Details

Published: 09 February 2018

Hits: 33010

Dr Kerry Hempenstall, Senior Industry Fellow, School of Education, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia.

All my blogs can be viewed on-line or downloaded as a Word file or PDF at https://www.dropbox.com/sh/olxpifutwcgvg8j/AABU8YNr4ZxiXPXzvHrrirR8a?dl=0

Complete PDF of the Teaching Reading in Secondary Schools is also here: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/olxpifutwcgvg8j/AAAIKplGUIX1XqTgEnXBC4L1a/PDFs?dl=0&preview=Teaching+reading+in+secondary+schools.pdf

Teaching reading in secondary schools: Some theoret

ical and

practical issues.

Teaching reading in secondary schools: Some theoret

ical and

practical issues.

New Addition - March 2025

So, does this new document differ from the early version of this Secondary Schools? Might there be anything that suggests a change in our education system?

This may be a dubious suggestion - that there could now be a greater incidence of attention to behaviour management than education issues.

Interesting that in the early version of Teaching reading in secondary schools there were 14 mentions of behaviour in the text. In the newer version there are 45 mentions on behaviour.

Ahh! - OK! So, back to the serious:

Pupils' challenging behaviour towards their teachers (2025)

“Student challenging behavior toward teachers is a common phenomenon across countries. This qualitative study, based on 28 interviews with teachers and their school principals, from nine public schools in Denmark, examined how teachers prevent challenging behavior and the role of team organization.

The findings emphasize that sharing knowledge, experiences, and responsibilities within teams facilitates prevention. School principals play a key role in supporting teachers and fostering reflection on teacher-student interactions. Trust among team members is essential for effective collaboration.

Strengthening team organization and collaboration offers a practical approach to managing and preventing challenging behaviors within the student-teacher dynamic in schools.

Issues:

Challenging behavior by students toward their teachers poses a significant problem.

Teachers prevented challenging behavior from students by collaborating in teams.

Teachers shared knowledge, experience, and responsibility to prevent such behavior.”

Lars Peter S. Andersen, Trine Nøhr Winding, R. Grytnes, Pupils' challenging behaviour towards their teachers: The role of teacher team collaboration in prevention. A qualitative study. Teaching and Teacher Education, Volume 155, 2025, 104883, ISSN 0742-051X, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104883

(https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0742051X24004165)

“Why do we see poor behaviour?

The development of disruptive behaviour can be influenced by a range of biological, social, environmental, and educational factors. Here are three key reasons why students might engage in disruptive behaviour at school:

1. Students find the school work too difficult

Students with delayed academic skills are more likely to exhibit disruptive and challenging behaviour, and students who display disruptive behaviour may be more likely to fall behind academically.

This connection has been shown to be strongest between a student’s reading skills and disruptive behaviour. This makes sense, because as students’ progress through primary school, they need to demonstrate increasingly advanced language and literacy skills to participate and succeed academically in all subjects.

2. Students are trying to impress their peers

Students are more likely to display disruptive behaviour in schools and classrooms where this is accepted. Researchers talk about the “classroom climate”. These are the values, beliefs and norms that set the behaviour within a classroom setting.

At school (particularly in high school), peer approval is one of the most important variables that can influence student behaviour.

Being disruptive may seem “cool” in some peer groups, and researchers have found that this can promote a culture of student disruption.

3. Students are copying their parents

Students model and learn the behaviours they see. Telling students how to behave well won’t work when the adults in the room are overwhelmed, stressed, and not in control of their emotions.

Recent research suggest teachers and school leaders are facing increasing threats and hostility from parents. Students may witness these parent-teacher conflicts and behave in similar ways when managing conflict at school.”

Leif, E. (2023). Australian classrooms are among the 'least favourable' for discipline in the OECD. Here's how to improve student behaviour. The Conversation.

Https://theconversation.com/australian-classrooms-are-among-the-least-favourable-for-discipline-in-the-oecd-heres-how-to-improve-student-behaviour-202946

“Managing 20-30 adults in one room is a challenge for even the best managers. Swap the adults for children and you have what classroom teachers do every day.

Student behaviour and engagement in class are some of the biggest problems worrying Australian teachers and education experts. According to a 2022 report, Australian classrooms rank among the OECD’s most disorderly. This can range from low-level behaviours such as talking, not following instructions and using a mobile phone in class, to destruction of property, physical and verbal abuse.

This makes it harder for students to learn and more stressful for teachers to teach.

For the past year, a Liberal-chaired Senate inquiry has been looking at “increasing disruption in Australian school classrooms”.

