Rethinking the Role of Knowledge in the Literacy Classroom

Hattan, Courtney; Lupo, Sarah M.

doi:10.1002/rrq.350

Cited by 29 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 103 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To support students’ dexterity as text participants, instruction should promote reading comprehension development. Building, and building on, prior knowledge and vocabulary can effectively leverage comprehension growth (Cabell & Hwang, 2020; Hattan & Lupo, 2020), as can explicitly taught strategies such as posing questions (Chiang et al, 2017; Joseph, Alber‐Morgan, Cullen, & Rouse, 2016; Pearson et al, 2020), although encouraging flexible strategy use as part of wider talk about text may be more useful than teaching isolated strategies (I.A.G. Wilkinson & Son, 2011).…”

Section: What Kinds Of Readers Should Society Raise?mentioning

confidence: 99%

What Matters Most? Toward a Robust and Socially Just Science of Reading

Aukerman¹,

Schuldt²

2021

Reading Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Science of reading is a term that has been used variously, but its use within research, policy, and the press has tended to share one important commonality: an intensive focus on assessed reading proficiency as the primary goal of reading instruction. Although well intentioned, this focus directs attention toward a problematically narrow slice of reading. In this article, we propose a different framework for the science of reading, one that draws on existing literacy research in ways that could broaden and deepen instruction. The framework proposes, first, that reading education should develop textual dexterity across grade levels in the four literate roles first proposed by Freebody and Luke: code breaker (decodes text), text participant (comprehends text), text user (applies readings of text to accomplish things), and text analyst (critiques text). Second, the framework suggests that reading education should nurture important literate dispositions alongside those textual capacities, dispositions that include reading engagement, motivation, and self‐efficacy. Justification is offered for the focus on textual dexterity and literate dispositions, and we include research‐based suggestions about how reading educators can foster student growth in these areas. Finally, we propose that reading education should attend closely to linguistic, cultural, and individual variation, honoring and leveraging different strengths and perspectives that students bring to and take away from their learning. Reimagining a science of reading based on these principles has the potential to make it both more robust and more socially just, particularly for students from nondominant cultures.

show abstract

Section: What Kinds Of Readers Should Society Raise?mentioning

confidence: 99%

What Matters Most? Toward a Robust and Socially Just Science of Reading

Aukerman¹,

Schuldt²

2021

Reading Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first is: What type of knowledge counts? Referencing a recent article (Hattan & Lupo, 2020), Courtney Hattan encouraged attendees to think beyond content knowledge and stated, "We certainly need to broaden the definitions of knowledge and center varying forms of knowledge, especially students' assets." For example, educators can value and recognize the funds of cultural knowledge (Moll et al, 1992) and linguistic knowledge (Orellana, 2015) that students already possess.…”

Section: Background Knowledge and Content-rich English-language Arts (Ela) Instruction Sonia Q Cabellmentioning

confidence: 99%

Critical Issues in the Science of Reading: Striving for a Wide-Angle View in Research

Hoffman

Cabell

Barrueco

et al. 2021

Literacy Research: Theory, Method, and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This report reflects a panel presentation and discussion at the 2020 Literacy Research Conference focused on the science of reading (SoR). Each panelist presents a summary of the presentation and incorporates the comments of the Literacy Research Association (LRA) members attending the session virtually and posting in the chat room. Each presentation takes a critical stance on the possibilities for expanding the lens for the SoR. Concerns are raised regarding the narrow interpretation of the SoR and impact of this narrow conception on research, theory, and practice.

show abstract

“…When we instead turn our attention to high-stakes standardized tests, we can see how these metrics unfairly privilege some forms of knowledge over others. Hattan and Lupo (2020), addressing the role of background knowledge from a sociocultural perspective, argue that:…”

Section: Two Contemporary Critiquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking the role of reading assessments for real learning

Francois

Hood²

2021

JME

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Scholars who advocate for equity-oriented educational practices have argued that the accountability era in the USA, now in place for two decades, has failed in its intended goal to improve student performance for traditionally marginalized student populations. This study aims to use a sociocultural lens to trace how a century-old conceptualization of reading – that discrete skills comprise comprehension and that multiple-choice questions can measure mastery of those skills – predominates today’s standardized reading tests. Design/methodology/approach This essay draws on the authors’ collective experiences as literacy educators, school leaders and researchers. Findings The authors critique two beliefs rooted in Eurocentric thinking borne from a long-held conceptualization of reading – that logical reasoning and the right background knowledge can promote achievement on standardized tests. The authors link the critique to their lived experiences and situate test design features in the broader sociopolitical educational landscape. Then, by presenting examples from an urban public high school, the authors encourage educational leaders to revisit the potential of authentic assessments as complex and meaningful activities that foster the critical thinking necessary for participating in democracy. Practical implications Committing to authentic assessments takes the work characteristic of transformative school leadership, especially serving diverse student populations: A clear and ambitious vision that centers social justice and cultural relevance, frequent, shared opportunities for professional growth and shared norms for instructional practice and student growth. Originality/value This essay encourages educational leaders, researchers and policymakers to revisit the potential of authentic assessments as tasks that can surpass external measures in informing teachers about how students’ develop their literacy in school.

show abstract

Rethinking the Role of Knowledge in the Literacy Classroom

Cited by 29 publications

References 103 publications

What Matters Most? Toward a Robust and Socially Just Science of Reading

What Matters Most? Toward a Robust and Socially Just Science of Reading

Critical Issues in the Science of Reading: Striving for a Wide-Angle View in Research

Rethinking the role of reading assessments for real learning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About