Search results

Purpose: To describe the importance of exemplary literacy teacher preparation today, the changing landscape of teacher preparation accreditation and the recently revised and launched International Literacy Association (ILA) National Recognition programs.

Design: In this chapter, the authors examine the current context of literacy teacher preparation in the United States, including the changing landscape of national accreditation, national recognition, and certification requirements. Next, the authors provide a brief overview of the ILA Standards for the Preparation of Literacy Professionals 2017 (Standards 2017) (International Literacy Association (ILA), 2018) and consider how Standards 2017 may inform literacy teacher preparation programs, state standards, and certification. Then, the authors discuss how the role of reading/literacy specialist in Standards 2017 is being applied in the ILA National Recognition program. To close the chapter, the authors share guiding questions and two case studies from exemplary literacy preparation programs – West Virginia University and the University of Texas at San Antonio – in an effort to provide practical examples of program innovation and improvement in these challenging times in literacy teacher preparation.

Findings: The authors discuss the current context of teacher preparation today, the ILA Standards 2017 with specific attention to the reading/literacy specialist role and standards.

Practical Implications: ILA National Recognition program involve reflection, self-study, on-site visits by peers to support and inspire ongoing literacy teacher preparation program quality and improvement.

This chapter addresses the concept of Literacy for all under a broadened view of inclusion in education. Definitions of inclusion, literacy and inclusive literacy are provided prior to consideration of some of the issues associated with developing and improving the literacy of every student in regular classroom contexts. It presents a brief overview of theory and international research, and as an example, provides some insights into current educational policies, practices and provision in Australia in relation to literacy education.

Purpose – To discuss relevant research and theory that inform literacy development in a digital age.

Design – This chapter weaves together research on K-12 literacy development, metacognition, and new literacies in an effort to build a framework for supporting the literacy development of children and adolescents. Relevant theories and research frame a sociolinguistic approach to literacy development and learning as its relation to engaging with digital text is discussed throughout.

Findings – A framework for supporting literacy development alongside working with developing teachers is offered to support comprehensive literacy development within a digital age.

Practical Implications – A framework is presented that can be used across grade levels. Multiple examples across grade levels and within teacher education are offered to support the model that is proposed.

Purpose – Teachers should plan instruction that integrates digital tools into instruction in meaningful ways to promote students’ use of multimodalities. Therefore, it is useful for teacher educators to expose pre-service teachers (PSTs) to a systematic approach to integrating a variety of digital tools into their instruction. In this chapter, the authors discuss on the Technology Integration Planning Cycle (TIPC; Hutchison & Woodward, 2014a, 2014b) as one systematic approach for teachers and teacher educators to consider.

Design – This chapter describes the promise of using the TIPC with PSTs to demonstrate and practice how to plan effective literacy instruction to support students’ use of multimodalities. The chapter includes a rich description of how the use of the TIPC might take shape in a literacy methods course based on a composite of courses, students, and activities that the authors have experimented with over time.

Findings – Using the TIPC with PSTs requires a structured approach (Hutchison & Colwell, 2016) that includes modeling and scaffolding of PSTs’ knowledge of technology and pedagogy (Beschorner & Kruse, 2016). Therefore, the Gradual Release of Responsibility (Pearson & Gallagher, 1983) might be valuable to consider as a guiding framework for planning course activities and assignments that utilize the TIPC. This chapter provides an example of this type of instruction.

Practical Implications – There is a significant need to prepare twenty-first century learners to read and write multimodal text. Thus, supporting PSTs to increase their self-efficacy in using technology for instruction and providing the conditions necessary to develop pedagogical beliefs that make it likely for them to be able to integrate technology in meaningful ways is vital (Ertmer, 2005). Using the TIPC in a literacy methods course in the ways that model and scaffold its use, might be one approach to creating these conditions.

This chapter contends that to meet the needs of refugees, we must go beyond addressing only safety and security by including education as well, specifically, literacy development. The authors suggest that in order to support refugee education, generally, we need to identify best practices for supporting reading programs in refugee settings. The authors discuss basic design and assessment of literacy education programming in refugee settings that parallels the designs for traditional school-wide literacy programs, which we have in place in more stable regions of the world. The authors attempt to converge the fields of literacy education with refugee studies to make recommendations for supporting refugees’ literacy education with the goal of preserving their native language and literacy while preparing them for the future.

Purpose – This study explored agentive and sustainable teacher development as part of literacy coaching that employed a reflective framework and video with an apprenticeship stance. This chapter examines principles of apprenticeship and the Gradual Release of Responsibility (GRR) model to analyze the transition of responsibility for reflection from coach to teacher.

Design/methodology/approach – An earlier seven-month multiple case study of literacy coaching with four secondary level teachers revealed seven joint actions (i.e., revoice, build, ask questions to develop understanding, ask dissonant questions, suggest, disagree, reconceptualize) and four categories of joint action (i.e., directive/consonant, directive/dissonant, responsive/consonant, and responsive/dissonant) within a model of joint action for literacy coaching (Reichenberg, 2018). This analysis mapped those joint actions onto the GRR model (McVee, Shanahan, Hayden, Boyd, & Pearson, 2018; Pearson & Gallagher, 1983). This chapter explicates reasoning for variability in responsibility and the potential relationship between variability and the development of teachers’ thinking and action through in-depth analysis of a single coaching session. Examples from other teachers’ coaching sessions are included.

