Teacher agency in English language arts teaching: a scoping review of the literature

IF 0.8 4区 教育学 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH English Teaching-Practice and Critique Pub Date : 2019-06-03 DOI:10.1108/ETPC-05-2019-0080
J. Chisholm, Jennifer Alford, L. Halliday, Fannie M. Cox
{"title":"Teacher agency in English language arts teaching: a scoping review of the literature","authors":"J. Chisholm, Jennifer Alford, L. Halliday, Fannie M. Cox","doi":"10.1108/ETPC-05-2019-0080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis paper aims to examine ways in which English language arts (ELA) teachers have exercised agency in response to policy changes that have been shaped by neoliberal education agendas that seek to further advance standardization and the primacy of measurability of teaching and learning.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThe authors posed the following research questions of related literature: Under what conditions, in what ways and to what ends do teachers exercise agency within ELA classroom teaching? Through five stages of systematized analysis, this scoping review of 21 studies maps the evidence base.\n\n\nFindings\nStructural, material, interpersonal and pedagogical issues both constrained and supported agency. Teachers covertly exercised agency to be responsive to students’ needs; in some instances, teachers’ agentive practices reinforced institutionally sanctioned methods. Teachers’ agentive action aimed to combat the deprofessionalization of the field, foster innovative curriculum approaches and challenge stereotypes about students. The authors also found a range of definitions of agency in the research, some of which are more generative than others.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis paper addresses a gap in the research literature by illuminating contexts, consequences and conundrums of ELA teacher agency. The authors documented the range of structural, cultural and material conditions within which teachers exercise agency; the subversive, collective and small- and large-scale ways in which teachers realize agency; and the potentially favorable or unfavorable consequences to which these efforts are directed. In doing so, the authors also problematize the range of definitions of agency in the literature and call for greater attention to conceptual clarity around agency in research. As literacy researchers illuminate work that disrupts the marginalization of teachers’ agency, this scoping review maps the field’s knowledge base of agency in ELA teaching and sets up a future research agenda to promote the professionalization of teaching and advocacy for English teachers.\n","PeriodicalId":45885,"journal":{"name":"English Teaching-Practice and Critique","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"English Teaching-Practice and Critique","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ETPC-05-2019-0080","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to examine ways in which English language arts (ELA) teachers have exercised agency in response to policy changes that have been shaped by neoliberal education agendas that seek to further advance standardization and the primacy of measurability of teaching and learning. Design/methodology/approach The authors posed the following research questions of related literature: Under what conditions, in what ways and to what ends do teachers exercise agency within ELA classroom teaching? Through five stages of systematized analysis, this scoping review of 21 studies maps the evidence base. Findings Structural, material, interpersonal and pedagogical issues both constrained and supported agency. Teachers covertly exercised agency to be responsive to students’ needs; in some instances, teachers’ agentive practices reinforced institutionally sanctioned methods. Teachers’ agentive action aimed to combat the deprofessionalization of the field, foster innovative curriculum approaches and challenge stereotypes about students. The authors also found a range of definitions of agency in the research, some of which are more generative than others. Originality/value This paper addresses a gap in the research literature by illuminating contexts, consequences and conundrums of ELA teacher agency. The authors documented the range of structural, cultural and material conditions within which teachers exercise agency; the subversive, collective and small- and large-scale ways in which teachers realize agency; and the potentially favorable or unfavorable consequences to which these efforts are directed. In doing so, the authors also problematize the range of definitions of agency in the literature and call for greater attention to conceptual clarity around agency in research. As literacy researchers illuminate work that disrupts the marginalization of teachers’ agency, this scoping review maps the field’s knowledge base of agency in ELA teaching and sets up a future research agenda to promote the professionalization of teaching and advocacy for English teachers.
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
英语语言艺术教学中的教师代理:文献综述
本文旨在研究英语语言艺术(ELA)教师在应对新自由主义教育议程所塑造的政策变化时行使代理的方式,这些议程旨在进一步推进教学和学习的标准化和可测量性的首要地位。作者对相关文献提出了以下研究问题:教师在何种条件下、以何种方式、以何种目的在ELA课堂教学中行使能动性?通过五个阶段的系统化分析,本文对21项研究进行了范围审查,绘制了证据基础。结构、材料、人际关系和教学问题既限制又支持代理。教师隐性行使能动性,响应学生需求;在某些情况下,教师的代理实践强化了制度认可的方法。教师的代理行动旨在打击该领域的非专业化,促进创新的课程方法,挑战对学生的刻板印象。作者还在研究中发现了代理的一系列定义,其中一些定义比其他定义更具生动性。原创性/价值本文通过阐释ELA教师代理的背景、后果和难题,弥补了研究文献的空白。作者记录了教师行使代理权的结构、文化和物质条件的范围;教师实现能动性的颠覆性、集体性、小规模和大规模方式;以及这些努力所指向的潜在的有利或不利的结果。在此过程中,作者还对文献中代理定义的范围提出了质疑,并呼吁更多地关注研究中代理的概念清晰度。随着扫盲研究人员阐明了打破教师代理边缘化的工作,本研究概述了ELA教学中代理领域的知识基础,并建立了未来的研究议程,以促进英语教师的教学专业化和倡导。
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
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
11.10%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: English Teaching: Practice and Critique seeks to promote research and theory related to English literacy that is grounded in a range of contexts: classrooms, schools and wider educational constituencies. The journal has as its main focus English teaching in L1 settings. Submissions focused on EFL will be considered only if they have clear pertinence to English literacy in L1 settings. It provides a place where authors from a range of backgrounds can identify matters of common concern and thereby foster broad professional communities and networks. Where possible, English Teaching: Practice and Critique encourages comparative approaches to topics and issues. The journal published three types of manuscripts: research articles, essays (theoretical papers, reviews, and responses), and teacher narratives. Often special issues of the journal focus on distinct topics; however, unthemed manuscript submissions are always welcome and published in most issues.
期刊最新文献
Experiencing the cycles of love in teaching: the praxis of an early career Asian American ELA teacher Reading with love: the potential of critical posthuman reading practices in preservice English education Claiming a space in the W/writerly community to increase English Language Arts teacher agency “I’m really just scared of the White parents”: a teacher navigates perceptions of barriers to discussing racial injustice Playful literacies and pedagogical priorities: digital games in the English classroom
×
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