Other Duties as Assigned: The Hidden Work of Reading and Writing Assessments in Two Primary Classrooms

Holly Carol Parkinson,Rosamund Kathryn Stooke

doi:10.20360/g2js3h

Abstract

This article presents findings from a qualitative investigation into the literacy work of two Ontario primary teachers. Informed by the writing of Dorothy E. Smith, we construe the literacy curriculum as a social accomplishment, the product of many people’s work. Through a critical examination of field notes and teachers’ accounts of their work, we explicate ways in which required reading and writing assessments were mediating a hidden curriculum. Specifically we discuss a paradoxical finding that both teachers organized their literacy curriculum in ways that facilitated the collection of assessment data, yet neither teacher explicitly employed assessment data when making pedagogical decisions and neither teacher mentioned assessment work when describing her school’s literacy curriculum.

Highlights

This article discusses findings from a qualitative study of teachers‘ work in two Ontario primary classrooms
Through a critical examination of observational field notes and teachers‘ accounts of their work, we show how required reading and writing assessments were mediating the literacy curricula in both classrooms
The overarching question asked in the study was: What work do teachers carry out as they operationalize the expectations of The Ontario Curriculum, Grades 1-8: Language (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2006a)? the finding that both teachers were spending such large quantities of time and energy on assessment work

Summary

Introduction

This article discusses findings from a qualitative study of teachers‘ work in two Ontario primary classrooms. The teachers‘ accounts of their literacy assessment work tended to focus on official texts such as the Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA) and the Ontario Provincial Writing Assessment (Nelson Education, 2008), but Jane showed Holly several binders of locally-produced rubrics and information about assessments. She will have to organize some self-sustaining, independent activities for the other children to do while she works with each small group on the assessment task Emma said she knows that when the assessment tasks are completed in that way they won‘t be valid as the teacher will have helped the students. We inferred that like the teachers who participated in Comber and Nixon‘s (2009) study, Jane and Emma were approaching the assessments as bureaucratic requirements that got in the way of their curriculum work Why did Emma feel a need to adjust the writing assessment tasks and build a guided writing lesson around an artificial task even though she knew the assessment results would not be valid? We inferred that like the teachers who participated in Comber and Nixon‘s (2009) study, Jane and Emma were approaching the assessments as bureaucratic requirements that got in the way of their curriculum work

Discussion

Conclusion