Thèses sur le sujet « Literacy and reading »

This qualitative study examined a professional development model of literacy coaching in which secondary content teachers were trained in literacy strategy instruction and in literacy mentorship. I attempted to understand the negotiation of pedagogical identities of content teachers engaged in literacy strategy instruction within their own classrooms while also providing literacy mentorship for a peer within the district. Data sources included interviews, video of strategy instruction, field notes, and artifacts from three participants in a suburban high school. Findings revealed that participants engaged in strategy instruction in their own practices and identified themselves regularly as literacy strategy experts within the district but not typically as mentoring experts. Three metaphors were used to explore the separate identities exhibited by the teachers in their role of mentor: the Peer Coach; the Content Warrior, and the Fake Mentor. The findings also revealed that cooperative reflection around video of strategy instruction was essential for negotiation of identity. Several implications for administrators, teachers, teacher educators and professional development were drawn from the findings of this study in regard to developing and selecting professional development models around disciplinary literacy strategy instruction.

This is a quantitative research project utilizing secondary data. Reading Recovery and Leveled Literacy Intervention are two early literacy interventions based on a whole language and phonetic approach to reading instruction. For the purposes of this study, the end-of-first-grade benchmark is a Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA) 18 and the end-of-second-grade benchmark is a DRA 30. This study utilizes descriptive analyses, ANOVA, and ANCOVA analyses of variance, and regression analyses to determine which programs bring tier 3, non-special education readers to grade level status at the conclusion of first grade. Reading Recovery successfully brings first-grade students to grade level status (p = .002), and 47.1% of students who participated in this intervention met the end-of-first-grade benchmark. Overall, their mean end-of-kindergarten DRA score was a text level 3, and their mean end-of-first-grade DRA score was a text level 16. For students who participated in Leveled Literacy Intervention (LLI), 35.3% met the end-of-first-grade benchmark. Overall, their mean end-of-kindergarten DRA score was a text level 3, and their mean end-of-first-grade DRA score was a text level 14. LLI was not found to be statistically significant (p = .607). For students who participated in both Reading Recovery and Leveled Literacy Intervention, 30.1% met the end-of-first-grade benchmark. Overall, their mean end-of-kindergarten DRA score was a text level 3, and their mean end-of-first-grade DRA score was a text level 14. The combination RR and LLI group was not found to be statistically significant (p = .877).

According to this study, for students who participate in either Reading Recovery or Leveled Literacy Intervention, a child’s gender (ANOVA p = .000, ANCOVA p = .000), and ethnicity (ANOVA Black p = .214, Other p = .067; ANCOVA Black p = .765, Other p = .556) is not a significant predictor of their end-of-first-grade DRA level. Depending upon the analysis conducted, a child’s free or reduced lunch rate (ANOVA p = .005, ANCOVA p = .283) is a significant predictor of their end-of-first grade DRA level F(2,1) = 5.416, p = .005 with an R² value of .033 and an error of 612. As anticipated, a child’s initial kindergarten DRA level remains the most significant predictor of their end-of-first-grade DRA level (ANOVA p = .000, ANCOVA p = .000). The lowest scoring students in kindergarten tend to also be the lower scoring students at the end of first and second grades. The second greatest predictor for children who do not participate in Reading Recovery or Leveled Literacy Intervention is the child’s free or reduced lunch rate (p = .005). However, when an ANCOVA analysis of variance analyzed only students with a complete data set, kindergarten through second grade, a child’s lunch rate (p = .283) was shown not to be a significant predictor of end-of-first-grade DRA reading level. Additionally, a child’s lunch rate is not shown to be a significant predictor of a child’s text growth gain.

The study follows students who met the end-of-first-grade DRA 18 benchmark into second grade to ascertain if the students are able to maintain their grade level status. For students who participated in Reading Recovery and met the end-of-first-grade benchmark, 58.7% also met the end-of-second-grade benchmark. Their mean end-of-second-grade DRA score was a text level 30. For students who participated in Leveled Literacy Intervention and met the end-of-first-grade benchmark, 62.8% also met the end-of-second-grade benchmark. Their mean end-of-second-grade DRA score was a text level 30. For students who participated in both Reading Recovery and Leveled Literacy Intervention and met the end-of-first-grade benchmark, 53.8% also met the end-of-second-grade benchmark. Their mean end-of-second-grade DRA score was a text level 28.