Following an interim report in December 2023, the final report was released on Wednesday evening.

“Managing 20-30 adults in one room is a challenge for even the best managers. Swap the adults for children and you have what classroom teachers do every day.

Student behaviour and engagement in class are some of the biggest problems worrying Australian teachers and education experts. According to a 2022 report, Australian classrooms rank among the OECD’s most disorderly. This can range from low-level behaviours such as talking, not following instructions and using a mobile phone in class, to destruction of property, physical and verbal abuse.

This makes it harder for students to learn and more stressful for teachers to teach.

For the past year, a Liberal-chaired Senate inquiry has been looking at “increasing disruption in Australian school classrooms”.

Following an interim report in December 2023, the final report was released on Wednesday evening.

What is in the report?

On top of its previous recommendation to introduce a “behaviour curriculum” (to “help students understand their school’s behavioural expectations and values”), the committee now recommends a further inquiry into “declining academic standards” in Australian schools.

News that cuts through the noise in an election year.

Get free newsletter

The report notes the latest Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) results. Released in December 2023, this is an international test of 15-year-olds’ knowledge and skills in science, maths and reading:

while Australia’s relative performance has remained mostly unchanged over the last two cycles, Australian students’ overall performance has actually been in steady decline over the past two decades.

Along with the academic component, a PISA questionnaire asked students how often disruptions happened in maths lessons. This included asking whether students do not listen to what the teacher says and whether there is noise and disorder in the classroom.

Australia ranked 33 out of the 37 OECD countries in the survey. Around 40% of Australian students reported they get distracted by using digital devices in maths lessons, while more than 30% said they get distracted by other students using digital devices.”

“Sally’s research documented average scores in the four major standardised assessments in which Australia’s students have participated since 1995.

All but one assessment program (PISA) showed improvements or minimal change in average achievement.

In particular, primary school students’ scores in some of the standardised literacy and numeracy tests, including NAPLAN, PIRLS and TIMSS, have notably improved since the start of testing in each program.

For example, for PIRLS, which tests Year 4 reading skills, the average score for Australian students increased from 527 in 2011 to 544 in 2016 and 540 in 2021 (the difference between 2016 and 2021 is negligible).

Since NAPLAN testing began in 2008, average Year 3 reading achievement has increased by the equivalent of a full year’s progress.

In high school, students’ NAPLAN and TIMSS results have stayed largely the same over the same time span.”

Georgiou, H. and Larsen, S., 2023. Are Australian students really falling behind? It depends which test you look at. The Conversation. Are Australian students really falling behind? It depends which test you look at

“The report also noted the Australian Education Research Organisation’s recent work on behaviour, backed by federal government funding.

In December 2023 the organisation released a paper looking at the evidence on what works to manage classrooms. Last month it also released a guide for teachers based on this research.

Post-COVID, teachers have reported student behaviour appears to be getting worse, with students more distracted and less engaged than before the pandemic began.”

Zid Niel Mancenido. (2024). A new Senate report sounds alarm bells on student behaviour. Here are 4 things to help teachers in the classroom. The Conversation

https://theconversation.com/a-new-senate-report-sounds-alarm-bells-on-student-behaviour-here-are-4-things-to-help-teachers-in-the-classroom-222874

 “According to a 2022 report, Australian classrooms rank among the OECD's most disorderly. This can range from low-level behaviours such as talking, not following instructions and using a mobile phone in class, to destruction of property, physical and verbal abuse.7 Feb 2024

“Research has shown that student choice of text and increased time spent on reading independently are two factors that can result in an increase in students’ reading motivation and enjoyment.

The authors investigated implementation of evidence-based practices to show how they played out in a high school English language arts classroom. The research was guided by two questions: (1) How does choice affect the reading motivation of a group of high school students? (2) How does silent reading time in class affect these students’ perceptions of reading?

Findings reveal that students valued freedom of text choice, leading to increased reading self-concepts and reading value. In addition, dedicating class time to reading and literature circle discussions helped students have more positive reading experiences than otherwise.

These findings suggest benefits from flexibility in literature selection and instructional time, thereby providing a space in the classroom for student-driven reading and discussion.”

Johnny B. Allred,&  Michael E. Cena. (2020). Reading Motivation in High School: Instructional Shifts in Student Choice and Class Time. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 64, 27-35.

https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.1058

“In the context of teaching workforce shortages, this study examined teachers’ perceptions of safety, role satisfaction, and their intent to remain in the profession, in Australia. Findings from two iterations of a survey of a total of 8293 teachers revealed that 20% to 25% of participants felt unsafe in their schools. The results also showed that those who felt unsafe were less likely to be satisfied with the role and more likely to intend to leave the profession. Sources of safety concerns included student and parent behaviors along with a lack of support from schools and systems. The findings highlight an urgent need to better understand how schools and education systems might foster safer, more inclusive and positive learning environments.”

