Preparing student teachers to address complex learning and controversy with middle grades students

Year 2011, Volume: 7 Issue: 2, 33 - 51, 01.08.2011

Ann Marie Smith Sean Lennon

Abstract

This qualitative study explores pre-service teachers’ perceptions of teaching critical literacy through discussions of controversial issues. Personality questionnaires were given to six classes of pre-student teachers over three semesters in order to gauge interest in teaching methods that incorporate inquiry learning and critical literacy. The results of this study suggest that these pre-service teachers were generally unwilling to discussing controversial issues in their classes. Also some teachers did not necessarily believe that students are capable of directing their own learning. The authors of this study make recommendations for preparing teachers to think about critical literacy through discussions of controversial issues

Keywords

Critical literacy, Preservice teacher education, complex learning, controversy

References

• Allen, J. Moller, K. & Stroup, D. (2003). “Is this some kind of soap opera?: A tale of two readers across four literature discussion contexts. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 19, 225-51. International Reading Association.
• Almasi, J., Palmer, B., Garas, K., Cho, W., Shanahan, L., & Augustino, A. (2004). A Longitudinal investigation of the influence of peer discussion of text on Reading development in grades K-3. Final report submitted to the Institute of Education Sciences. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.
• Almasi, J., O’Flahavan, J., & Arya, P. (2001). A comparative analysis of student and teacher development in more and less proficient discussions of literature. Reading Research Quarterly, 36, 96-134.
• Apple, M. (2004) Ideology and curriculum,3rd ed. New York: Taylor & Francis.
• Avery, P. (2004). Social studies teacher education in an era of globalization. In S. Adler (ed.) Critical issues in social studies teacher education (pp. 37-57). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
• Applebee, A., Langer, J., Nystrand, M., Gamoran, A. (2003). Discussion-based approaches to developing understanding: Classroom instruction and student performance in middle and high school English. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 685-730.
• Association of Statisticians of American Religious Bodies. (2002) Nashville, TN: Glenmary Research Center. CD Rom.
• Byford, J., Lennon, S. & Russell, W. (2009). Teaching controversial issues in social studies: A Research study of high school teachers. Clearing House, 82 (4),165-70.
• Carlson, D., & Schramm-Pate, L. (2005). Risky Business: Teaching about the confederate flag controversy in a South Carolina high school. In Eds. L. Weis & M. Fine. Beyond Silenced voices: Class, race and gender in united states schools (pp 217-231). New York: SUNY Press.
• Corbin, J. & Strauss, A. (2008). The Basics of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
• Cornbleth, C. (2001). Climates of constraint/restraint of teachers and teaching. In W. Stanley (Ed). Social studies research for the 21st century (pp. 73-95). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
• Evans, P. (2002). Fifth graders’ perceptions on how they experience literature Discussion groups. Reading Research Quarterly, 37, 46-49,
• Finn, P. (1999). Literacy with an attitude: Educating working-class children in their own self-interest. Albany: SUNY.
• Giroux, H. (2001). Theory and Resistance in Education: Towards a pedagogy for the opposition. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.
• Hess, D. (2009). Controversy in the classroom: The Democratic power of discussion. New York:Routledge.
• Kelly, U. (1997). Schooling desire: Literacy, cultural politics, and pedagogy. New York: Routledge.
• Kincheloe, J. (2004). Critical pedagogy. New York: Peter Lang.
• Lalik, R. & Oliver, K. (2007). Differences and tensions in implementing a pedagogy of critical literacy with adolescent girls. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(1).46-70.
• Lambeth, D. & Smith, A. (2011). Preservice teachers’ perceptions of culturally responsive teacher preparation in the 21st century. Paper/poster presented at the American Educational Research Association (AERA) Annual Meeting, New Orleans.
• Levitt, G., & Longstreet, W. (1993). Controversy and the teaching of authentic civic values. Social Studies, 84 (4), 142-47.
• Lewis, C. (1998). Literary interpretation as a social act. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 42, 168-177.
• Lipman, P. (2004). High stakes education. New York: Routledge Farmer.
• McNeil, L. (2000). Contradictions of school reform: Educational costs of Standardized testing. New York: RoutledgeFarmer.
• Pescatore, C. (2008). Current events as empowering literacy: For English and social Studies teachers. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 51 (4), 326-339.
• Rosenblatt, L. (1994). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the literary work. Carbondale, IL.: Southern Illinois Press.
• Rosenblatt, L. (1995). Literature as exploration. New York: MLA.
• Santora, E. (2001). Interrogating privilege, plurality and possibilities in a multicultural society. In W. Stanley (Ed). Social studies research for the 21st century (pp. 149-171). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
• Smith, A. (2006). Negotiating control and protecting the private: Accountability, History teachers, and the Virginia Standards of Learning. In SG Grant (Ed.) Measuring history (pp.221-247). Greenwich, CT: Information Age
• State of Georgia labor profile. http://explorer.dol.state.ga.us. Retrieved April 19, 2010.
• Street, B. (1995). Social literacies: Critical approaches to literacy development, ethnography, and education. New York: Addison Wesley. Publishing.
• Stringer, E. (2008). Action research in education, 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. USDA economic research services. 2008 Count-level poverty rates. Retrieved April 19, 2010
• Whitson, J. (2004). What social studies teachers need to know. In W. Stanley (Ed). Social studies research for the 21st century (pp. 9-35). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
• Wilson, E., et al. Teachers’ perspectives on incorporating current controversial issues into the social Studies curriculum. The International Social Studies Forum, 2 (1). 31-45.
• Winston, K. & Ross, E. (2001). In search of the social studies curriculum: Standardization, diversity and a conflict of appearances. In W. Stanley (Ed). Social studies research for the 21st century (pp. 39-71). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
• Young, J. (2000). Boy talk: Critical literacy and masculinities. Reading Research Quarterly, 35. 312-337.