Purpose – This chapter provides the reader with an overview of a reflective video pedagogy for use within a literacy center or within professional development contexts. The conceptual overview is followed by two-case examples that reveal how literacy centers can serve as rich, productive research sites for the use and study of reflective video pedagogy.
Methodology/approach – The authors describe their ongoing work to develop and integrate a reflective video pedagogy within a literacy center during a 15-week practicum for literacy-specialists-in-training. The reflective video pedagogy is not only used by the clinicians who work with struggling readers twice a week, but it is also used by the researchers at the literacy center who study the reflective video pedagogy through the same video the clinicians use.
Practical implications – Literacy centers are dynamic sites where children, families, pre/in-service teachers, and teacher educators work together around literacy development. Reflective video pedagogies can be used to closely examine learning and teaching for adult students (i.e., clinicians) and for youth (i.e., children in elementary, middle, and high school) and also for parents who want their children to find success with literacy.
Research implications – In recent years “scaling up” and “scientific research” have come to dominate much of the literacy research landscape. While we see the value and necessity of large-scale experimental studies, we also posit that literacy centers have a unique role to play. Given that resources are scarce, literacy scholars must maximize the affordances of literacy centers as rich, productive research sites for the use and study of a reflective video pedagogy.
Shanahan, L.E., McVee, M.B., Schiller, J.A., Tynan, E.A., D’Abate, R.L., Flury-Kashmanian, C.M., Rinker, T.W., Ebert, A.A. and Emily Hayden, H. (2013), "Supporting Struggling Readers and Literacy Clinicians Through Reflective Video Pedagogy", Ortlieb, E. and Cheek, E.H. (Ed.) Advanced Literacy Practices (Literacy Research, Practice and Evaluation, Vol. 2), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 303-323. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2048-0458(2013)0000002018
Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2013, Emerald Group Publishing Limited