exceptional education. However, the literacy field writ large can also be critiqued for systemic racial bias. Milner argues that white, male lenses have traditionally dominated publications, calling for greater racial and ethnic diversity among scholars conducting research in the literacy field. Beyond this, Milner also encourages increased diversity in the methods of qualitative and quantitative research used to shed light on the reading process as well as publication of important scholarship in a wider range of journal outlets. Pushing against the marginalization of the voices of researchers who are women, Black, or other people of color will be aided by the consideration of a wide array of research methods. Finally, in line with a greater diversity of research methods including qualitative, Milner also urges scholarship that is humanizing rather than objectifying of research subjects, with the aim of contributing to tangible benefits for communities and the lives of people.
Auckerman and Schuldt (2021) raised concern that inadequate consideration of social and cultural factors in the development of reading can lead to failure to identify strengths that students possess and potentially contribute to the over-representation of students of color in remedial and exceptional education. The authors proposed a framework that focuses on textual dexterity, which is the ability to make meaning of diverse, multimodal texts in flexible and adaptive ways. Readers exercise textual dexterity during the decoding, comprehension, application, and critique of texts. Further, the framework of Auckerman and Schultz prioritizes the fostering of dispositions among readers to engage meaningfully with a text, find intrinsic motivation to read a text, and gain the confidence in one’s ability to successfully read increasingly challenging texts with success.
Literacy Instruction from a Sociocultural Lens
Sociocultural Learning Theory is better understood as an umbrella for a collection of frameworks (Cole & Engeström, 1993; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Rogoff, 1990) each drawing on the work of Lev Vygotsky (1998) rather than a holistic, unified theory. A stance that learning is shaped by social interaction and environments provides the grounding for sociocultural learning theory. This stance drives instructional choices that prioritize the activity, dialogue, and collaboration (Daniels, 2016). Three themes of Vygotsky’s scholarship identified by Wertsch (1991) can deeply inform instructional decision making. First, social interaction is at the root of learning, including the development of reading skills. This theme implies that it is vital for teachers to consider the classroom learning environment and lived experiences of students when planning literacy instruction. The second theme is that actions are shaped by signs and tools in communication and meaning making. So, teachers would be well-advised to purposely consider the tools (types of pens and crayons, use of a computer) and signs (words spoken, words on a printed page or a screen) when considering how to shape the development of reading skills. The third theme is that the learning of students should be studied developmentally, with an eye on continuous change. Students are not passive or static, and neither are their literacy skills, teachers need to be active observers and participants in the ongoing growth of literacy development.
Literacy instruction that is responsive to sociocultural factors privileges the role of interactions in shaping the understanding of how students learn to read. Yet, the approach also includes the purposeful scaffolding of instruction in basic skills such as phonemic awareness, decoding, and phonics, with the teacher active in the child’s learning every step of the way. Instruction should be dynamic, open to continuous re-evaluation. The following is a bare bones group of five principles that can aid teachers in adjusting to demands for SOR-alignment guided by a sociocultural framework: (a) ensure that the social and cultural context of the development of reading skill remains a key aspect instruction; (b) ensure that instruction includes purposeful scaffolding, goal-setting, and monitoring of student learning; (c) ensure that student interest, student voice, and issues related to power and privilege remain an important component of instruction, (d) ensure that motivation and creativity remain important aspects of instruction, and (e) explicitly and purposefully guide students through the development of both basic skills and meaning making within a zone of proximal development, using formal and informal means of assessment to monitor progression toward independence in the mastery of skills.
The discourse over SOR often is polemic (Evans, 2020). The renewal of long-held sharp divides of a “reading war” is not healthy for the field. Promising steps can be taken by educators to listen and learn from one another (Burkins & Yates, 2021). The active view of reading model (Duke & Cartwright, 2021) is a noteworthy move in the direction of acknowledging reading processes that the Simple View of Reading and Scarborough’s Reading Rope point to as important, while also bringing in situational and cultural context as urged by social constructivists. A strong case can be made that many teachers will benefit from increased knowledge of decoding and phonics, and that teacher education and professional development programs can make improvements in helping to ensure that teachers have adequate knowledge and skill in these areas. Early detection of the reasons for why students may struggle – including possible decoding difficulties – will help ensure that intervention is purposeful and meets the needs of the student.
Instruction that is advocated by SOR is narrowly confined, lacking sensitivity to the social and cultural aspects of reading as well as a wide variety of factors that need to be considered in promoting comprehension of texts. Now more than ever, it is time to work together at bridging the research to practice gap, ensuring that classroom instruction is reflective of evidence from the literature of how students become proficient and highly engaged lifelong readers. This requires studying the literature from the wide lens of the various frameworks and models of reading, rather than becoming siloed into opposing camps. Draw on instructional tools from a “toolbelt” that is diverse, knowing how, why, and when to use these tools for a given context and student, present to the needs and interests – the passions – of the student. Students deserve the opportunity to love reading throughout their lives. This means building skill and fostering motivation as well as deep engagement in diverse texts. It can be done, and it takes hard work, placing the focus on teaching the child not the program.
