FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2617757002> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2617757002 startingPage "38" @default.
• W2617757002 abstract "and Gospels? the woman across from me interrupted. That's what we had to read in high school, and Gospels. The woman, a guest at a party, found out I was an En- glish teacher and asked what books I taught. She answered before I could, but I was charmed and intrigued by her response, charmed because she as- sumed (in some cases accurately) that the literature that was taught 40 years ago is still being taught today and intrigued because she was actually inter- ested in discussing literature that I teach. Little did this woman know narratives about teaching high school literature have been at the center of con- troversy for many years. Inevitably, the problem with such debates over what literature is best for high school classrooms is that high school teach- ers, despite being the ones actually engaged with students and the texts in question, have little cred- ibility in the larger, public discourse and end up being interrupted, critiqued, or shouldered out of the conversation.In this article, I look at how recent policies have shaped what and how literature is taught in the secondary classroom and how those policies af- fect professional and classroom conversations about literature. Then I share focused conversations I've had with high school English teachers from di- verse communities about the complex ways in which they engage their students with literature. Finally, I make an argument for why critical con- versations about the selection and use of literature, like the ones I had with the interviewees, should be an essential part of professional development for all English teachers, including those new to the profession.How the Conversation StartedIn terms of the national discourse about what lit- erature matters in high school, it's important to acknowledge that although some beliefs about curriculum have changed over the last 200 years, many remain. Oddly enough, the woman I spoke with at the party was likely in her 40s, and yet the Greeks and Gospels curriculum she described casts her in the 19th-century American classroom, where literature study was viewed only as part of teaching classical languages. Clearly, this attitude has changed. Rare is the public school that requires Latin over language arts. But as the 20th century turned, debates formed among university professors over whether the study of literature should involve personal, aesthetic readings or should apply far more scientific approaches (Graff). Another sub- ject of debate at the time was whether popular liter- ature should be part of classroom study. Such topics sound eerily familiar today where many ELA teach- ers aren't sure whether to place greater focus on strategies or texts and on which texts in particular. The canon? Multicultural literature? YA? Nonfic- tion? But the dilemma of how to balance strategies and texts has been exacerbated by the volley of con- tradictions teachers have been subject to under No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and Common Core State Standards.Allow me to illustrate the problem. In 2001-05, not long after NCLB legislation, literacy coaches and specialists were installed in 5,600 pub- lic elementary schools across the country because of Reading First Grants provided to major urban districts such as Chicago, New York, Los Ange- les, and San Diego (Atteberry and Bryk; Peterson et al.). Not much time passed before eight public high schools received similar grants and NCTE and IRA published standards of practice for literacy coaches (Blamey, Meyer, and Walpole). With the installation of literacy coaches came widespread change in the professional development available to teachers of all subject areas, a change that em- phasized reading strategies that could aid student comprehension. The movement took hold, but the trouble was that so much reading strategy instruc- tion was creating for English teachers what Lisa Schade Eckert describes as a pedagogical gap between literary and reading instruction. …" @default.
• W2617757002 created "2017-06-05" @default.
• W2617757002 creator A5069974880 @default.
• W2617757002 date "2014-07-01" @default.
• W2617757002 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W2617757002 title "Beyond the Stacks: Why High School English Teachers Should Be Talking about Books" @default.
• W2617757002 hasPublicationYear "2014" @default.
• W2617757002 type Work @default.
• W2617757002 sameAs 2617757002 @default.
• W2617757002 citedByCount "4" @default.
• W2617757002 countsByYear W26177570022015 @default.
• W2617757002 countsByYear W26177570022016 @default.
• W2617757002 countsByYear W26177570022017 @default.
• W2617757002 countsByYear W26177570022020 @default.
• W2617757002 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2617757002 hasAuthorship W2617757002A5069974880 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConcept C124952713 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConcept C145420912 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConcept C19417346 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConcept C199033989 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConcept C2777200299 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConcept C46312422 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConcept C55493867 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConcept C98184364 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConceptScore W2617757002C124952713 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConceptScore W2617757002C142362112 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConceptScore W2617757002C144024400 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConceptScore W2617757002C145420912 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConceptScore W2617757002C15744967 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConceptScore W2617757002C185592680 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConceptScore W2617757002C19417346 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConceptScore W2617757002C199033989 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConceptScore W2617757002C2777200299 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConceptScore W2617757002C46312422 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConceptScore W2617757002C55493867 @default.
• W2617757002 hasConceptScore W2617757002C98184364 @default.
• W2617757002 hasIssue "6" @default.
• W2617757002 hasLocation W26177570021 @default.
• W2617757002 hasOpenAccess W2617757002 @default.
• W2617757002 hasPrimaryLocation W26177570021 @default.
• W2617757002 hasRelatedWork W116902806 @default.
• W2617757002 hasRelatedWork W2029249370 @default.
• W2617757002 hasRelatedWork W2050739807 @default.
• W2617757002 hasRelatedWork W2065874284 @default.
• W2617757002 hasRelatedWork W2115498658 @default.
• W2617757002 hasRelatedWork W2611532776 @default.
• W2617757002 hasRelatedWork W2612016882 @default.
• W2617757002 hasRelatedWork W270439597 @default.
• W2617757002 hasRelatedWork W2769422331 @default.
• W2617757002 hasRelatedWork W2789747326 @default.
• W2617757002 hasRelatedWork W295301545 @default.
• W2617757002 hasRelatedWork W2955360304 @default.
• W2617757002 hasRelatedWork W335409685 @default.
• W2617757002 hasRelatedWork W342157556 @default.
• W2617757002 hasRelatedWork W2186686724 @default.
• W2617757002 hasRelatedWork W2597041382 @default.
• W2617757002 hasRelatedWork W2609388056 @default.
• W2617757002 hasRelatedWork W2622345502 @default.
• W2617757002 hasRelatedWork W2626021990 @default.
• W2617757002 hasRelatedWork W6118356 @default.
• W2617757002 hasVolume "103" @default.
• W2617757002 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2617757002 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2617757002 magId "2617757002" @default.
• W2617757002 workType "article" @default.