Teachers’ perceptions of the impact of COVID-19 on writing instruction in Australia

Education interruption can influence educational outcomes for students, particularly those already experiencing disadvantage. Little is known about how education interruption caused by COVID-19 has influenced the literacy learning of Australian students. This article provides insights into the impact of COVID-19 related education interruption on writing instruction of primary school aged children from the perspectives of their teachers. Drawing on data from a single-stage mixed-methods survey tool, it explores extent of perception of an impact of COVID-19 writing instruction in Australia, as well as capturing data on the nature of this perceived impact. As expected, the COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on writing instruction in the majority of cases, with impact typically perceived to be negative, though for some respondents, an unexpected benefit of the disruption was the collaborative response of educators and education systems. The diverse facets of the nature of this perceived impact were identified by respondents, some of which were related to context and home affordances, with findings highlighting how uneven levels of parental and technological resourcing at home can support or impede student learning of writing skills. The findings can be drawn upon to mitigate barriers to the teaching of writing during times of education interruption

Teaching writing in primary education (grades 1–6) in Australia: A national survey

Providing adequate writing instruction and practice in schools is an essential cornerstone of writing development and it affords a diagnostic approach for teachers. But what writing instruction is being practiced in Australian primary schools? The aim of this study was to survey a sample of teachers (n = 310) about their instructional practices for writing and their preparation and self-efficacy to teach writing. The majority of the teachers surveyed indicated they allocated on average less than three hours per week for writing practice in their classrooms, with findings further showing a large variability in the frequency of writing practice ranging from 15 min to 7.5 h per week. Findings suggested an emphasis placed on teaching foundational skills, such as spelling, over the teaching of process skills, such as planning and revising. Results further indicated that less emphasis is placed on teaching handwriting and typing. The majority of participating teachers reported implementing only six of the 20 different instructional practices included in the survey on a weekly basis, with school-home strategies being the least frequently reported strategies to foster students’ writing development. Most teachers expressed positive beliefs about their preparation and self-efficacy for teaching writing. Results from multiple regression analysis showed that preparation and self-efficacy for teaching writing significantly and statistically accounted for variability in using evidence-based practices, teaching foundational skills, and teaching process skills. However, only self-efficacy made a statically significant contribution to predicting strategies to extend writing to the home environment. Implications for teaching and recommendations for research are provided

Handwriting automaticity and writing instruction in Australian kindergarten: An exploratory study

Learning to write involves the acquisition and development of lower-level skills (e.g., handwriting and spelling) and higher-level skills (e.g., planning and revising). Accumulating evidence indicates handwriting automaticity is related to the development of effective writing skills. The present study examined the levels of handwriting automaticity of Australian children at the end of kindergarten and the amount and type of writing instruction they experienced before entering first grade. The current study involved 177 kindergarten children enrolled in 23 classrooms from seven public primary schools in Western Australia. Individual child level data (e.g., handwriting automaticity and word-reading skills) were collected and teachers were asked to complete a survey assessing the amount of time and types of writing activities developed in their classrooms (viz., teaching basic skills and teaching writing processes). Hierarchical linear models were conducted to examine total variance attributable to child and classroom levels. Results showed a total variance of approximately 20% in children’s handwriting automaticity attributable to differences among classrooms when gender and word-reading skills were controlled for. Large variability was noted in the amount and type of writing instruction reported by each participating teacher. Handwriting automaticity was associated with the teaching of revising strategies but not with the teaching of handwriting. Implications for writing development, writing instruction, and early writing assessment will be discussed

Handwriting automaticity and writing instruction in Australian kindergarten: An exploratory study

The present study examined the levels of handwriting automaticity at the end of kindergarten and the amount and type of writing instruction children experience before entering Year 1. The following questions were addressed in this study: (1) What level of handwriting automaticity do children exhibit at the end of kindergarten? (2) How much variation in writing automaticity is attributable to classrooms and schools? (3) What writing instruction do children experience at the end of kindergarten? (4) Are there associations between classroom writing instruction and children’s level of handwriting automaticity? The current study involved 177 kindergarten children enrolled in 23 classrooms from seven public primary schools in Western Australia. Individual child level data (e.g., handwriting automaticity and word reading skills) were collected and teachers were asked to complete a survey assessing the amount of time and types of writing activities developed in their classrooms (viz., teaching basic skills and teaching writing processes). Hierarchical linear models were conducted to examine total variance attributable to child and classroom levels. Results showed a total variance of approximately 20% in children’s handwriting automaticity attributable to differences among classrooms when gender and word-reading skills were controlled for. Large variability was noted in the amount and type of writing instruction reported by each participating teacher. Handwriting automaticity was associated with the teaching of revising strategies but not with the teaching of handwriting. Implications for writing development and writing instruction will be discussed

