Polic(y)ing time and curriculum: how teachers critically negotiate restrictive policies

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-12-2018-0116
Christy Wessel‐Powell, Beth A. Buchholz, Cassie J. Brownell
{"title":"Polic(y)ing time and curriculum: how teachers critically negotiate restrictive policies","authors":"Christy Wessel‐Powell, Beth A. Buchholz, Cassie J. Brownell","doi":"10.1108/ETPC-12-2018-0116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThe purpose of this paper is to theorize teacher agency as enacted through a P/policymaking lens in three elementary classrooms. Big-P Policies are formal, top-down school reform policies legislated, created, implemented and regulated by national, state and local governments. Yet, Big-P policies are not the only policies enacted in literacies classrooms. Rather, little-p policies or teachers’ local, personal and creative enactments of their values and expertise are also in play in daily classroom decisions. Little p-policies are teachers doing their best in response to their students and school contexts.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nAdapting elements of discursive analysis, this interpretive inquiry is designed to examine textual artifacts, situated alongside classroom events and particular local practices, to explicate what teachers’ policymaking enactments regarding time and curriculum look like across three distinct contexts. Using three elementary classrooms as examples, this paper provides analytic snapshots illustrating teachers’ policymaking to solve problems of practice posed by state and school policies for curriculum, and for use of time at school.\n\n\nFindings\nThe findings suggest that teachers ration (aliz)ed use of time in ways that enacted personal politics, to prioritize children’s personal growth and well-being alongside teachers’ values, even when use of time became “inefficient.” An artifact from three focal classrooms illustrates particular practices – scheduling, connecting and modeling – teachers leveraged to enact little p-policy. Teachers’ little p-policy enactment is teacher agency, used to disrupt temporal and curricular policies.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis framing is valuable because little-p policymaking works to disrupt and negotiate temporal and curricular mandates imposed on classrooms from the outside.\n","PeriodicalId":45885,"journal":{"name":"English Teaching-Practice and Critique","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"English Teaching-Practice and Critique","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ETPC-12-2018-0116","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: 15

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to theorize teacher agency as enacted through a P/policymaking lens in three elementary classrooms. Big-P Policies are formal, top-down school reform policies legislated, created, implemented and regulated by national, state and local governments. Yet, Big-P policies are not the only policies enacted in literacies classrooms. Rather, little-p policies or teachers’ local, personal and creative enactments of their values and expertise are also in play in daily classroom decisions. Little p-policies are teachers doing their best in response to their students and school contexts. Design/methodology/approach Adapting elements of discursive analysis, this interpretive inquiry is designed to examine textual artifacts, situated alongside classroom events and particular local practices, to explicate what teachers’ policymaking enactments regarding time and curriculum look like across three distinct contexts. Using three elementary classrooms as examples, this paper provides analytic snapshots illustrating teachers’ policymaking to solve problems of practice posed by state and school policies for curriculum, and for use of time at school. Findings The findings suggest that teachers ration (aliz)ed use of time in ways that enacted personal politics, to prioritize children’s personal growth and well-being alongside teachers’ values, even when use of time became “inefficient.” An artifact from three focal classrooms illustrates particular practices – scheduling, connecting and modeling – teachers leveraged to enact little p-policy. Teachers’ little p-policy enactment is teacher agency, used to disrupt temporal and curricular policies. Originality/value This framing is valuable because little-p policymaking works to disrupt and negotiate temporal and curricular mandates imposed on classrooms from the outside.
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
政策(时间)和课程:教师如何批判性地协商限制性政策
目的本研究的目的是透过P/政策制定的视角,在三个小学教室中理论化教师代理。大p政策是正式的、自上而下的学校改革政策,由国家、州和地方政府立法、制定、实施和监管。然而,大p政策并不是唯一在识字课堂上实施的政策。相反,little-p政策或教师对其价值观和专业知识的本地、个人和创造性的实践也在日常课堂决策中发挥作用。小p政策是老师们尽最大努力来回应他们的学生和学校环境。设计/方法/方法采用话语分析的元素,这种解释性调查旨在检查文本文物,与课堂事件和特定的地方实践一起,以解释教师关于时间和课程的决策制定在三种不同的背景下是什么样子。以三个小学教室为例,本文提供了分析快照,说明教师的政策制定,以解决国家和学校政策对课程和在校时间利用提出的实践问题。研究结果研究结果表明,即使时间的使用变得“低效”,教师也会以制定个人政治的方式分配时间,将孩子的个人成长和福祉与教师的价值观放在首位。来自三个重点教室的人工制品说明了特定的实践-调度,连接和建模-教师利用制定小p政策。教师制定的小p-policy是教师的代理,用来扰乱时间和课程政策。独创性/价值这种框架是有价值的,因为很少有政策制定的工作是破坏和协商从外部强加给教室的时间和课程要求。
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