Fiona Longmuir, Amanda McKay, Beatriz Gallo Cordoba, Kelly-Ann Allen & Michael Phillips (2025) Australian Teachers’ Perceptions of Safety, Violence and Limited Support in Their Workplaces, Journal of School Violence, 24:1, 1-20, DOI: 10.1080/15388220.2024.2385893

“Reading is one of the essential skills for a human's social life and economic development. Previous studies have revealed that some students in higher learning institutions rarely read beyond their lecture notes. They rely heavily on detailed PowerPoint slides that are likely to appear on tests or study guides available just a few days before examinations. This study investigated the motives for undergraduate students in Tanzania to read beyond their lecture notes, providing recommendations to promote a reading culture among students in higher learning institutions in a context where many students are averse to such a tradition. Forty-two participants from three higher learning institutions in Tanzania participated in the study: 36 students in focused group discussions and six others in in-depth interviews. The data subjected to inductive thematic analysis revealed factors that motivated the students’ reading culture, include the desire to attain competencies in the subject areas, pursuing personal goals, zeal for excellence and attaining self-confidence. Other motivations to reading beyond notes included fear of failing in the examinations, availability of resources and the instructors’ guidelines. Both internal and external factors accounted for the reading motivation. The study provides practical and policy recommendations to promote reading culture among students in higher learning institutions.”

Mkimbili, S., Amani, J., Kalolo, J., & John, P. (2025). What motivates undergraduate students to read beyond their lecture notes? Studies in Higher Education, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2025.2456603

“This review of the 40+ year process of building a comprehensive reading program for secondary struggling readers yields plenty of areas where researchers and funding agencies can make improvements in future scaling–up projects for any intervention. A number of factors can increase the probability of success.

First, feedback from the teachers indicated that targeted materials need to be created that make the instruction very easy for new teachers. Teachers should not be required to find and compile reading materials for their students that match the reading skills being taught. All the materials should be provided along with lesson plans and other guides.

Funding agencies need to supply enough funds that incentives can be provided to school personnel to ensure fidelity of implementation across all dimensions of the program. Administrators need to be given incentives to attend PD to learn about the program and how to monitor its implementation. They also need to receive incentives to ensure that they are responsible and accountable for ensuring that teachers attend PD and implement all parts of the program with fidelity.

They need to ensure that the teachers and students selected for the program are appropriate for the program and that the correct number of students are assigned to each class. Teachers need to be given detailed and frequent feedback on the quality and quantity of their instruction tied to incentives for implementing the program, staying on pace, covering all components of the program, and realizing student growth and mastery.

Fidelity data need to be collected on the quality of teachers’ presentation of the lessons, the percentage of lessons implemented, whether mastery is being required, and the accuracy of the scoring and feedback provided by the teachers. Outcome data should be gathered by personnel not associated with the school or the program developers.

Incentives should be given to students to perform at their best to equal or “beat” their pretest scores to eliminate insincere attempts on the posttest. Ways of analyzing the outcome data need to be used that are tied to teacher implementation levels and related to individual student performance by those students for whom the program was designed. Compiling all the student data together regardless of whether a teacher has implemented the program should not be done.

Understanding the individual gains students can make is important when trying to close the achievement gap. Additionally, proper controls (e.g., random assignment of students to the intervention) need to be included to ensure that the studies are accepted by the research community.

Other factors such as ensuring that teachers have autonomy in choosing to participate in the program might also be important (Deci, 2009). Indeed, some leaders in the scaling–up field have suggested that a new scaling–up model needs to be adopted; such a model would involve an interactive process that takes into consideration all the factors mentioned above as well as the alignment of policies and infrastructure to ensure the system supports the educational innovation (Glennan et al., 2004a, 2004b).

Notably, the Xtreme Reading Program is not the only secondary–level reading program that has been studied. Numerous other studies have now been completed on other reading interventions at the secondary level (see Baye et al., 2018; Slavin et al., 2008, for reviews). Some of them focus on reading skill/strategy instruction (e.g., Schiller et al., 2012; Vaughn & Fletcher, 2012; Vaughn et al., 2013), while others focus on the method of instruction (e.g., technology [e.g., Shannon & Grant, 2015], intensive group instruction [e.g., Lang et al., 2009], or cooperative learning [e.g., Stevens & Durkin, 1992]).

