Utilizing Young Adult Literature to Develop Preservice English Teachers’ CDL-Based Pedagogical Practices

Author(s):  
SHELLY UNSICKER-DURHAM ◽  
SHAISTA FENWICK ◽  
NAJAH AMATULLAH HYLTON ◽  
SUZANNE SUTTON ◽  
CONNOR WOODARD

Study and Scrutiny has focused on the publication of critical and empirical studies surrounding the scholarship and critical merits of Young Adult literature. Because other journals provide a space for pedagogical practices concerning YA, the editors have intentionally shied away from explaining to teachers how to teach a particular title in a particular way. Still, the intention of the journal has been, in part, to support the learning of secondary students as readers and the classroom practices of their teachers. This section hopes to serve as a space to open the conversation surrounding YA literature, its critical merits, and ways that the research might serve teachers as they make curriculum choices about both texts and strategies. The idea is to bring teachers, as intellectuals, into conversation surrounding the scholarship of a featured study. For this issue, four Oklahoma teachers from four different school districts focus on Arianna Banack’s article “Connecting and Critiquing the Canon: Pairing Pride and Pride and Prejudice.” 


Author(s):  
Susanne Gannon ◽  
Jennifer Dove

AbstractIn secondary schools, English teachers are often made responsible for writing results in national testing. Yet there have been few studies that focussed on this key group, or on how pedagogical practices have been impacted in the teaching of writing in their classrooms. This study investigated practices of English teachers in four secondary schools across different states, systems and regions. It developed a novel method of case study at a distance that required no classroom presence or school visits for the researchers and allowed a multi-sited and geographically dispersed design. Teachers were invited to select classroom artefacts pertaining to the teaching of writing in their English classes, compile individualised e-portfolios and reflect on these items in writing and in digitally conducted interviews, as well as elaborating on their broader philosophies and feelings about the teaching of writing. Despite and sometimes because of NAPLAN, these teachers held strong views on explicit teaching of elements of writing, but approached these in different ways. The artefacts that they created animated their teaching practices, connected them to their students and their subject, suggested both the pressure of externally driven homogenising approaches to writing and the creative individualised responses of skilled teachers within their unique contexts. In addition to providing granular detail about pedagogical practices in the teaching of writing in the NAPLAN era, the contribution of this paper lies in its methodological adaptation of case study at a distance through teacher-curated artefact portfolios that enabled a deep dive into individual teachers’ practices.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document