Lessons learned from remote, early-literacy instruction

IF 1.3 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of Early Childhood Literacy Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1177/14687984241281206
Jill S. Jones, Jill F. Grifenhagen, Stephen McKinney
{"title":"Lessons learned from remote, early-literacy instruction","authors":"Jill S. Jones, Jill F. Grifenhagen, Stephen McKinney","doi":"10.1177/14687984241281206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The COVID-19 pandemic rapidly shifted primary-grade literacy instruction which had rarely been implemented online before the pandemic. Remote early literacy instruction is thus an emerging field of research, and research is needed to understand the affordances and limitations of this crisis-driven instruction and how it may inform early literacy instruction moving forward, both in remote and traditional settings. This mixed methods case study examined how 106 novice primary-grade teachers in the United States implemented literacy instruction in the remote platform during the COVID-19 pandemic with a desire to understand both successful and challenging literacy practices. The main data sources entailed 106 teacher interviews conducted using a semi-structured interview protocol and teacher self-ratings of their implementation of evidence-based literacy practices. Qualitative analyses of teachers’ perspectives yielded findings that remote early literacy instruction increased the involvement of families, required teachers to navigate multiple boundaries to implement literacy instruction, remote instruction was most conducive to teacher-led literacy instruction, and resulted in teachers’ difficulty knowing and addressing children’s literacy needs. Quantitative data analysis of Likert-scale questions about teachers’ early literacy instructional practices revealed teachers reported their highest quality literacy instructional practices as read alouds, collaboration with children’s families, and building an effective learning community for remote literacy instruction. Teachers rated their remote implementation of writing instruction, literacy assessment processes, and differentiation of literacy instruction as lower quality. The findings add to the literature by providing an in-depth understanding of remote early literacy instruction, successes and challenges reported by teachers providing literacy instruction to primary-aged children, and implications for post-pandemic instruction.","PeriodicalId":47033,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Early Childhood Literacy","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Early Childhood Literacy","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14687984241281206","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic rapidly shifted primary-grade literacy instruction which had rarely been implemented online before the pandemic. Remote early literacy instruction is thus an emerging field of research, and research is needed to understand the affordances and limitations of this crisis-driven instruction and how it may inform early literacy instruction moving forward, both in remote and traditional settings. This mixed methods case study examined how 106 novice primary-grade teachers in the United States implemented literacy instruction in the remote platform during the COVID-19 pandemic with a desire to understand both successful and challenging literacy practices. The main data sources entailed 106 teacher interviews conducted using a semi-structured interview protocol and teacher self-ratings of their implementation of evidence-based literacy practices. Qualitative analyses of teachers’ perspectives yielded findings that remote early literacy instruction increased the involvement of families, required teachers to navigate multiple boundaries to implement literacy instruction, remote instruction was most conducive to teacher-led literacy instruction, and resulted in teachers’ difficulty knowing and addressing children’s literacy needs. Quantitative data analysis of Likert-scale questions about teachers’ early literacy instructional practices revealed teachers reported their highest quality literacy instructional practices as read alouds, collaboration with children’s families, and building an effective learning community for remote literacy instruction. Teachers rated their remote implementation of writing instruction, literacy assessment processes, and differentiation of literacy instruction as lower quality. The findings add to the literature by providing an in-depth understanding of remote early literacy instruction, successes and challenges reported by teachers providing literacy instruction to primary-aged children, and implications for post-pandemic instruction.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
远程早期扫盲教学的经验教训
COVID-19 大流行迅速改变了小学一年级的识字教学,而在大流行之前,这种教学很少在网上进行。因此,远程早期识字教学是一个新兴的研究领域,需要通过研究来了解这种危机驱动教学的能力和局限性,以及如何在远程和传统环境下为今后的早期识字教学提供参考。这项混合方法案例研究考察了在 COVID-19 大流行期间,美国 106 名小学一年级新教师如何在远程平台上实施识字教学,以期了解成功和具有挑战性的识字教学实践。主要数据来源包括采用半结构化访谈协议进行的 106 次教师访谈,以及教师对其实施循证扫盲实践的自我评价。对教师观点的定性分析发现,远程早期识字教学增加了家庭的参与,要求教师在实施识字教学时跨越多重界限,远程教学最有利于教师主导的识字教学,以及导致教师难以了解和满足儿童的识字需求。对有关教师早期识字教学实践的李克特量表问题进行的定量数据分析显示,教师们认为他们最优质的识字教学实践是朗读、与儿童家庭合作以及为远程识字教学建立有效的学习社区。教师对远程实施的写作教学、识字评估过程和识字教学的差异化评价较低。这些研究结果深入了解了远程早期识字教学、为小学学龄儿童提供识字教学的教师所报告的成功经验和面临的挑战,以及对流行病后教学的影响,从而为相关文献提供了补充。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Early Childhood Literacy
Journal of Early Childhood Literacy EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
12.50%
发文量
54
期刊介绍: Journal of Early Childhood Literacy is a fully peer-reviewed international journal. Since its foundation in 2001 JECL has rapidly become a distinctive, leading voice in research in early childhood literacy, with a multinational range of contributors and readership. The main emphasis in the journal is on papers researching issues related to the nature, function and use of literacy in early childhood. This includes the history, development, use, learning and teaching of literacy, as well as policy and strategy. Research papers may address theoretical, methodological, strategic or applied aspects of early childhood literacy and could be reviews of research issues. JECL is both a forum for debate about the topic of early childhood literacy and a resource for those working in the field. Literacy is broadly defined; JECL focuses on the 0-8 age range. Our prime interest in empirical work is those studies that are situated in authentic or naturalistic settings; this differentiates the journal from others in the area. JECL, therefore, tends to favour qualitative work but is also open to research employing quantitative methods. The journal is multi-disciplinary. We welcome submissions from diverse disciplinary backgrounds including: education, cultural psychology, literacy studies, sociology, anthropology, historical and cultural studies, applied linguistics and semiotics.
期刊最新文献
Observers of the world: Primary grade students imagining solutions for broken environmental and social systems Starting small: Engaging young learners with literacy through multilingual storytelling Windows & mirrors but mostly windows: Early childhood administrators view on diverse books Book review: Toward a BlackBoyCrit pedagogy black boys: Male teachers, and early childhood classroom practices Writing experiences in early childhood classrooms where children made higher language gains
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1