Although the effect sizes achieved in some of the studies are comparable to those in the scaling–up studies reviewed here, there is no standard set of parameters on which the interventions and studies can be compared. Even though two studies have achieved an effect size of. 09, no one really knows what that means in terms of student gains within individual teachers’ classes.

Although suggestions have been made about principles to follow when scaling–up interventions (e.g., Baker, 2004; i3 Community, 2017; Quint et al., 2005), whether these principles have been followed is unknown. Furthermore, the actual meaning of significant differences and effect sizes in terms of the quality–of–life factors important in raising a student's reading level is not clear. There is no way of knowing whether the achievement gap has been closed in a meaningful way by these interventions such that students can succeed in high school and beyond. Whether certain levels of statistical significance and certain effect sizes translate into the ability to perform in high school courses is anyone's guess. When the field identifies standard parameters related to implementation, outcome data, and data analysis, the results of these comparisons may become clear.

In sum, the research community needs to learn from the experiences that have been derived from the scaling–up efforts of the past. Teachers should not be expected to teach intensive and explicit programs aimed at helping students close the deficit gap without appropriate professional learning experiences and supervision, including accountability checks. Such supervision needs to ensure that all parts of the program are being implemented in the proper order and at the proper pace at a high level of quality.

Evaluators and educators need to stop assuming that implementation is taking place and do more than rating in a global way whether it is taking place. They need to stop assuming that content–area secondary teachers can be expected to teach reading to students with severe reading deficits without considerable buy–in, professional development, detailed feedback, and incentives.

Perhaps scaling–up efforts can take place in phases with only small numbers of teachers and classes being monitored at first until the training and implementation aspects of the project have been ironed out. Perhaps fewer numbers of components are needed to achieve the same results.⁷ Perhaps trying to remediate all of a student's deficits in one year is not practical.

Perhaps students can be taught in two years and followed into additional grades to determine the effects on their performance and longevity in school. Perhaps teachers who have the most success can be studied to determine what sets them apart from other teachers. Once some of these issues have been addressed, larger numbers of schools can be included in scaling–up efforts. Only then will adequate scaling–up efforts be achieved with a complex, multicomponent intervention aimed at closing the achievement gap.”

Schumaker, J. B. (2022). Lessons Learned during the Development and Validation of an Intensive Evidence–Based Reading Intervention for Secondary Students. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 37(4), 294-313. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12293 (Original work published 2022)

“The purpose of this qualitative research study was to understand secondary students' perspectives of their literacy and learning. The study focused on participants who attended a restorative education program and who had faced both academic and personal challenges. Data was obtained through a semi-structured interview process to learn students’ thoughts about literacy and learning, as well as information they want teachers to know about them as individuals.

Findings suggest that the students, who were also striving readers, want teachers to have higher expectations and to provide more unsolicited support. Further, while students engaged in reading outside of school, few had strong role models among family or peers. Finally, students had career goals that required reading skills, and some realized the challenges ahead. Implications include the importance of helping teachers become aware of students' perspectives and encouraging teachers to learn about their students, to demonstrate a caring stance, to establish high expectations, to provide unsolicited opportunities for assistance and to provide students with opportunities to take ownership of their learning.”

Robertson, D.L (2024). Amplifying Voices of Secondary Students in a Restorative Education Program: A Narrative of Experiences, Insights, and Suggestions to Support Literacy and Learning.

 University of Kansas ProQuest Dissertations & Theses,  2024. 31767241

_______________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Effective teaching and successful learning are measured best through assessment. Researchers noted that end-of-grade assessments provide cumulative information on student achievement (Cartwright et al., 2018; Osborne, 2021). That is, end-of-grade assessments are meant to sum up all of a student’s knowledge and skills in a specific academic area.

The results from state assessments look backward to determine if teachers have taught and students have learned all, or at least enough, of the skills needed for a student to demonstrate grade-level proficiency in an area. Both veteran and new teachers are tasked with providing literacy instruction that is differentiated to meet the individual needs of students.

The best way to do this is by compiling data gathered through assessments for each individual student (Al Otaiba et al., 2016; McKenna & Stahl, 2015; Osborne, 2021). Data from the 2019 Georgia Milestones End-of-Grade English Language Arts Assessment show that 55% of students who attend the middle school study site scored below grade level in the area of reading (Georgia Department of Education, 2020). Comparatively, data from the Georgia Milestones Math End-of-Grade Assessments for Grade 6 through

Grade 8 showed that 60.4% of students scored below grade below grade level. The data in Table 1 are evidence of the difficulties secondary school students from the local study site are facing in literacy and may reflect the challenges teachers face in improving subject-specific outcomes.”

