Thesis (M.Ed.)--Kutztown University of Pennsylvania, 1979. / Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 45-06, page: 2797.

Adolescent literacy is currently viewed as in crisis. Moore (2002) argues that a focus on adolescent literate identity seems to be a key consideration when designing literacy instruction for secondary classrooms. This dissertation argues that in order for adolescents to develop a literate identity, their teachers should possess a literate identity.This phenomenological case study investigates the transformational paths nine developing teachers traversed as they "authored" their teacher literacy identity through a university content area literacy course, student teaching, and/or the induction period. "Authoring" includes both how the teachers represent their literacy identities in their writing and speaking, and how teachers do their literacy identities when enacting or performing (Moje, 2004) literacy instruction.Six instructional engagements completed by participants when they were students in a university content area literacy course comprise one data set. During student teaching and/or during their first or second year of teaching, three types of data were gathered: the Seidman (1998) three-interview series; a content area literacy lesson planning session; and an observation of each planned lesson. A phenomenological analysis (Merriam, 1998) guided the initial examination of the data. The data sets were analyzed using the constant comparative method (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007; Merriam, 1998).Teacher literacy identity is a previously unexplored construct. Based on a literature review and the voices of the participants, the following definition took shape: teacher literacy identity is a confident view of self as responsible for and in control of improving the literacy learning of self and the competency to enact engagements to guide the literacy learning of students. Teacher literacy identity consists of three transactional dimensions: the construct of literacy, the construct of literacy in practice, and the quality of the literacy enactment. Six major categories emerged to illustrate the phenomenon: identity, learning communities, personal agency, design of practice, literacy theories, and sources of dissonance.Implications of this exploration suggest that the investigation and documentation of developing teachers' literacy learning trajectories are worthy areas of further study. Moreover, a critical re-evaluation of teacher education and professional development in the support of teacher literacy identity deserves close attention.

This qualitative study was designed to examine the influences of language, culture, and power on teacher instructional decision-making with high-achieving African American students in advanced secondary English classrooms. The research questions were crafted to address how language, culture, and power influenced: (1) teachers' instructional planning when working with high-achieving African American students in the secondary English classrooms as they use literary and informational texts to support literacy development; (2) teachers' understanding of how language, culture, and power impact instructional decision-making when planning for literacy development with high-achieving African American students in advanced secondary English classrooms, and (3) teachers' understanding of how language, culture, and power influence learning and achievement for high-achieving African American students in advanced secondary English classrooms. The framework for this study was grounded in several intersectional theories related to; (a) schools as communities of practice (Wenger, 1998); (b) language as identity shaper and inseparable from culture (Delpit, 2002;Gee, 2005; Labov, 1972; Lee, 2007; Nieto, 2010; Smitherman, 1977; and Thornborrow, 1999); (c) culture as emergent due to human interaction (Carrithers, 1992); (d) power is a force in all relationships and interactions, which creates imbalances and determine the degree to which the language variations and cultures interact freely and equitably (Burbules, 1986; Freire, 1921/1970; Giroux, 1992; Nyberg, 1981; Shrigley, 1986); (e) race is a social construct and racism is normal infiltrating every aspect of US society including the education of marginalized groups (Delgado and Stefancic, 2012; Ford, 2010; Ladson-Billings, 1995); (f) secondary students acquire, develop, and engage with literacy differently from their elementary counterparts and require teachers to deepen their knowledge about the ways adolescents engage with texts (Alexander, 2003; Chall, 1983; Goldman and Snow, 2015; Idrisano and Chall, 1995; McConachie and Petrosky, 2009; Moje, 1996/2002; Piercy and Piercy, 2010; Schoenbach, Greenleaf, and Murphy, 2012; Shanahan and Shanahan, 2008). Participant interviews, lesson plans, and field notes generated data to address the research questions. Findings demonstrated language, culture, and power are intersectional and influence every aspect of the instructional decision-making process. This study provides insight into teacher's thinking about their planning and how the inquiry constructs influence that planning. / Ph. D. / This study was designed to gain insight into the influences of language, culture, and power on teacher instructional decision-making with high-achieving African American students in advanced secondary English classrooms. Three research questions were crafted to address how language, culture, and power influenced: (1) teachers’ instructional planning when working with high-achieving African American students in the secondary English classrooms as they use literary and informational texts to support literacy development; (2) teachers’ understanding of how language, culture, and power impact instructional decision-making when planning for literacy development with high-achieving African American students in advanced secondary English classrooms, and (3) teachers’ understanding of how language, culture, and power influence learning and achievement for high-achieving African American students in advanced secondary English classrooms. Several interconnected theories formed the basis of this inquiry and were related to (a) schools as communities of practice (Wenger, 1998); (b) language as identity shaper and inseparable from culture (Delpit, 2002;Gee, 2005; Labov, 1972; Lee, 2007; Nieto, 2010; Smitherman, 1977; & Thornborrow, 1999); (c) culture develops as humans interact (Carrithers, 1992); (d) power is present in all relationships and interactions; it creates imbalances and determines how varieties of language variations and cultures freely and equitably interact (Burbules, 1986; Freire, 1921/1970; Giroux, 1992; Nyberg, 1981; Shrigley, 1986); (e) race is a social construct and racism is normal infiltrating every aspect of US society including the education of marginalized groups (Delgado & Stefancic, 2012; Ford, 2010; Ladson-Billings, 1995); (f) secondary students acquire, develop, and engage with literacy differently from their elementary counterparts and require teachers to increase their knowledge about how adolescents engage with texts (Alexander, 2003; Chall, 1983; Goldman & Snow, 2015; Idrisano & Chall, 1995; McConachie & Petrosky, 2009; Moje, 1996/2002; Piercy & Piercy, 2010; Schoenbach, Greenleaf, & Murphy, 2012; Shanahan & Shanahan, 2008). Participant interviews, lesson plans, and field notes generated data to address the research questions. Findings showed language, culture, and power are intersectional and influence every aspect of the instructional decision-making process. This study provides insight into teacher’s thinking about their planning and how the inquiry constructs influence that planning.