Handwriting automaticity and writing instruction in Australian kindergarten: An exploratory study

The present study examined the levels of handwriting automaticity at the end of kindergarten and the amount and type of writing instruction children experience before entering Year 1. The following questions were addressed in this study: (1) What level of handwriting automaticity do children exhibit at the end of kindergarten? (2) How much variation in writing automaticity is attributable to classrooms and schools? (3) What writing instruction do children experience at the end of kindergarten? (4) Are there associations between classroom writing instruction and children’s level of handwriting automaticity? The current study involved 177 kindergarten children enrolled in 23 classrooms from seven public primary schools in Western Australia. Individual child level data (e.g., handwriting automaticity and word reading skills) were collected and teachers were asked to complete a survey assessing the amount of time and types of writing activities developed in their classrooms (viz., teaching basic skills and teaching writing processes). Hierarchical linear models were conducted to examine total variance attributable to child and classroom levels. Results showed a total variance of approximately 20% in children’s handwriting automaticity attributable to differences among classrooms when gender and word-reading skills were controlled for. Large variability was noted in the amount and type of writing instruction reported by each participating teacher. Handwriting automaticity was associated with the teaching of revising strategies but not with the teaching of handwriting. Implications for writing development and writing instruction will be discussed

The relationship between executive functioning and self‐regulated learning in Australian children

Executive functioning (EF) and self-regulated learning (SRL) are established predictors of academic achievement, both concurrent and future. Although it has been theorized that EF development enables SRL in early childhood, this directional model remains empirically untested against plausible alternatives. Thus, this study investigated the longitudinal relations between children’s EF and SRL during the transition from kindergarten to Year 1 in an Australian sample to determine the direction and strength of the association between EF and SRL. We compared four directional models and also tested whether EF and SRL can be construed as manifestations of a common factor. Children’s EF was assessed using a battery of tasks tapping working memory, inhibition, and shifting, and their SRL was assessed by teachers using the Checklist of Independent Learning Development. Cross-lagged structural equation modelling analyses were conducted on a longitudinal dataset of 176 children at the end of kindergarten (age M = 5 years, 8 months; SD = 4.02 months), and 1 year later (age M = 6 years, 5 months; SD = 3.65 months). EF predicted SRL longitudinally (β= .58, controlling for kindergarten SRL), consistent with common assumptions, whereas SRL did not predict EF. However, the common factor model also fit the data very well. We concluded that EF and SRL are indeed related concurrently and longitudinally but that further evidence is needed to disambiguate whether EF is best understood as a necessary antecedent of SRL development in early childhood, or whether they reflect the same general construct

Parental behaviours predicting early childhood executive functions: a Meta-Analysis

Recent research indicates that parental behaviours may influence the development of executive functions (EFs) during early childhood, which are proposed to serve as domain-general building blocks for later classroom behaviour and academic achievement. However, questions remain about the strength of the association between parenting and child EFs, more specifically which parental behaviours are most strongly associated with child EFs, and whether there is a critical period in early childhood during which parental behaviour is more influential. A meta-analysis was therefore conducted to determine the strength of the relation between various parental behaviours and EFs in children aged 0 to 8 years. We identified 42 studies published between 2000 and 2016, with an average of 12.77 months elapsing in the measurement of parent and child variables. Parental behaviours were categorised as positive (e.g. warmth, responsiveness, sensitivity), negative (e.g. control, intrusiveness, detachment) and cognitive (e.g. autonomy support, scaffolding, cognitive stimulation). Results revealed significant associations (ps < .001) between composite EF and positive (r = .25), negative (r = −.22) and cognitive (r = .20) parental behaviours. Associations between cognitive parental behaviours and EFs were significantly moderated by child age, with younger children showing a stronger effect size, whereas positive and negative parental behaviours showed a stable association with EFs across ages. We conclude that modest, naturally occurring associations exist between parental behaviours and future EFs and that early childhood may be a critical period during which cognitive parental behaviour is especially influential

The importance of explicit handwriting instruction

Early years classroom practitioners need to devote more time to teaching writing, including explicit handwriting instruction, according to research findings from an Australian study. A team from Murdoch University, Perth, examined the handwriting abilities of Kindergarten students in seven government primary schools in Western Australia, and the amount and type of writing instruction delivered by their teachers. They found writing instruction was ‘highly variable’ across the 23 classrooms