Brewington, M.T. (2024. How Secondary Disciplinary Teachers Integrate Literacy Strategies to Improve Outcomes on State Assessments.  Walden University ProQuest Dissertations & Theses,  2024. 31636914.

“The purpose of this study was to provide recommendations to solve the problem of sixth-grade below-proficient reading comprehension scores at Hermitage Middle School in Hermitage, Missouri. The problem was that 60% of the sixth-grade students at Hermitage Middle School could not comprehend grade-level text. The rationale for this research was that it is vital to ameliorate the reading comprehension scores of students since improvements may lead to greater grade-level and post-secondary readiness and an increase in school reputation, accreditation, and enrollment. The central research was, How can the problem of sixth-grade below-proficient reading comprehension be solved at Hermitage Middle School in Hermitage, Missouri? Three forms of data were collected for this applied research, including qualitative interviews, quantitative surveys, and documents. The interview data were analyzed by identifying codes and themes. Survey and document data were analyzed using graphical representations of results. Recommendations to solve the problem included providing professional development in Response to Intervention (RTI), creating a school-wide literacy culture, and restructuring RTI.”

Beers, Shannon, "Recommendations for Solving the Problem of Low Sixth-Grade Comprehension Proficiency Scores at Hermitage Middle School in Hermitage, Missouri" (2024). Doctoral Dissertations and Projects. 5437.
https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/doctoral/5437

“Research has shown that student choice of text and increased time spent on reading independently are two factors that can result in an increase in students’ reading motivation and enjoyment. The authors investigated implementation of evidence-based practices to show how they played out in a high school English language arts classroom. The research was guided by two questions: (1) How does choice affect the reading motivation of a group of high school students? (2) How does silent reading time in class affect these students’ perceptions of reading? Findings reveal that students valued freedom of text choice, leading to increased reading self-concepts and reading value. In addition, dedicating class time to reading and literature circle discussions helped students have more positive reading experiences than otherwise. These findings suggest benefits from flexibility in literature selection and instructional time, thereby providing a space in the classroom for student-driven reading and discussion.”

Johnny B. Allred, Michael E. Cena (2020). Reading Motivation in High School: Instructional Shifts in Student Choice and Class Time.

Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, Volume 64, Issue 1 p. 27-35.

https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.1058

“Reading engagement influences students’ literacy attainment. School library professionals provide resources, environments and guidance to promote reading for pleasure, but little is known about how this role is currently supported or challenged. Drawing on mixed methods survey responses from 971 school library professionals from 63 countries, integrated findings suggest that younger students had greater access to the library, and that limiting access may negatively influence student engagement. The educative value of reading aloud and reading for pleasure may be poorly understood in some schools. Most parents had no access to the school library; in some contexts, this was due to safety concerns. Student choice may be constrained by low resourcing, censorship and book levelling. Some multi-purpose uses of libraries are incompatible with sustained reading. To enhance student reading engagement, school leaders should promote reading for pleasure as a vital responsibility shared by school library professionals and classroom teachers.”

Merga, M. K., & Mat Roni, S. (2025). “An uphill battle”: school library professionals fostering student reading engagement. English in Education, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/04250494.2025.2456718

“Schools need to foster their students’ reading engagement to build and maintain literacy skills, particularly given the benefits regular RfP can offer for enhancing vocabulary and reading comprehension (Allington and McGill-Franzen Citation2021; Pfost and Heyne Citation2023; Sullivan and Brown Citation2015; Torppa et al. Citation2020). RfP needs to be understood, valued and communicated as an educative practice, particularly as children who recognise the ongoing importance of RfP read more often (Merga and Mat Roni Citation2018).

Fostering awareness of the importance of RfP within schools and the role of SLPs in promoting and supporting it may be challenging in many contexts. A number of key issues with high relevance for SLPs’ capacity to foster student reading engagement were identified in this research, warranting researcher, SLP, leadership and/or policymaker attention.

First, school leaders and policymakers need to be targeted by research-supported advocacy aimed at illustrating the educative value of RfP and reading aloud. School libraries will struggle to compete for time and resourcing to be dedicated to reading engagement supportive strategies unless they can persuasively demonstrate their value.

Once independent reading skills have been acquired, the logical and research-supported role that independent reading and exposure to reading aloud plays in maintaining and building reading skills should not be sidelined in the crowded curriculum.

