Leveraging Collaborative Expertise: Social Studies Teachers’ Perspectives of Disciplinary Literacy Instruction

IF 1.1 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Literacy Research and Instruction Pub Date : 2020-11-24 DOI:10.1080/19388071.2020.1826069
Yong-Jik Lee*, Laura Lemanski, M. M. Van Deventer, David G. O’Brien
{"title":"Leveraging Collaborative Expertise: Social Studies Teachers’ Perspectives of Disciplinary Literacy Instruction","authors":"Yong-Jik Lee*, Laura Lemanski, M. M. Van Deventer, David G. O’Brien","doi":"10.1080/19388071.2020.1826069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study aims to augment the current understanding of how practicing teachers perceive and implement disciplinary literacy and in what ways they collaborate with researchers in a disciplinary literacy project. To do this, we collected and analyzed transcripts of the meetings from a disciplinary literacy project that was a university-school partnership between history teachers, literacy education researchers, and social studies education researchers. To analyze our data, we applied a constant comparative method and identified three salient themes: collaboration, text use, and instructional practice. Specifically, the teachers cited that the triangular structure of the collaborative expertise of teachers, literacy, and social studies education researchers was useful in constructing professional and instructional knowledge. In terms of text use, teachers expressed that the intentional selection and teaching of multiple and multimodal texts provided diverse perspectives and supported the various ways in which students read and learn. Finally, concerning instructional practice, the teachers revealed that disciplinary literacy and thinking skills should be intentionally taught and that methods for enhancing discipline-specific motivation should be considered. Based on these findings, key issues and implications are discussed.","PeriodicalId":45434,"journal":{"name":"Literacy Research and Instruction","volume":"60 1","pages":"220 - 241"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/19388071.2020.1826069","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Literacy Research and Instruction","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2020.1826069","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

ABSTRACT This study aims to augment the current understanding of how practicing teachers perceive and implement disciplinary literacy and in what ways they collaborate with researchers in a disciplinary literacy project. To do this, we collected and analyzed transcripts of the meetings from a disciplinary literacy project that was a university-school partnership between history teachers, literacy education researchers, and social studies education researchers. To analyze our data, we applied a constant comparative method and identified three salient themes: collaboration, text use, and instructional practice. Specifically, the teachers cited that the triangular structure of the collaborative expertise of teachers, literacy, and social studies education researchers was useful in constructing professional and instructional knowledge. In terms of text use, teachers expressed that the intentional selection and teaching of multiple and multimodal texts provided diverse perspectives and supported the various ways in which students read and learn. Finally, concerning instructional practice, the teachers revealed that disciplinary literacy and thinking skills should be intentionally taught and that methods for enhancing discipline-specific motivation should be considered. Based on these findings, key issues and implications are discussed.
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
利用合作专业知识:社会研究教师对学科素养教学的看法
摘要本研究旨在加深对实习教师如何感知和实施学科素养的理解,以及他们在学科素养项目中以何种方式与研究人员合作。为此,我们收集并分析了一个学科扫盲项目的会议记录,该项目是历史教师、扫盲教育研究人员和社会研究教育研究人员之间的大学-学校合作项目。为了分析我们的数据,我们采用了一种持续的比较方法,并确定了三个突出的主题:合作、文本使用和教学实践。具体而言,教师们指出,教师、识字和社会研究教育研究人员的合作专业知识的三角结构有助于构建专业和教学知识。在文本使用方面,教师们表示,有意选择和教授多种和多模式文本提供了不同的视角,并支持学生阅读和学习的各种方式。最后,在教学实践中,教师们指出,应该有意识地教授学科素养和思维技能,并考虑增强学科特定动机的方法。基于这些发现,讨论了关键问题和影响。
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
Literacy Research and Instruction
Literacy Research and Instruction EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: Literacy Research and Instruction (formerly Reading Research and Instruction), the official journal of the College Reading Association, is an international refereed professional journal that publishes articles dealing with research and instruction in reading education and allied literacy fields. The journal is especially focused on instructional practices and applied or basic research of special interest to reading and literacy educators. Peer Review Policy: All articles in this journal have undergone rigorous peer review, based on initial editor screening and anonymous refereeing by reviewers.
期刊最新文献
Empowering Adolescent Emergent Readers in Government Schools: An Exploration of Multimodal Texts as Pathways to Comprehension Novice Teachers’ Knowledge of Racial Literacies Effect of Dramatic Storytelling on Emergent Literacy in EFL: Evidence from the UAE Kindergartens Reexamining the Dolch Basic Sight Word List: Contemporary Considerations for Culturally Sustaining Approaches to Assess Sight Word Development A Multilevel Meta-Analysis of Synchronous Paired Oral Reading Techniques in Elementary Classrooms
×
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