.
exceptional education. However, the literacy field writ large can also be critiqued for systemic racial bias. Milner argues that white, male lenses have traditionally dominated publications, calling for greater racial and ethnic diversity among scholars conducting research in the literacy field. Beyond this, Milner also encourages increased diversity in the methods of qualitative and quantitative research used to shed light on the reading process as well as publication of important scholarship in a wider range of journal outlets. Pushing against the marginalization of the voices of researchers who are women, Black, or other people of color will be aided by the consideration of a wide array of research methods. Finally, in line with a greater diversity of research methods including qualitative, Milner also urges scholarship that is humanizing rather than objectifying of research subjects, with the aim of contributing to tangible benefits for communities and the lives of people.
Auckerman and Schuldt (2021) raised concern that inadequate consideration of social and cultural factors in the development of reading can lead to failure to identify strengths that students possess and potentially contribute to the over-representation of students of color in remedial and exceptional education. The authors proposed a framework that focuses on textual dexterity, which is the ability to make meaning of diverse, multimodal texts in flexible and adaptive ways. Readers exercise textual dexterity during the decoding, comprehension, application, and critique of texts. Further, the framework of Auckerman and Schultz prioritizes the fostering of dispositions among readers to engage meaningfully with a text, find intrinsic motivation to read a text, and gain the confidence in one’s ability to successfully read increasingly challenging texts with success.
Literacy Instruction from a Sociocultural Lens
Sociocultural Learning Theory is better understood as an umbrella for a collection of frameworks (Cole & Engeström, 1993; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Rogoff, 1990) each drawing on the work of Lev Vygotsky (1998) rather than a wholistic, unified theory. A stance that learning is shaped by social interaction and environments provides the grounding for sociocultural learning theory. This stance drives instructional choices that prioritize the activity, dialogue, and collaboration (Daniels, 2016). Three themes of Vygotsky’s scholarship identified by Wertsch (1991) can deeply inform instructional decision making. First, social interaction is at the root of learning, including the development of reading skills. This theme implies that it is vital for teachers to consider the classroom learning environment and lived experiences of students when planning literacy instruction. The second theme is that actions are shaped by signs and tools in communication and meaning making. So, teachers would be well-advised to purposely consider the tools (types of pens and crayons, use of a computer) and signs (words spoken, words on a printed page or a screen) when considering how to shape the development of reading skills. The third theme is that the learning of students should be studied developmentally, with an eye on continuous change. Students are not passive or static, and neither are their literacy skills, teachers need to be active observers and participants in the ongoing growth of literacy development.
Literacy instruction that is responsive to sociocultural factors privileges the role of interactions in shaping the understanding of how students learn to read. Yet, the approach also includes the purposeful scaffolding of instruction in basic skills such as phonemic awareness, decoding, and phonics, with the teacher active in the child’s learning every step of the way. Instruction should be dynamic, open to continuous re-evaluation. The following is a bare bones group of five principles that can aid teachers in adjusting to demands for SOR-alignment guided by a sociocultural framework: (a) ensure that the social and cultural context of the development of reading skill remains a key aspect instruction; (b) ensure that instruction includes purposeful scaffolding, goal-setting, and monitoring of student learning; (c) ensure that student interest, student voice, and issues related to power and privilege remain an important component of instruction, (d) ensure that motivation and creativity remain important aspects of instruction, and (e) explicitly and purposefully guide students through the development of both basic skills and meaning making within a zone of proximal development, using formal and informal means of assessment to monitor progression toward independence in the mastery of skills.
The discourse over SOR often is polemic (Evans, 2020). The renewal of long-held sharp divides of a “reading war” is not healthy for the field. Promising steps can be taken by educators to listen and learn from one another (Burkins & Yates, 2021). The active view of reading model (Duke & Cartwright, 2021) is a noteworthy move in the direction of acknowledging reading processes that the Simple View of Reading and Scarborough’s Reading Rope point to as important, while also bringing in situational and cultural context as urged by social constructivists. A strong case can be made that many teachers will benefit from increased knowledge of decoding and phonics, and that teacher education and professional development programs can make improvements in helping to ensure that teachers have adequate knowledge and skill in these areas. Early detection of the reasons for why students may struggle – including possible decoding difficulties – will help ensure that intervention is purposeful and meets the needs of the student.
Instruction that is advocated by SOR is narrowly confined, lacking sensitivity to the social and cultural aspects of reading as well as a wide variety of factors that need to be considered in promoting comprehension of texts. Now more than ever, it is time to work together at bridging the research to practice gap, ensuring that classroom instruction is reflective of evidence from the literature of how students become proficient and highly engaged lifelong readers. This requires studying the literature from the wide lens of the various frameworks and models of reading, rather than becoming siloed into opposing camps. Draw on instructional tools from a “toolbelt” that is diverse, knowing how, why, and when to use these tools for a given context and student, present to the needs and interests – the passions – of the student. Students deserve the opportunity to love reading throughout their lives. This means building skill and fostering motivation as well as deep engagement in diverse texts. It can be done, and it takes hard work, placing the focus on teaching the child not the program.
.