Jacqueline Edmondson

Asking Different Questions: Critical Analyses and Reading Research

The author describes two research frames—functionalist research and critical analyses—focusing on the different questions they raise. Her purpose is to suggest that reading researchers must extend the tendency to conduct policy-driven research toward critical and pragmatic questions about reading education, research, and policy. [Note: This article is reprinted in Reading Education Policy. www.reading.orgpublicationsbbvbooksbk568]

Reading Education and Poverty: Questioning the Reading Success Equation

At their core, most arguments about literacy education in the United States are predicated on the idea that learning to read will prevent or overcome poverty. For school-age Americans, reading is expected to bring academic success, which in turn will later enable the individual to become a productive worker and citizen. For adults, learning to read will open employment opportunities and promote increased civic engagement. Popular media report this idea, albeit typically in the language of crisis:

Considering alternatives for federal education policy in the United States: a critical perspective on No Child Left Behind

The pending reauthorization of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, the George W. Bush administrations iteration of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, provides an important opportunity to consider what federal education policy could be in the United States. In this paper, we explain how the rationalization of education, particularly of reading instruction, has led to the failure of NCLB, even on its own terms. Our analysis critiques the underlying assumptions of this policy and proposes different possibilities for education policy, particularly the potential for policy to: (1) provide possibilities for all citizens to engage in democratic life, (2) provide access to information, and (3) to embrace the complexities of learning and literacy.