Expanding Meaningfulness in Literacy Research: Possibilities of a Relational Perspective

Abstract

In this article, I consider expanding meaningfulness in literacy research by exploring the possibilities offered by a relational perspective on literacy and its study. An interdisciplinary relational perspective is outlined and used to rethink what happens when we engage in reading and writing. Questions guiding this exploration include: What makes literate activity meaningful, and how might a relational perspective enhance meaningfulness in studying this activity? What does a relational perspective look like as a theoretical frame for literacy research, and why might such a perspective be needed now? A synthesis of literacy research representing a relational perspective will be presented and examples of methodological applications offered. I conclude with the consequences of a relational perspective including implications for student well-being, assessment practices, and capacities for social justice work.

What Does It Mean to Say Coaching Is Relational?

“…Associated meaning-making is built on shared expertise and knowledge-building (e.g., questioning, disagreeing, consensus building), and is intensely personal, contextualized by the unique human circumstances of the coach–teacher relationship. Lysaker (2018), in describing a relational perspective toward literacy, wrote, “Meaning happens in the in-between” (p. 6). In literacy coaching, we defined the “in-between” as mutuality in leadership and knowledge-building.…”

“…A relational perspective in coaching is one in which meaning-making is negotiated in a dialogic flow between coach and teacher, with both participants positioned as integral. Such a stance brings to the forefront both the individuality and the “relatingness” (i.e., the striving for connection; Lysaker, 2018) of the teacher and the coach. Outcomes of coaching are thus co-constructed in this relational space that is informed by each person’s individual sociohistorical (Bakhtin, 1981) and sociocultural (Vygotsky, 1978) identities.…”

“…We define lived experiences as the interactions between the coach and teacher that intersect with and are influenced by issues of positioning and power, the “logics” (Woulfin, 2016) of literacy learning, and the tensions and vulnerabilities that surface therein. Furthermore, lived experiences honor both the coach’s and the teacher’s experiential knowledge; respond to the situated learning and contextual needs of teachers, their students, and coaches; and cultivate teacher agency that, when successful, flows through the coaching event into the teaching events and into students’ own relational meaning-making (Lysaker, 2018).…”

“…In this metasynthesis (Sandelowski et al, 1997), we review a small corpus ( n = 28) of literacy coaching studies from a relational perspective (Lysaker, 2018) as a way to understand the discrepant findings. By relational , we mean contexts where the coach and teacher came together to dialogically (Bakhtin, 1981) examine genuine concerns and practices of the teacher and to reciprocally co-construct new knowledge and skills related to teaching or coaching.…”

Integrative Research Syntheses as Sites of Disruption in Literacy Teacher Education

“…Authors of integrative research syntheses also can propose and develop alternative theoretical frameworks, which can shift ideologies within a field, as Lysaker (2018) did by framing comprehending and composing from a relational perspective. Similarly, Mosley Wetzel et al (2019) apply a sociocultural and critical stance to examine PTs’ sociocultural insights and understandings and push against hegemonic views prevalent in teacher education.…”