Preservice Teachers Engaging Elementary Students in an Activist Literacy Curriculum

References

1. Ahmed S. Daniels H. (2017)  Identity, empathy and inquiry. Literacy Today, 34 5, 44–45.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Applegate A. (2012)  The one and only Ivan, New York: Harper-Collins.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Ballenger C. (2009)  Puzzling moments, teachable moments: Practicing teacher research in urban classrooms, New York: Teachers College Press.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Bencze L. Sperling E. Carter L. (2012)  Students’ research-informed socio-scientific activism: Re/visions for a sustainable future. Research in Science Education, 42 1, 129–148.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Bomer R. (2003)  Things that make kids smart: A Vygotskian perspective on concrete tool use in primary literacy classrooms. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 3, 223–247.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Britzman D. (2003)  Practice makes practice: A critical study of learning to teach, New York: State University of New York.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Brown B. A. Spang E. (2008)  Double talk: Synthesizing everyday and science language in the classroom. Science Education, 92, 708–732.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Cambria J. Guthrie J. T. (2010)  Motivating and engaging students in reading. New England Reading Association Journal, 46 1, 16–29.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Daniels H. Ahmed S. K. (2014)  Up-standers: How to engage middle school hearts and minds with inquiry, Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Dewey J. (1934)  Art as experience, New York: Putnam’s Sons.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Duke N. K. 2000a 3.6 minutes per day: The scarcity of informational texts in first grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 202–224.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Duke N. K. 2000b For the rich it’s richer: Print experiences and environments offered to children in very low- and very high-socioeconomic status first-grade classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 37, 441–478.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Duke N. K. (2003)  Informational books in early childhood. Young Children, 58 2, 14–20.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Duke N. K. (2016)  Project-based instruction: A great match for informational texts. American Educator, 40 3, 4–11.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Edelson D. C. (2002)  Design research: What we learn when we engage in design. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11, 105–121.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Eisenhardt K. M. (1989)  Building theories from case study research. The Academy of Management Review, 14, 532–550.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Erickson F. E. (1986)  Qualitative methods in research on teaching. Wittrock M. C.. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching3rd ed., 119–161. New York: Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Feiman-Nemser S. (2001)  From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103 6, 1013–1055.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Freire P. (1970)  Pedagogy of the oppressed, New York: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Grossman P. L. Smagorinsky P. Valencia S. (1999)  Appropriating tools for teaching English: A theoretical framework for research on learning to teach. American Journal of Education, 108, 1–29.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Guthrie J. T. Klauda S. L. (2014)  Effects of classroom practices on reading comprehension, engagement, and motivations for adolescents. Reading Research Quarterly, 49, 387–416.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Hammerness K. Darling-Hammond L. Bransford J. Berliner D. Cochran-Smith M. Mcdonald M. Zeichner K. (2005)  How teachers learn and develop. Darling-Hammond L. Bransford J.. (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do, 358–389. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Harste J. C. (1994)  Literacy as curricular conversations about knowledge, inquiry, and morality. Ruddell M. R. Ruddell R. B.. (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading4th ed., 1220–1242. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Hoffman J. V. (2017)  What if “just right” is just wrong? The unintended consequences of leveling readers. The Reading Teacher, 71, 265–273.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Hoffman J. V. Mosley Wetzel M. DeJulio S. (2018)  Multiple literacy tutoring experiences across a teacher preparation program: How can practice in hybrid spaces challenge the “Practice Makes Practice” dilemma?. Action in Teacher Education, 40, 58–76.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Hoffman J. V Svrcek N. Lammert C. Daly-Lesch A. Steinitz E. Greeter E. DeJulio S. (2019)  A research review of literacy tutoring and mentoring in initial teacher preparation: Toward practices that can transform teaching. Journal of Literacy Research, 51, 233–251.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Jeong J. Gaffney J. Choi H. (2010)  Availability and use of informational texts in second-, third-, and fourth-grade classrooms. Research in the Teaching of English, 44, 435–456.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Kilpatrick W. H. (1930)  Our educational task: As illustrated in the changing South, Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Kosnik C. Beck C. (2008)  We taught them about literacy but what did they learn? The impact of a preservice teacher education program on the practices of beginning teachers. Studying Teacher Education, 4, 115–128.
