媒体、立法和阅读科学:了解政策叙事,通往合作之路

IF 1.4 2区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Olivia J. Cox, Emily Johns-O’Leary
{"title":"媒体、立法和阅读科学:了解政策叙事,通往合作之路","authors":"Olivia J. Cox, Emily Johns-O’Leary","doi":"10.1177/1086296x241226475","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Using frame analysis, the present study examined the intersections of science of reading research, media coverage, and state literacy policy to explore how Colorado policy and media documents have defined reading achievement. It also analyzed the values, assumptions, and agendas within these definitions. It identified diagnostic frames that defined a state-level problem with reading education and prognostic frames that proposed curriculum and teacher training mandates as solutions. Underlying these frames were assumptions of objectivity, agendas of top-down accountability, and a binary separation between effective and ineffective methods for the teaching of reading. Implications include the development of a critical pragmatism in which researchers, teachers, school leaders, and other practitioners can collaborate to navigate shifts required by legislation while reflecting on the ways in which such shifts are situated in larger narratives. The authors argue that such analyses are essential for implementing reading reform in ways that are equitable and responsive to local contexts.","PeriodicalId":47294,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Literacy Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Media, Legislation, and the Science of Reading: Understanding Policy Narratives for a Path to Collaboration\",\"authors\":\"Olivia J. Cox, Emily Johns-O’Leary\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1086296x241226475\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Using frame analysis, the present study examined the intersections of science of reading research, media coverage, and state literacy policy to explore how Colorado policy and media documents have defined reading achievement. It also analyzed the values, assumptions, and agendas within these definitions. It identified diagnostic frames that defined a state-level problem with reading education and prognostic frames that proposed curriculum and teacher training mandates as solutions. Underlying these frames were assumptions of objectivity, agendas of top-down accountability, and a binary separation between effective and ineffective methods for the teaching of reading. Implications include the development of a critical pragmatism in which researchers, teachers, school leaders, and other practitioners can collaborate to navigate shifts required by legislation while reflecting on the ways in which such shifts are situated in larger narratives. The authors argue that such analyses are essential for implementing reading reform in ways that are equitable and responsive to local contexts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47294,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Literacy Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Literacy Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296x241226475\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Literacy Research","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296x241226475","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究采用框架分析法,考察了阅读科学研究、媒体报道和州扫盲政策的交叉点,以探讨科罗拉多州的政策和媒体文件是如何定义阅读成就的。本研究还分析了这些定义中的价值观、假设和议程。研究发现,诊断性框架定义了州一级的阅读教育问题,而预测性框架则提出了课程和教师培训任务作为解决方案。这些框架的基础是客观性假设、自上而下的问责制议程以及有效和无效阅读教学方法的二元分离。研究的意义包括发展批判实用主义,研究人员、教师、学校领导和其他从业人员可以通过合作来引导立法所要求的转变,同时反思这种转变在更大叙事中的位置。作者认为,这种分析对于以公平和符合当地情况的方式实施阅读改革至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Media, Legislation, and the Science of Reading: Understanding Policy Narratives for a Path to Collaboration
Using frame analysis, the present study examined the intersections of science of reading research, media coverage, and state literacy policy to explore how Colorado policy and media documents have defined reading achievement. It also analyzed the values, assumptions, and agendas within these definitions. It identified diagnostic frames that defined a state-level problem with reading education and prognostic frames that proposed curriculum and teacher training mandates as solutions. Underlying these frames were assumptions of objectivity, agendas of top-down accountability, and a binary separation between effective and ineffective methods for the teaching of reading. Implications include the development of a critical pragmatism in which researchers, teachers, school leaders, and other practitioners can collaborate to navigate shifts required by legislation while reflecting on the ways in which such shifts are situated in larger narratives. The authors argue that such analyses are essential for implementing reading reform in ways that are equitable and responsive to local contexts.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: The Journal of Literacy Research (JLR) is a peer-reviewed journal contributes to the advancement research related to literacy and literacy education. Current focuses include, but are not limited to: -Literacies from preschool to adulthood -Evolving and expanding definitions of ‘literacy’ -Innovative applications of theory, pedagogy and instruction -Methodological developments in literacy and language research
×
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