diagnostic testing of all incoming year 8 & 9. Differentiated curriculum to cater for individual needs. Wave 3 – 5 (1-on-1) sessions/week of literacy and numeracy for students with greatest needs. Wave 2 - 2 (1-on-1) sessions/week of literacy and numeracy for students with significant needs. Special Education teacher support for students with Negotiated Education Plans. Term 4, 2013 further data collection to review the intervention and plan for further action.

19. Conclusion We have already learnt from the process and instigated some improvements based on our Action Research including:  extending testing and student support to incorporate all students in Years 3 to 9.  valuing socialisation of the student so that Wave 3 learners now attend all their team’s lesson as well as their support lessons.

20. References Boyd, J, 2001, Effective Middle Schooling, Global Learning Communities, Aust Deakin University, 2001, Literacy an Learning in the Middle Years- Major Report on the Middle Years Literacy Research Project, April 2001, Consultancy and Development Unit, Faculty of Education, Deakin University Available at: http://www.eduweb.vic.gov.au/edulibrary/public/teachlearn/student/ MYLiteracyFullReport.pdf http://www.eduweb.vic.gov.au/edulibrary/public/teachlearn/student/ MYLiteracyFullReport.pdf DECS, 2011, ICAN & Mentoring: Student Engagement Matrix, Government of South Australia DETE Queensland Government, 2012, Literacy the key to Learning, http://education.qld.gov.au/literacy/

21. References Hattie, John A.C. (2009), Visible Learning: A Synthesis of over 800 Meta- Analyses Relating to Achievement, Routledge, London Rowe, K, 2006, Effective Teaching Practices for students with and without learning difficulties: Constructivism as a legitimate theory of learning and teaching?, ACER http://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1008&context=le arning_processes&sei-redir