Finally, the study utilized a regression analysis to determine if there is a difference in reading achievement growth based upon a student’s participation in Reading Recovery or Leveled Literacy Intervention. All analyses were controlled for initial DRA level, gender, ethnicity, and free or reduced lunch rate. The results found that while both programs appear to be moving students towards grade level status, Reading Recovery’s results are significant (p = .002), LLI’s results are not significant (p = .607), and the combination group of both RR and LLI are not significant (p = .877). According to this one year study, for students who participated in Reading Recovery or Leveled Literacy Intervention as first graders, once a child learns how to read, the variables—initial DRA level, gender, ethnicity and socio-economic status—do not affect a child’s continued reading achievement.

This study is an ex post facto correlational study that analyzed the mediated relationship between everyday adult literacy practices (directions or instructions; letters, memos, or mail; newspapers or magazines; professional journals or publications; books, manuals or reference materials; financial statements; diagrams, maps, or schematics) and literacy scores, using vocabulary scores as the mediator while controlling for educational attainment, current educational practices, age, and number of books at home. This study used the Program of International Assessment of Adult Competency (PIAAC) 2012/2014 public use household dataset which includes data from over 8,000 participants. This dataset contains information about participants’ background, daily lives, and reading practices as well as literacy, numeracy, and informational technology skills. Analyses were completed using the IDB analyzer to complete regression analyses on the final sample which included 1,599 participants who had taken both the literacy and print vocabulary assessment. The Sobel process was used to determine mediation. According to the Sobel test, the vocabulary score mediated the relationship between reading letters, memos, or mail (b = 4.18, SE = 0.23, p < .001) and newspapers or magazines (b = 2.55, SE = 0.29, p < .05) and the combined plausible literacy score. This showed that a portion of the ability to predict adult literacy scores from the frequency of reading letters, memos, or mail and newspapers or magazines could be due to vocabulary proficiency.

Previously, improvisation has served as a term for describing a quality of the action taking place in classrooms between teachers and students. This project begins to theorize a way of understanding embodied literacies and scenes of learning through a lens of improvisation that enhances the description and better equips researchers to analyze this quality. This project synthesizes numerous research threads and theories from theater (Halpern, 1994, 2005; Johnstone, 1992; Spolin, 1999), anthropology (Holland, Lachicotte, Skinner, & Cain, 2003), psychology (Sawyer, 2011b; Vygotsky, 1978), and literary theory (Bakhtin, 1981) in an effort to provide a theory of improvisation that could be deployed in future qualitative studies or serve as a way for literacy teachers to think about their classrooms. A theory of improvisation enables qualitative researchers in the field of education to acquire a more thorough understanding of the way literacies are an improvised process in scenes of learning. This project is necessary because no such theory yet exists. As part of theorizing literacy and improvisation, I draw upon scenes from my own teaching and from theatrical improvisation. I analyze these moments to illustrate various theoretical premises such as instances of "yes, and-ing" that carry a scene of learning forward. This theory building and analysis amount to a first iteration of improv theory.

Student literacy rates across the country are unacceptably low. Teacher preparation has emerged as a priority in both research and practice in efforts to improve the nation's literacy rates. Teacher knowledge and beliefs influence the quality of instruction teachers are able to implement. This study was designed to help educators and mentors of novice teachers understand the relationship between literacy pedagogical content knowledge and literacy teacher efficacy beliefs and changes to this relationship during the course of student teaching.

Using a sample of 36 pre-service teachers assigned to student teaching in kindergarten, first or second grade classrooms, literacy pedagogical content knowledge was measured in a multiple-choice assessment that covered a variety of early literacy instructional areas including phonology, orthography, vocabulary, morphology and comprehension. Literacy teaching efficacy beliefs was measured using a self-report questionnaire. Participants completed the survey at two time points, at the beginning and end of student teaching.

To determine if a literacy pedagogical content knowledge and literacy teaching efficacy beliefs demonstrated a relationship, Pearson correlations were calculated at both time points. Results of this study suggest that these constructs are not related and operate independently. Additionally this study suggested that while literacy teaching efficacy beliefs improved significantly over the course of student teaching, literacy pedagogical content knowledge did not. Results from this study can inform teacher educators, mentors of novice teaches and professional development programmers on the relationship of literacy pedagogical content knowledge and literacy teaching efficacy beliefs in pre-service teachers.