Furthermore, the benefits of school libraries do not expire as students age; if we want students to maintain the beneficial practice of sustained RfP, they need access to the library to select reading materials, and to enjoy a reading supportive environment. Teacher-related factors may be vital; schools looking to enhance student reading engagement should promote RfP as a responsibility of both SLPs and classroom teachers, and seek to develop their rich, mutually supportive alliance towards this shared goal.

From the results given in this article, it is clearly not enough for a school to have a school library with SLPs. These are valuable resources that need to be understood, respected and maintained. As per our correlation analysis, differences in factors cannot be simplistically and universally explained away by country income, and some of the qualitative responses showed that even high-income countries can lack the resources and support they need to be optimally functional.

Some of the multiple purposes that contemporary libraries accommodate are inevitable and mutually beneficial, while others seriously hinder the ability of the library to be fit for sustained reading. Libraries need adequate and knowledgeable staff, but the expertise of SLPs may be poorly recognised in some contexts, and the challenge of leadership and colleague detractors may further contribute to poor morale in these staff. Leadership needs to value their libraries and their SLPs, and actively position the library as a vital reading supportive resource, to be nurtured and promoted.

This article has captured some of the ways that the possibility of a welcoming library space can be strongly shaped by resourcing as well as societal and cultural norms beyond the control of SLPs. Research supports the value of outreach to parents to invite them to be active agents fostering their child’s reading engagement; however, it might not be safe for them to enter the school library.

Research underpins the importance of student choice in reading material; however, student choice may be constrained by diverse issues. Focusing more on commonalities than differences, these findings hold the potential to provide ammunition for the “uphill battle” that some SLP’s are facing when they seek to foster reading engagement in their schools, communities and nations.”

Merga, M. K., & Mat Roni, S. (2025). “An uphill battle”: school library professionals fostering student reading engagement. English in Education, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/04250494.2025.2456718

_______________________________________________________________________________________________ 

“Student challenging behavior toward teachers is a common phenomenon across countries. This qualitative study, based on 28 interviews with teachers and their school principals, from nine public schools in Denmark, examined how teachers prevent challenging behavior and the role of team organization.

The findings emphasize that sharing knowledge, experiences, and responsibilities within teams facilitates prevention. School principals play a key role in supporting teachers and fostering reflection on teacher-student interactions. Trust among team members is essential for effective collaboration. Strengthening team organization and collaboration offers a practical approach to managing and preventing challenging behaviors within the student-teacher dynamic in schools.”

“There is increasing international awareness that students' challenging behavior toward teachers in the form of harassment, threats, and violence is a common challenge in schools worldwide (Hellfeldt et al., 2018; Kauppi & Pörhölä, 2012; Maeng et al., 2020; Moon & McCluskey, 2016). Longobardi et al. (2018) conducted a meta-analysis that found a pooled prevalence of 53% for any type of violence toward teachers perpetrated by students over a presiding 2-year period; however, the prevalence ranged widely across studies, from 20% to 75% (Longobardi et al., 2018).

This significant variability may stem from variations in factors such as measurement methods, time periods, geographical locations, and the types of challenging behavior toward teachers (for instance only physical violence) being included in the definition.

It underscores the need for further research to gain a deeper understanding of the factors contributing to and strategies preventing students' challenging behavior in the form of harassment, threats, and violence toward teachers.

Several factors may reduce the risk of students' challenging behavior. Some studies have found that social support from co-workers and supervisors reduces the risk of harassment perpetrated by students or their parents (Berlanda et al., 2019) and that social support from colleagues reduces the risk of verbal and physical teacher victimization perpetrated by students (Hellfeldt et al., 2018).

Additionally, administrative support in schools is associated with a reduction in reports of multiple forms of violence and being physically attacked by students (Huang et al., 2020; Martinez et al., 2016). One study found that teachers who collaborated with other teachers that consistently enforced the rules were less likely to be victims of students' aggressions (Berg & Cornell, 2016).

Finally, a study among 369 Australian teachers found that collaborating with colleagues and school leaders was an effective strategy to prevent students’ challenging behavior in the form of threats and physical aggression toward teachers. In this study, collaboration included working with and being supported by colleagues and adopting a “whole school” approach (Stevenson et al., 2022).

However, even though these results are promising, most research in this field has been based on quantitative studies. To understand how teachers can prevent pupils' challenging behavior in their daily practices, more qualitative studies are needed.”

Lars Peter S. Andersen, Trine Nøhr Winding, R. Grytnes (2025). Pupils' challenging behaviour towards their teachers: The role of teacher team collaboration in prevention. A qualitative study,

Teaching and Teacher Education, Volume 155, 2025, 104883, ISSN 0742-051X, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104883. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0742051X24004165)

“There is limited research of observed writing instruction in inclusive, secondary diverse urban contexts. This study contributes to the field by investigating four urban secondary English teachers’ perceptions of ideal writing instruction as compared with their actual instruction, which is primarily driven by high-stakes accountability measures.

