文学解读中的情境专家——高中生和博士生阅读经典嘻哈和诗歌的专家研究

IF 2.3 1区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Cognition and Instruction Pub Date : 2022-07-21 DOI:10.1080/07370008.2022.2092482
S. Levine
{"title":"文学解读中的情境专家——高中生和博士生阅读经典嘻哈和诗歌的专家研究","authors":"S. Levine","doi":"10.1080/07370008.2022.2092482","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This study brings into conversation two bodies of research that operate from different assumptions and make divergent conclusions about high school students’ capacity to read and respond to literary texts. On one hand, cognitively-oriented expert-novice research comparing experienced literary readers to high school students indicates that students tend not to engage in expert-like interpretive sense-making when they read literature. On the other hand, socioculturally-oriented studies of students’ “funds of knowledge” and socially situated “interpretive communities” indicate that students do engage in expert-like interpretation. One likely reason for these divergent findings is that by default, expert-novice studies often define interpretive expertise by drawing on Western, White discourses and epistemologies. This study experiments with a situated expert-expert methodology that considers the influence of culture, race, and the practices of different interpretive communities on participants’ literary reading and response. First, it offers an expanded definition of interpretive expertise by looking outside conventional academic interpretive communities. Then, the study ascribes interpretive expertise to two groups: Black, Latinx, and Asian-American high school students who self-identified as experts in hip-hop; and mostly White doctoral students who self-identified as experts in poetry. Both groups read lyrics to a highly regarded hip-hop song and a highly regarded poem. Analyses showed that each group was more likely to engage in expert-like practices, such as building symbolic interpretation and appreciating realness, within the genre belonging to their interpretive community. These findings offer empirical support for the power of interpretive communities and the value of funds of knowledge frameworks. The findings strengthen the call for the still predominantly White, Western academy to honor other interpretive communities and recognize the limits of their own.","PeriodicalId":47945,"journal":{"name":"Cognition and Instruction","volume":"40 1","pages":"540 - 562"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Situated Expertise in Literary Interpretation: An Expert-Expert Study of High School and PhD Students Reading Canonical Hip-Hop and Poetry\",\"authors\":\"S. Levine\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/07370008.2022.2092482\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This study brings into conversation two bodies of research that operate from different assumptions and make divergent conclusions about high school students’ capacity to read and respond to literary texts. On one hand, cognitively-oriented expert-novice research comparing experienced literary readers to high school students indicates that students tend not to engage in expert-like interpretive sense-making when they read literature. On the other hand, socioculturally-oriented studies of students’ “funds of knowledge” and socially situated “interpretive communities” indicate that students do engage in expert-like interpretation. One likely reason for these divergent findings is that by default, expert-novice studies often define interpretive expertise by drawing on Western, White discourses and epistemologies. This study experiments with a situated expert-expert methodology that considers the influence of culture, race, and the practices of different interpretive communities on participants’ literary reading and response. First, it offers an expanded definition of interpretive expertise by looking outside conventional academic interpretive communities. Then, the study ascribes interpretive expertise to two groups: Black, Latinx, and Asian-American high school students who self-identified as experts in hip-hop; and mostly White doctoral students who self-identified as experts in poetry. Both groups read lyrics to a highly regarded hip-hop song and a highly regarded poem. Analyses showed that each group was more likely to engage in expert-like practices, such as building symbolic interpretation and appreciating realness, within the genre belonging to their interpretive community. These findings offer empirical support for the power of interpretive communities and the value of funds of knowledge frameworks. The findings strengthen the call for the still predominantly White, Western academy to honor other interpretive communities and recognize the limits of their own.