Moving Beyond Interpretive Monism: A Disciplinary Heuristic to Bridge Literary Theory and Literacy Theory

IF 2.6 4区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Harvard Educational Review Pub Date : 2021-09-01 DOI:10.17763/1943-5045-91.3.382
Todd Reynolds, Leslie S. Rush, Jodi P. Lampi, J. P. Holschuh
{"title":"Moving Beyond Interpretive Monism: A Disciplinary Heuristic to Bridge Literary Theory and Literacy Theory","authors":"Todd Reynolds, Leslie S. Rush, Jodi P. Lampi, J. P. Holschuh","doi":"10.17763/1943-5045-91.3.382","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this essay, authors Todd Reynolds, Leslie S. Rush, Jodi P. Lampi, and Jodi Patrick Holschuh provide a disciplinary heuristic that bridges literary and literacy theories. The secondary English language arts (ELA) classroom is situated at the intersection between literary theory and literacy theory, where too often literary theory does not include pedagogical practices and literacy theory does not take disciplinary differences into account. Reynolds and coauthors propose an English Language Arts heuristic for disciplinary literacy to guide teachers toward embracing student-led interpretations. They explore the connections among the Common Core State Standards, New Criticism, and the ELA classroom and focus on the prevalence of interpretive monism, which is the belief that only one interpretation is appropriate for students when reading a literary text. The essay explicates a heuristic for ELA literacy that centers on students actively creating interpretations of and transforming literary texts. By embracing this heuristic, the authors assert, teachers can focus on student-led interpretations of literary texts and thus empower their students.","PeriodicalId":48207,"journal":{"name":"Harvard Educational Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Harvard Educational Review","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17763/1943-5045-91.3.382","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

In this essay, authors Todd Reynolds, Leslie S. Rush, Jodi P. Lampi, and Jodi Patrick Holschuh provide a disciplinary heuristic that bridges literary and literacy theories. The secondary English language arts (ELA) classroom is situated at the intersection between literary theory and literacy theory, where too often literary theory does not include pedagogical practices and literacy theory does not take disciplinary differences into account. Reynolds and coauthors propose an English Language Arts heuristic for disciplinary literacy to guide teachers toward embracing student-led interpretations. They explore the connections among the Common Core State Standards, New Criticism, and the ELA classroom and focus on the prevalence of interpretive monism, which is the belief that only one interpretation is appropriate for students when reading a literary text. The essay explicates a heuristic for ELA literacy that centers on students actively creating interpretations of and transforming literary texts. By embracing this heuristic, the authors assert, teachers can focus on student-led interpretations of literary texts and thus empower their students.
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
超越诠释一元论:文学理论与识字理论的学科启发式
在这篇文章中,作者Todd Reynolds、Leslie S.Rush、Jodi P.Lampi和Jodi Patrick Holschuh提供了一种学科启发,将文学和识字理论联系起来。中学英语语言艺术(ELA)课堂位于文学理论和识字理论的交叉点,文学理论往往不包括教学实践,识字理论也没有考虑学科差异。Reynolds和合著者提出了一种针对学科素养的英语语言艺术启发式方法,以引导教师接受学生主导的解释。他们探索了共同核心国家标准、新批评和ELA课堂之间的联系,并关注解释一元论的流行,即认为学生在阅读文学文本时只有一种解释是合适的。本文阐述了ELA识字的启发式方法,该方法以学生积极创造对文学文本的解释和转换为中心。作者断言,通过采用这种启发式方法,教师可以专注于学生主导的文学文本解读,从而赋予学生权力。
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
Harvard Educational Review
Harvard Educational Review EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: The Harvard Educational Review (HER) accepts contributions from researchers, scholars, policy makers, practitioners, teachers, students, and informed observers in education and related fields. In addition to original reports of research and theory, HER welcomes articles that reflect on teaching and practice in educational settings in the United States and abroad.
期刊最新文献
“Whatever You Want to Call It”: Science of Reading Mythologies in the Education Reform Movement Language and Education in Africa: A Fresh Approach to the Debates on Language, Education, and Cultural Identity, by Bert van Pinxteren From Democratic Participation to Cariño: Exploring the Core Commitments of Foundational Scholars in the Field of Youth Participatory Action Research What Relationships Do We Want with Technology? Toward Technoskepticism in Schools Expanding the Reasons We Give: Black Parents’ Collective Engagement as Resisting White Supremacy at School
×
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