Seth A. Parsons, Melissa A. Gallagher, A. B. Leggett, Samantha T. Ives, Michelle Lague
{"title":"2007-2016年15种期刊素养内容分析","authors":"Seth A. Parsons, Melissa A. Gallagher, A. B. Leggett, Samantha T. Ives, Michelle Lague","doi":"10.1177/1086296X20939551","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this content analysis, a research team examined the articles in 15 journals published over a span of 10 years to obtain an overview of the current field of literacy. Researchers coded the topics, theoretical perspectives, designs, and data sources in a total of 4,305 literacy-related articles. Analyses revealed statistically significant differences in the topics, perspectives, designs, and data sources among literacy articles in journals written for practitioners, those written for researchers, and those written for both practitioners and researchers. Although the topics in journals written for practitioners somewhat reflected the content of those written for researchers, results demonstrated a need to diversify methods used in articles published in journals written for researchers. We argue that this diversity is likely to enhance the ability of research to build the knowledge base in our field.","PeriodicalId":47294,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Literacy Research","volume":"52 1","pages":"341 - 367"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1086296X20939551","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Analysis of 15 Journals’ Literacy Content, 2007–2016\",\"authors\":\"Seth A. Parsons, Melissa A. Gallagher, A. B. Leggett, Samantha T. Ives, Michelle Lague\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1086296X20939551\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this content analysis, a research team examined the articles in 15 journals published over a span of 10 years to obtain an overview of the current field of literacy. Researchers coded the topics, theoretical perspectives, designs, and data sources in a total of 4,305 literacy-related articles. Analyses revealed statistically significant differences in the topics, perspectives, designs, and data sources among literacy articles in journals written for practitioners, those written for researchers, and those written for both practitioners and researchers. Although the topics in journals written for practitioners somewhat reflected the content of those written for researchers, results demonstrated a need to diversify methods used in articles published in journals written for researchers. We argue that this diversity is likely to enhance the ability of research to build the knowledge base in our field.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47294,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Literacy Research\",\"volume\":\"52 1\",\"pages\":\"341 - 367\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1086296X20939551\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Literacy Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X20939551\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Literacy Research","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X20939551","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
An Analysis of 15 Journals’ Literacy Content, 2007–2016
In this content analysis, a research team examined the articles in 15 journals published over a span of 10 years to obtain an overview of the current field of literacy. Researchers coded the topics, theoretical perspectives, designs, and data sources in a total of 4,305 literacy-related articles. Analyses revealed statistically significant differences in the topics, perspectives, designs, and data sources among literacy articles in journals written for practitioners, those written for researchers, and those written for both practitioners and researchers. Although the topics in journals written for practitioners somewhat reflected the content of those written for researchers, results demonstrated a need to diversify methods used in articles published in journals written for researchers. We argue that this diversity is likely to enhance the ability of research to build the knowledge base in our field.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Literacy Research (JLR) is a peer-reviewed journal contributes to the advancement research related to literacy and literacy education. Current focuses include, but are not limited to: -Literacies from preschool to adulthood -Evolving and expanding definitions of ‘literacy’ -Innovative applications of theory, pedagogy and instruction -Methodological developments in literacy and language research