be dominated by postmodernist theory that undermines the essentials of literacy.
The current focus on pursuing a‘back-to-basics’approach to teaching students not
only centres on literacy and numeracy but also increasingly prescribes teaching
methods reminiscent of a‘golden’past, far removed from the multiple literacies
movement that alerts students to the politicisation of texts. In this vein, the
Australian Government has lamented the decline of what it regards as effective and
proven methods: especially‘phonemic awareness and phonics’(TEMAG 2015 :5)
popular during the 1970s. Accompanying this is a predilection for direct instruction,
especially in remote and disadvantaged schools. Former Minister Pyne has artic-
ulated this preference thus:“I am personally very determined to drive an agenda in
literacy that focuses on phonics”(Pyne, in Hurst 2013 ) and:
I think a phonics-based, robust curriculum in primary years should be the norm across all
schools in Australia... when parents discover the transformative impact...on their
struggling child’s learning ability there will be a revolution demanding that it be introduced
beyond remote schools. (Pyne, in Walker 2014 )In England there is a similar assertion that“we do not have a strong enough focus
on what is proven to be the most effective practice in teacher education and
development”(DfE 2010 : 19). This is championed as“focusing on core teaching
skills, especially in teaching reading and mathematics and in managing behaviour”
(DfE 2010 : 9). As in Australia, the argument is that“systematic synthetic phonics is
the proven best way to teach early reading”(DfE 2010 :22–23).
Yet critical research on literacy in schools suggests that when teachers are
required to teach in prescribed ways for particular outcomes, other pedagogic
approaches and teachers’professional judgments are squeezed out (Comber 2012 ).
Students for whom prescribed approaches to teaching literacy are not effective, are
difficult to accommodate when other ways of teaching are marginalised. Teachers’
knowledge and experience in assisting these students are no longer valued as they
do not contribute to mandated literacy teaching:
Because NAPLAN [National Assessment Program: Literacy and Numeracy] is what
counts, other curriculum areas and other literacy activities are sidelined...a disengaged
student experiences a teacher who is unable to use her full repertoire to re-connect him with
the educative process. It is not that she doesn’t have the professional knowledge or
experience, so often seen as the causes of student alienation....Subsequently, a student,
who most needs her expertise, becomes a problem in a different way. (Comber 2012 : 129)In contrast, these are the very knowledges and experiences that Donaldson wants
teachers to evoke:
The most successful education systems invest in developing their teachers as reflective,
accomplished and enquiring professionals who are able, not simply to teach successfully in
relation to current external expectations, but who have the capacity to engage fully with the
complexities of education and to be key actors in shaping and leading educational change.
(Donaldson 2011 : 14)35 The Prevailing Logic of Teacher Education... 529