CITE-ITEL A dialogical synthesis of research into initial literacy teacher preparation
Login

Learning to teach literacy through collaborative discussions of student work

Abstract

Despite the high numbers of students with disabilities struggling with literacy, few teachers report feeling well prepared to address it. Most students with disabilities encounter challenges in reading and professional development can help teachers learn a range of ways to address those. In this article, we discuss a professional development project in which prospective teachers work collaboratively with practicing teachers throughout their university preparation. The professional development provided builds on the idea of ‘literacy artifacts’, which are samples of students’ and teachers’ work. Using guided discussions, teachers across the career continuum construct understandings and practices in which they learn how to infuse literacy instruction into all teaching and learning. By conjoining the literacy artifact with instructional resources teachers use, participants make visible the complexity of literacy instruction and how literacy could be embedded in teaching content for students with disabilities especially in general education classrooms.

Reference

  • Hughes, M. T., Parker-Katz, M., & Balasubramanian, A. (2013). Learning to teach literacy through collaborative discussions of student work. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 19(5), 543-558.

Journal

Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice

Analysis

Is this article part of a larger project or series of studies?

no

Does this study draw on a large, preexisting data set?

no

Research Approach

  • none stated

Geographic Setting

  • Chicago
  • Illinois
  • United States

Institutional Context

  • University based

Certification Level

  • Special Education

Programatic Focus

  • Special Education

Research Location Context

  • Not stated

Preservice Participants

  • Graduate Students

Preservice Sample Size

43

Other Participant Data

  • Cooperating teachers
  • Mentors (experienced teachers)

Duration of Data Collection

  • 1 year

Data Sources

  • Interviews
  • Survey

Data Analysis Tools

  • coding (emergent categories)
  • Constant comparative analysis
  • Likert-type scale

Researcher Positionality

  • Inside (studying their own programs)

Research Questions

"(1) What types of literacy artifacts do experienced special education teachers select for discussions and why?" (p. 546)
Is this research question explicit from the manuscript? Yes
"(2) What purpose do experienced special educations [sic] give for selecting particular literacy artifacts and how did they perceive the discussions that emerged from these artifacts?" (p. 546)
Is this research question explicit from the manuscript? Yes
"(3) What are the perceptions of prospective special educators’ regarding the value of literacy artifacts discussions in understanding and learning about teaching?" (p. 546)
Is this research question explicit from the manuscript? Yes

Categories

1TEP Category: Teacher educator practices.

2PTI Category: Preservice teacher identity, knowledge, beliefs, attitudes, and/or orientation (ikbao) toward literacy or the teaching of literacy.

4CTM Category: Cooperating/mentor teachers

3CCE Category: Course experiences – the work that is done in a course to promote the content.

4FIS Category: Field Experiences: inside schools

7DIS Topic: Students identified with disabilities

7REP Topic: Reflection and the reflective practitioner

7TNQ Topic: Teaching as inquiry

8A Topic: Findings in Need of a Category

Comments

Subscribe
Notify of
Please login to comment
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted

© 2015–2026 The University of Texas at Austin
Supported by the Office of Instructional Innovation
Web Privacy Policy | Web Accessibility Policy | Contact

The University of Texas at Austin College of Education

The Literacy Research Association provided pilot funding for portions of this project.

wpDiscuz
0
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
| Reply
wpDiscuz
0
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
| Reply