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47945,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cognition and Instruction\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"540 - 562\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cognition and Instruction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2022.2092482\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognition and Instruction","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2022.2092482","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要:本研究引入了两种不同的研究体系,它们基于不同的假设,得出了关于高中生阅读和回应文学文本能力的不同结论。一方面,以认知为导向的专家-新手研究将有经验的文学读者与高中生进行比较,表明学生在阅读文学作品时倾向于不进行专家式的解释意义构建。另一方面,以社会文化为导向的对学生“知识储备”和社会情境“解释社区”的研究表明,学生确实从事专家式的解释。这些不同发现的一个可能原因是,默认情况下,专家-新手研究通常通过借鉴西方、白人话语和认识论来定义解释性专业知识。本研究采用了一种专家-专家的方法,考虑了文化、种族和不同解释群体的实践对参与者文学阅读和反应的影响。首先,它通过在传统的学术解释社区之外寻找解释专家提供了一个扩展的定义。然后,该研究将解释专业知识归于两组:黑人、拉丁裔和亚裔美国高中生,他们自认为是嘻哈专家;其中大部分是白人博士生,他们自认为是诗歌专家。两组学生都朗读了一首颇受好评的嘻哈歌曲和一首颇受好评的诗歌的歌词。分析表明,每个群体都更有可能参与专家般的实践,比如在属于他们的解释群体的类型中建立符号解释和欣赏真实性。这些发现为解释社区的力量和知识框架资金的价值提供了实证支持。这些发现加强了对仍然以白人为主的西方学术界的呼吁,即尊重其他解释群体,并认识到自己的局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Situated Expertise in Literary Interpretation: An Expert-Expert Study of High School and PhD Students Reading Canonical Hip-Hop and Poetry
Abstract This study brings into conversation two bodies of research that operate from different assumptions and make divergent conclusions about high school students’ capacity to read and respond to literary texts. On one hand, cognitively-oriented expert-novice research comparing experienced literary readers to high school students indicates that students tend not to engage in expert-like interpretive sense-making when they read literature. On the other hand, socioculturally-oriented studies of students’ “funds of knowledge” and socially situated “interpretive communities” indicate that students do engage in expert-like interpretation. One likely reason for these divergent findings is that by default, expert-novice studies often define interpretive expertise by drawing on Western, White discourses and epistemologies. This study experiments with a situated expert-expert methodology that considers the influence of culture, race, and the practices of different interpretive communities on participants’ literary reading and response. First, it offers an expanded definition of interpretive expertise by looking outside conventional academic interpretive communities. Then, the study ascribes interpretive expertise to two groups: Black, Latinx, and Asian-American high school students who self-identified as experts in hip-hop; and mostly White doctoral students who self-identified as experts in poetry. Both groups read lyrics to a highly regarded hip-hop song and a highly regarded poem. Analyses showed that each group was more likely to engage in expert-like practices, such as building symbolic interpretation and appreciating realness, within the genre belonging to their interpretive community. These findings offer empirical support for the power of interpretive communities and the value of funds of knowledge frameworks. The findings strengthen the call for the still predominantly White, Western academy to honor other interpretive communities and recognize the limits of their own.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
12.10%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: Among education journals, Cognition and Instruction"s distinctive niche is rigorous study of foundational issues concerning the mental, socio-cultural, and mediational processes and conditions of learning and intellectual competence. For these purposes, both “cognition” and “instruction” must be interpreted broadly. The journal preferentially attends to the “how” of learning and intellectual practices. A balance of well-reasoned theory and careful and reflective empirical technique is typical.
期刊最新文献
Teacher Cultivation of Classroom Statistical Modeling Practice: A Case Study Learning Inside the School, but Outside the Curriculum: An Extreme Case of Interest-Driven Learning in Alternative STEAM Learning Infrastructure for Schools The Intertwining of Children’s Interests and Micro-Practices at a Science Museum: Case Study of Three Children The Problem With Perspective: Students’ and Teachers’ Reasoning About Credibility During Discussions of Online Sources Collaborative Troubleshooting in STEM: A Case Study of High School Students Finding and Fixing Code, Circuit and Craft Challenges in Electronic Textiles
×
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