For concurrent enrollment, collaboration, not alignment, is the better story

Burke Scarbrough
{"title":"For concurrent enrollment, collaboration, not alignment, is the better story","authors":"Burke Scarbrough","doi":"10.1108/etpc-10-2021-0135","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nAs concurrent enrollment (CE) programs continue to expand in the USA, a growing share of English teaching at the first-year university level is taking place in secondary schools. Though much of the discourse surrounding CE courses relates to quality control, the purpose of this paper is to argue for a reconsideration of the terms by which these courses are valued, calling for a shift from alignment to collaboration as the crucial work for participating English teachers.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThis essay responds to scholarship and primary source documents related to CE programs in light of the author’s experience as liaison for a CE literature course at a Midwestern regional university in the USA.\n\n\nFindings\nAn ethic of alignment pervades discourse about CE programs. The quality control promised by this “alignment story” presupposes a stable university course to be aligned with and the emulation of college faculty pedagogy as the high-priority intellectual labor. This alignment story is undermined by the variation within and between on-campus and high school iterations of the literature course. Rather than justifying an alignment ethic, this variation continually renews important questions about what constitutes college-level engagement with literature and how to best help students achieve it in a particular setting. These questions call for deliberation among a community of English teachers, not alignment of one constituency to another.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis essay builds on previous scholarship about the importance of alignment and the opportunity for collaboration in CE by exploring how an emphasis on the former misrecognizes the importance of the latter.\n","PeriodicalId":428767,"journal":{"name":"English Teaching: Practice & Critique","volume":" 15","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"English Teaching: Practice & Critique","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/etpc-10-2021-0135","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose As concurrent enrollment (CE) programs continue to expand in the USA, a growing share of English teaching at the first-year university level is taking place in secondary schools. Though much of the discourse surrounding CE courses relates to quality control, the purpose of this paper is to argue for a reconsideration of the terms by which these courses are valued, calling for a shift from alignment to collaboration as the crucial work for participating English teachers. Design/methodology/approach This essay responds to scholarship and primary source documents related to CE programs in light of the author’s experience as liaison for a CE literature course at a Midwestern regional university in the USA. Findings An ethic of alignment pervades discourse about CE programs. The quality control promised by this “alignment story” presupposes a stable university course to be aligned with and the emulation of college faculty pedagogy as the high-priority intellectual labor. This alignment story is undermined by the variation within and between on-campus and high school iterations of the literature course. Rather than justifying an alignment ethic, this variation continually renews important questions about what constitutes college-level engagement with literature and how to best help students achieve it in a particular setting. These questions call for deliberation among a community of English teachers, not alignment of one constituency to another. Originality/value This essay builds on previous scholarship about the importance of alignment and the opportunity for collaboration in CE by exploring how an emphasis on the former misrecognizes the importance of the latter.
对于同时招生来说,合作,而不是结盟,是更好的选择
随着同步招生(CE)项目在美国不断扩大,越来越多的大学一年级英语教学开始在中学进行。尽管围绕英语教学课程的许多论述都与质量控制有关,但本文的目的是主张重新考虑这些课程的价值,呼吁从协调到合作的转变,作为参与英语教师的关键工作。设计/方法/方法本文根据作者在美国中西部地区大学担任CE文学课程联络人的经历,对与CE项目相关的学术研究和主要原始文献做出了回应。一致的伦理贯穿于关于CE项目的讨论中。这种“对齐故事”所承诺的质量控制,以一个稳定的大学课程为前提,并将大学教师的教学法作为高优先级的智力劳动加以效仿。这种一致性故事被校内和高中文学课程之间的差异所破坏。这种变化并没有证明对齐伦理的合理性,而是不断地更新一些重要的问题:什么是大学水平的文学参与,以及如何最好地帮助学生在特定的环境中实现这一目标。这些问题需要英语教师的集体讨论,而不是一个选区与另一个选区结盟。原创性/价值本文建立在先前关于一致性的重要性和合作机会的学术研究的基础上,探讨了对前者的强调如何误解了后者的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信