    [Google Scholar]
30. LentersK. (2018)  Multimodal becoming: Literacy in and beyond the classroom. The Reading Teacher, 71, 643–649.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Lewin K. (1948)  Action research and minority problems. Lewin K.. (Ed.), Resolving social conflicts: Selected papers on group dynamics, New York: Harper & Row.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Lewison M. Leland C. Harste J. (2007)  Creating critical classrooms: K–8 reading and writing with an edge, New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Lortie D. (1975)  Schoolteacher: A sociological study, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Maloch B. Flint A. S. Eldridge D. Harmon J. Loven R. Fine J. C. Martinez M. (2003)  Understandings, beliefs, and reported decision making of first-year teachers from different reading teacher preparation programs. The Elementary School Journal, 103, 431–457.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Maxwell J. (1997)  Designing a qualitative study. Bickman L. Rog D. J.. (Eds.), Handbook of applied social research methods, 69–100. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Mertens D. M. (2009)  Research and evaluation in education and psychology, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Moje E. B. (2015)  Youth cultures, literacies, and identities in and out of school. Flood J. Heath S. B. Lapp D.. (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching literacy through the communicative and visual arts, 2, 207–220. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Pappas C. C. (2006)  The information book genre: Its role in integrated science literacy research and practice. Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 226–250.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Pentimonti J. M. Zucker T. A. Justice L. M. Kaderavek J. N. (2010)  Informational text use in preschool classroom read-alouds. The Reading Teacher, 63, 656–665.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Serafini F. (2015)  Multimodal literacy: From theories to practices. Language Arts, 92, 412–423.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Shanahan C. Shanahan T. (2014)  Does disciplinary literacy have a place in elementary school?. The Reading Teacher, 67, 636–639.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Simon R. Campano G. (2013)  Activist literacies: Teacher research as resistance to the “normal curve.”. Journal of Language and Literacy Education, 9 1, 21–39.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Smagorinsky P. Barnes M. E. (2014)  Revisiting and revising the apprenticeship of observation. Teacher Education Quarterly, 41 4, 29–52.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Smith N. B. (1934)  A historical analysis of American reading instruction, New York: Silver, Burdett.
    [Google Scholar]
45. Strauss A. Corbin J. (1990)  Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques, Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
    [Google Scholar]
46. Street B. V. (1984)  Literacy in theory and practice, Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
47. Teddlie C. Yu F. (2007)  Mixed methods sampling: A typology with examples. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1 1, 77–100.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Toulmin S. (1958)  The uses of argument, New York: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
49. van den Akker J. Gravemeijer K. Mckenney S. Nieveen N. (Eds.) (2006)  Educational design research, New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
50. Vasquez V. M. (2017)  Critical literacy across the K–6 curriculum, New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
51. Vaughn M. Parsons S. A. (2013)  Adaptive teachers as innovators: Instructional adaptations opening spaces for enhanced literacy learning. Language Arts, 91, 81–93.
    [Google Scholar]
52. Wertsch J. V. (1998)  Mind as action, Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
53. Woody T. (1934)  Historical sketch of activism. Whipple G. M.. (Ed.), The thirty-third yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, 9–44. Bloomington, IL: Public School.
    [Google Scholar]
54. Wright T. S. (2013)  From potential to reality: Content-rich vocabulary and informational text. The Reading Teacher, 67, 359–367.
    [Google Scholar]
55. Wright T. S. Gotwals A. W. (2017)  Supporting disciplinary talk from the start of school: Teaching students to think and talk like scientists. The Reading Teacher, 71, 189–197.
    [Google Scholar]
56. Yin R. K. (2013)  Case study research: Design and methods5th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
    [Google Scholar]