Limitations of the Research

contamination effect between the two treatment groups generally, and specifically at the time of testing on the first two occasions. The conclusions presented in this research have implications for theorists and practitioners involved with literacy acquisition, especially in cross-cultural contexts. The implications are discussed from four perspectives: • Theories of literacy acquisition • Research methods in cross-cultural contexts • Teaching practice • Administration and policy making 6.3. Implications from the Studies 6.3.1 Implications for theories of literacy acquisition In Chapter 2, it was shown that there is currently general agreement that literacy acquisition includes the global holistic, meaning-centred modes of learning, and linear analytic, script- centred modes of learning. There is not, however, agreement on the method of introduction of the two areas and the sequencing of necessary components. One implication of this research for literacy acquisition theory is the insight that is given into the psychological effect of the initial method of instruction. There is clear evidence, in the reactions of the learners in the two programs, that the way literacy is acquired in the first encounters with reading and writing is the way that it persists cf. Stanovich 1986. In this research, the reactions of some of the semi-literate non-achievers showed that they could have profited by a period of concentrated “re-learning”—beginning from what they knew—to break strongly practised, nonproductive habits of learning. As mentioned previously, the most prevalent pattern was reading out each consonant—usually with an accompanying vowel—according to the sound or the English name of the consonant. Two contributing factors to the persistent use of this habit were the pervading culture of practice for literacy acquisition, and the age of the students. This culture of practice was built on the concept of linear acquisition of skills, building from phonemes to words, then sentences. There was a strong belief that “reading” was being able to say each letter—each consonant said with an accompanying vowel—so that such readers showed extreme difficulty in generating the word in focus. In these studies, learners, with some previous literacy exposure who were instructed with Multi-Strategy acquisition techniques, were able to make the shift from skills-based learning to meaningful, context-based learning more quickly, with more durable gains, and with more motivation to sustain literacy than the semi-literate learners exposed to the Gudschinsky method of instruction. As has already been discussed in Chapter 2, Freebody has argued for necessary status of four roles in any characterisation of successful reading …: the roles of code- breaker How do I crack this?, text-participant What does this mean?, text-user What do I do with this here and now?, and text-analyst What does this do for me? Freebody 1992:58. When we apply the findings of the present research to these roles, we can construct an explanation for the greater degree of literacy acquisition among Multi-Strategy semiliterate and nonliterate learners alike. Freebody 1992:58 has noted two crucial points of difference related to the instructional process of literacy between practitioners when incorporating these four roles, that is, sequencing of the roles, and “the necessary degree of explication in instruction.” As considered earlier, the two major emphases in this research in beginning literacy were primarily concerned with the roles of “code-breaker” and “text-participant.” Although potential for the other two is built into the Multi-Strategy method, the extent to which these are incorporated depends on cultural demands and subject content of the materials. Freebody noted that all of these roles form part of successful reading … therefore any program of instruction in literacy … needs to confront these roles systematically, explicitly, and at all developmental points Freebody 1992:58. As will be recalled, the Multi-Strategy method is not based on a linear sequence of instructional skills with acquisition of each skill dependent on the other in the sequence. There is systematic, explicit, and concurrent instruction in the two tracks from the onset of the program. The method incorporates a set of heuristics where instruction of skills is presented in contextual settings • to enable learners to learn how to attack new material confidently, and • to understand the meaning conveyed in the texts presented. In an attempt to focus more specifically on the roles of “code-breaker” and “text-participant,” a basic model of literacy acquisition incorporating the guiding principles for instruction is presented in Figure 6.1. Figure 6.1. Model of literacy acquisition based on guiding principles for instruction In Figure 6.1, the model shows the codes relevant for literacy acquisition but not with equal emphasis. The inter-linking code between the Script and Meaning codes is the Morphological or