5 / 68
Literacy
www.speechpathologyaustralia.org.auACQ
Volume 11, Number 2 2009
67
This article
has been
peer-
reviewed
Keywords
history
literacy
professional
role
speech
pathology
specialist knowledge in specific aspects of literacy, but
limited understanding of how their knowledge connects with
that of others’, or the context within which they will use it
(Richardson & Wallach, 2005). This lack of broad pre-service
literacy training leaves SPs to make these connections once
they are in a work context (Richardson & Wallach, 2005).
Conversely, there are recognised shortcomings in teacher
pre-service training and an acknowledged need to change
the focus of pre-service training related to literacy (American
Federation of Teachers, 1999; Education Queensland,
2006; Torgesen, 2004). For example, New Zealand and UK
research with pre-service and practising teachers found
that very few could phonemically segment words accurately
(Carroll, 2006; Scarborough, Ehri, Olson & Fowler, 1998).
Additionally, Richardson and Wallach (2005) suggested that
the lack of study in phonology, morphology, syntax and
semantics in US pre-service teaching courses is an obstacle
in the successful preparation of literacy teachers. Since
literacy came to encompass all language arts in the 1970s,
spoken language has been neglected in comparison to the
teaching of reading and writing (Halliday & Hasan, 1976). The
Australian government’s National Inquiry into the Teaching of
Literacy included a survey of all 4-year Bachelor of Education
courses around Australia. It found that while many students
undertaking these courses themselves lack knowledge of
such concepts of phonemic awareness, phonics and the
alphabetic principle, less that 10 per cent of course time
was devoted to preparing student teachers to teach reading
(Department of Education, Science and Training, 2005).
Coltheart and Prior (2007, p. 7) stated that regarding the
teaching of literacy “the situation in teacher training courses
in Australia is grave”.
Language is increasingly recognised as central to literacy
(Ehren & Nelson, 2005). SPs are well aware of how spoken
language underpins the development of literacy and how
aspects of spoken language skills can indicate possible
future literacy difficulties (Speech Pathology Australia, 2005).
SPs use various images to promote the importance of the
relationship between spoken and written language, typically
“stepping stones” or “bridges” (Paul, 2007). However, such
images may suggest that children “move on” from spoken
language to the more important area of written language,
inadvertently implying that once a child is about 7, spoken
language can be “demoted” while the focus changes to
literacy. These images fail to highlight the common language
(symbolic representation) system that underlies both
spoken and written language. In this writer’s opinion, some
Despite the relevance of the speech
pathologist’s professional skills to literacy
learning and remediation, it is argued that the
speech pathologist’s limited knowledge of the
“big picture” of literacy can be a significant
barrier to promoting their role. Varying
definitions, perspectives, and beliefs related to
literacy may all impact on effectively
conveying the role of speech pathologists in
this area. This article provides information
related to the big picture of literacy which may
assist speech pathologists to better promote
their own role in literacy.
L
iteracy education is an extremely complex and
politically charged area and speech pathologists (SPs)
risk being ignored if they attempt to promote their role
without knowledge of how they fit within the “big picture” of
literacy. SPs need to know about (ASHA, 2002):
•
the nature of literacy, including spoken-written language
relationships and reading and writing as acts of
communication and tools of learning;
•
normal development of reading and writing in the context
of the general education curriculum;
•
clinical tools and methods for targeting reciprocal spoken
and written language growth; and
•
disorders of language and literacy and their relationships
to each other and to other communication disorders.
However, clinical skills alone are not sufficient. This article
proposes that SPs also need to know about:
•
the differing content of pre-service training in literacy for
SPs and teachers;
•
the various definitions of literacy;
•
the range of perspectives on literacy in recent history; and
•
the influence of opinion and ideology in literacy policy and
practice.
Pre-service training in literacy
Significant differences in professionals’ knowledge and
approach to literacy instruction result from teachers’
educational-based training and speech pathologists’
medical-based training (McCartney & van der Gaag, 1996).
Pre-service SPs tend not to be exposed to the literacy
research literature outside their area (Snow, Scarborough &
Burns, 1999; Westby, 2004). So, as graduates, SPs have
The big picture
of literacy
Regina Walsh
Regina Walsh