Sociocultural theories guide analyses of video-recorded writing lesson and interview data, with critical literacy theory framing the discussion and implications for teaching writing to diverse learners. Intersecting themes from interviews and observations point to constrained writing instruction and practices.

Although the teachers recognized a responsibility to teach responsively to their diverse students’ instructional writing needs, they are inhibited and unable to do so primarily because of high-stakes testing mandates that narrow the curriculum and limit teacher autonomy.”

Mary A. Avalos, Xuchilt Perez & Vanessa Thorrington (2019): Comparing Secondary English Teachers’ Ideal and Actual Writing Practices for Diverse Learners: Constrained Professionalism in Figured Worlds of High-Stakes Testing, Reading & Writing Quarterly, DOI: 10.1080/10573569.2019.1635056 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2019.1635056

_______________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This next segment is the original, broader document and includes earlier periods.

What is known about the reading difficulties experienced by a proportion of students entering secondary school (20-30% according to the National Reading Panel, 2000)?

What does it take to make a difference to their literacy at this relatively late stage in their schooling?

Though there is less known about effective reading intervention for older students, the research does provide us with some pointers. For a fuller description of this research, see Older students’ literacy problems (updated 2017)

How far behind might these student be?

The best way to find out is by screening all intake Year 7 students – either in their feeder schools late in their Year 6 or early in Year 7. It is a little more work to catch them late in Year 6, but it allows more time for intervention planning. Ideally, choose a test that has either a decoding or a word reading subtest. There are many such tests available, and obviously choosing an assessment that allows for group testing is more time-efficient.

Can research provide answers? Is there much research on secondary students' reading?

“Although research specific to adolescent literacy is not as extensive as research on beginning reading (Boulay, Goodson, Frye, Blocklin, & Price, 2015; Herrera, Truckenmiller, & Foorman, 2016; National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 2000; Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998), there is a strong and growing consensus that if what we currently know about literacy instruction for adolescents were more broadly applied in practice, there is “little doubt that levels of adolescent literacy would improve” (p. 1, Torgesen et al., 2007). A recent quantitative synthesis of reading programs for adolescents found 33 studies published between 1970 and 2007 involving 39,000 students (Slavin, Cheung, Groff, & Lake, 2008).” (p. 38-39)  

Fien, H., Anderson, D., Nelson, N.J., Kennedy, P., Baker, S.K., & Stoolmiller, M. (2018). Examining the impact and school-level predictors of impact variability of an 8th grade reading intervention on at-risk students’ reading achievement. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 33(1), 37–50.

Some relevant research

“The struggling readers in this study were multiple grade levels (3–7 years) behind their typically developing peers in reading ability. Results of both group and individual analyses indicate these older struggling readers can be remediated and for some, gains of two, three, four, or more years can be accomplished with only 1 year of instruction.” (p.588)

Calhoon, M. B., & Prescher, Y. (2013). Individual and group sensitivity to remedial reading program design: Examining reading gains across three middle school reading projects. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 26, 565-592.

 “Students from the 10th and 90th percentiles differ by grade equivalents equal to their grade (i.e., 6 grade difference at the end of 6th grade)”. (Biemiller, personal communication, August 1, 2002) Professor Andrew Biemiller, Institute of Child Study, University of Toronto.

 What comes after screening?

Having completed a screening, it then remains to decide what resources in terms of teachers, aides etc you can commit, and how many periods you can allocate. You then need to make a cut-off point, usually selecting the most needy students for an intervention. You might expect 20-30% of your intake to be in need of help with literacy.

This approach, of course, ignores the cohort of struggling students already enrolled in your school. This creates the dilemma of how to expend resources – on your current students or future students. This is a difficult value decision. The older the student the more difficult the progress, but they are your students right now – whatever year they are in. However, if you focus on your intake students, you can hope to alter their trajectory through the secondary careers. If this occurs, there is a benefit to administration and teachers through the increased academic competence of this cohort over the ensuing years and the lessened demands on the school’s resources of school failure, disciple issues, and early school leaving.

So, where to start?

The most obvious problem that struggling readers are likely to display in class is in their comprehension of subject texts. However, that does not necessarily imply that comprehension should be the main focus of intervention.