Findings – Synthesis of the two models shows that joint actions initiated by the coach that were directive/dissonant fell on the left side of the GRR model with primary coach responsibility. Actions initiated by the coach that were classified as directive/consonant came next on the journey toward the middle, followed by responsive/dissonant actions. Responsive/consonant actions encompassed the middle region of shared responsibility. The same actions initiated by the teacher mirrored this progression. Principles of apprenticeship in this gradual release of responsibility highlight the bi-directionality of expertise in situated action informed by historical and dynamic context (Mercer, 2008). Evidence of teachers’ growing agency and sustainability were present in joint actions they initiated within the context of literacy coaching.

Research limitations/implications – Analysis of the actions of a literacy coach and teacher as directive, responsive, consonant, and dissonant add complexity to the discussion about how to transfer responsibility for reflection from coaches to teachers. Awareness of how joint actions map onto the GRR model can inform coaches’ and teachers’ decisions as they thoughtfully move toward greater teacher agency within coaching interaction.

Practical implications – The reflective framework employed in this study is applicable to a variety of settings such as instructional coaching across the disciplines, coaching by in-service literacy specialists, and the preparation of pre-service literacy coaches. The model of joint action for analyzing coaching interaction could be used by in-service literacy coaches, pre-service literacy coaches, and teachers who are being coached.

Originality/value – This chapter analyzes the transition of responsibility for reflection from coach to teacher. Principles of both the GRR model and apprenticeship theory provide a theoretical explanation for how these teachers achieved greater agency and sustainable development of a reflective stance.

Purpose: This chapter will examine and delineate the intersection of social, emotional, and cultural learning with literacy. Shared are promising practices, while encouragement is offered to educators for implementing the discussed practices with fidelity and consistency.

Design: Examined is research to explain the significance and benefits of social, emotional, and cultural learning in literacy. Additionally, promising practices are also identified through the review of existing literature.

Findings: The findings in this chapter indicate that students benefit from curriculum that intersects social, emotional, and cultural learning with literacy.

Practical Implications: Educators should learn how to effectively implement social, emotional, and cultural learning in their literacy classrooms daily. Teacher education preparation programs must examine their curriculum and if needed, revise to include social, emotional, and cultural learning in literacy.

The goal of this chapter is to address the importance of helping teachers develop an understanding of LGBTQ+ issues and ways to create inclusive classrooms for LGBTQ+ students with particular attention to how LGBTQ+ identities/experiences can be valued and visible through literary and literacy practices. The issues addressed in this chapter are grounded in queer theory and intersectionality, which provide a space for challenging heteronormative environments in many schools as well as acknowledging the complex intersectionality of diverse identities. This framework is unpacked so readers can see how it supports instructional practices. Theory and literature inform discussion of the move in the literacy profession toward LGBTQ+ -inclusive mindsets and pedagogies. They further inform practical implications and examples provided by the author. A major issue of our time is LGBTQ+ inclusion in schools and the role of teachers in implementing literacy practices that address the needs of LGBTQ+ students and making visible their diverse identities. For the field of literacy, this is evidenced in the revision of Standard 4 Diversity and Equity in the International Literacy Association’s (ILA) Standards for the Preparation of Literacy Professionals 2017 (Standards 2017). ILA Standards 2017, which will be released in 2018, require programs preparing literacy professionals to develop candidates’ knowledge of queer theory and literacy practices inclusive of diverse students, with diversity including sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression. Further, ILA Standards 2017 acknowledge intersectionality across forms of diversity and that a rich understanding of diversity improves the quality of teaching and learning within and across classrooms, schools, and communities. This chapter expands on these topics and offers foundational content and resources to help literacy teacher educators, candidates in literacy programs, and other stakeholders to answer this call for building a literacy field that is welcoming, inclusive, and equity-oriented. Developing the knowledge base about LGBTQ+ issues, including theoretical foundations, social justice teaching mindsets, and concrete pedagogical literacy practices that build inclusive classrooms, can be an accessible, meaningful, and fruitful endeavor that will enrich literacy education programs and the learning communities in which literacy professionals work. Teacher educators and teachers can utilize book choices, approaches to classroom discussion and assignments, and school initiatives to build a learning environment that values LGBTQ+ students’ identities and experiences and disrupts heteronormativity in the curriculum. Multiple examples of how this can be done are offered. Understanding intersectionality also helps teacher educators and teachers see how forms of diversity are not silos. Individuals’ identities are comprised of various aspects. The topics discussed in this chapter center on LGBTQ+ issues but are applicable beyond just this scope.

This paper shares findings from a multi-year literacy professional development partnership between a school district and university (2014–2019). We share this case of a Literacy Cohort initiative as an example of cross-institutional professional development situated within several of NAPDS’ nine essentials, including professional learning and leading, boundary-spanning roles and reflection and innovation (NAPDS, 2021).

We asked, “In what ways did the Cohort initiative create conditions for community and collaboration in the service of meaningful literacy reforms?” Drawing on social design methodology (Gutiérrez & Vossoughi, 2010), we sought to generate and examine the educational change associated with this multi-year initiative. Our data set included programmatic data, interviews (N = 30) and artifacts of literacy teaching, learning and leading.

Our findings reflect the emphasis areas that are important to educators in the partnership: diversity by design, building relationships through collaboration and rooting literacy reforms in teacher leadership. Our discussion explores threads of reciprocity, simultaneous renewal and boundary-spanning leadership and their role in sustaining partnerships over time.

This paper contributes to our understanding of building and sustaining a cohort model of multi-year professional development through the voices, perspectives and experiences of teachers, faculty and district administrators.