First, these problems did not arise suddenly at entry to secondary school. They could have been identified and attended to at or around primary school entry. However, this hasn’t occurred, and it is often not until around Year 4 that the earlier problems are brought into stark relief. Texts become more complex, both in word structure and in vocabulary in this period, and the students who had previously struggled (but it was hoped, would have had an educational growth spurt by now) are now clearly well below the minimum expected reading levels needed to cope with a secondary curriculum.

Second, the comprehension problem is usually contingent upon an underlying decoding and fluency delay. If only comprehension is addressed, progress will be minimal – because getting the words off the page fluently is a pre-requisite to comprehension.

We need to decide whether our scant resources should emphasise decoding or comprehension

 Some relevant research

“Phonological decoding made a significant unique contribution to reading comprehension for the eighth/ninth-grade group, to spelling for the fourth/fifth- and eighth/ninth-grade groups, and to the decoding rate and accuracy measures for all three groups, with only three exceptions”.

Nagy, W., Berninger, V.W., & Abbott, R.D. (2006). Contributions of morphology beyond phonology to literacy outcomes of upper elementary and middle-school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 134-147.

“In 90% of cases, the source of reading comprehension problems is poor word recognition skills (Oakhill & Garnham, 1988).”

Stuart, M. (1995). Prediction and qualitative assessment of five and six-year-old children's reading: A longitudinal study. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 65, 287-296.

“Research suggests that teaching children to read words quickly and accurately can also increase their reading comprehension (Tan & Nicholson, 1997). The theory behind fast and accurate word reading is that good readers are very good at reading words. They have over-learned this skill through much reading practice. As a result, like skilled musicians and athletes, they have developed automaticity, as a result of many hours of word reading practice. What this means is that they have over-learned word reading skills to the point where they require little or no mental effort. As a result, they are able to put all their mental energies into reading for meaning.”

1. B. Thompson & T. Nicholson (Eds.) (1998). Learning to read: Beyond phonics and whole language. New York: Teachers College Press.

 “The vast majority of school-age struggling readers experience word-level reading difficulties (Fletcher et al., 2002; Torgesen, 2002). This “bottleneck” at the word level is thought to be particularly disruptive because it not only impacts word identification but also other aspects of reading, including fluency and comprehension (LaBerge & Samuels, 1974). According to Torgesen (2002), one of the most important discoveries about reading difficulties over the past 20 years is the relationship found between phonological processing and word-level reading. Most students with reading problems, both those who are diagnosed with dyslexia and those who are characterized as “garden variety” poor readers, have phonological processing difficulties that underlie their word reading problems (Stanovich, 1988)” (p.179).

Nelson, J.M., Lindstrom, J.H., Lindstrom, W., & Denis, D. (2012): The structure of phonological processing and its relationship to basic reading. Exceptionality: A Special Education Journal, 20(3), 179-196.

“Without accurate decoding skills, these youngsters’ performance will deteriorate rapidly in the middle elementary grades, when greatly increased demands are made on comprehension and on the ability to recognise a large number of unfamiliar words (Chall, 1983; Mason, 1992)”.

Spear-Swerling, L., & Sternberg, R.J. (1994). The road not taken. An integrative theoretical model of reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27(2), 91-103.

"National longitudinal studies show that approximately 75% of those with reading problems in third grade still experience reading difficulties in the ninth grade (Francis, Shaywitz, Stuebing, Shaywitz, & Fletcher 1996; Shaywitz, Holahan, & Shaywitz, 1992). Students who experience reading difficulties in the early grades often suffer what has been called the "Matthew Effects" (Stanovich, 1986), a gap between good and poor readers that widens through the grades. Mikulecky (1990), for example, found that a group of secondary students two or more years behind their peers in reading ability were differentially affected by their tendency to avoid reading. These students read very little during or outside of school. Over the two-year period of the study, their reading comprehension performance actually declined."

Mikulecky, L. J. (1990). Stopping summer learning loss among at-risk youth. Journal of Reading, 33(7), 516-521.

“There is therefore a significant gap in the evidence base from RCT’s [randomised controlled trials] concerning the efficacy of language comprehension intervention. Clarke, Snowling, Truelove, and Hulme (2010) demonstrated using an RCT the effectiveness of an oral language intervention (comprising strategy use, vocabulary, figurative language and spoken narrative) in improving the reading comprehension skills of primary school students. To date such an approach has not been evaluated using an RCT in secondary schools.” (p.125)

Paul, S-A.S., & Clarke, P.J. (2016). A systematic review of reading interventions for secondary school students. International Journal of Educational Research, 79, 116–127.

What does it take to intervene effectively with older students? Intensity is a key element. That is, half-hearted efforts won’t work

Read more ...