Sonya L. Armstrong

Teaching Textual Conversations: Intertextuality in the College Reading Classroom.

In this article, a model of intertextuality is introduced as an instructional approach for postsecondary developmental reading courses. This model involves a scaffolded, schema-building approach to teaching college reading that aims to link core material (a text, a concept, or specific academic content) with supplementary texts that focus on specific topics associated with that core material. The purpose is to facilitate the building of a knowledge base on topics associated with the core material in order for students to engage on a deeper level with that core material. Two exemplar course designs are described: one at a community college and another in an alternative-admissions program in a university setting. Implications for practice and future research possibilities are included.

Situating Reader Stance Within and Beyond the Efferent–Aesthetic Continuum

The purpose of this theoretical essay is to encourage critical reflection of the relationship of specific reading events to traditional conceptualizations of reader stance. While conventional models of reader stance are useful for considering many aspects of reading, there are reading events that engender stances that appear to lie outside of the parameters of these traditional conceptualizations. In this article, we identify one such reading event, termed reading-for-the-writer, and analyze the specific point it occupies on an efferent-aesthetic continuum, a continuum that we view as more three-dimensional than linear and that includes both reader stances and writer stances. Through such analyses of specific stances, we conclude with pedagogical implications and research directions that move toward continued discussion of the interconnectedness of reading and writing processes.

Building Better Bridges: Understanding Academic Text Readiness at One Community College

ABSTRACT The multipronged study described in this manuscript was designed to determine the implicit definition of college-text ready at one community college. The impetus for this study is a need to fully understand what it means to be college-text ready based on the literacy demands, practices, and expectations in introductory-level (or entry-level) general-education courses. Only with this deeper understanding of college-text readiness can college reading professionals begin to design effective literacy interventions to help students who may not be considered college-text ready. Thus, another major goal of this study is to provide information on whether, how, and to what extent, current developmental reading courses are adequately preparing students for the reading expectations of the introductory-level courses that follow. Three component investigations were conducted: one on the text practices and expectations as observed, one on the faculty perspectives, and one on the student perspectives. Data sources included text analyses, classroom observations, faculty surveys and focus groups, and student surveys and focus groups. Findings included a mismatch between developmental reading and general-education courses in terms of the text types and difficulty levels, the purpose for the text, and the text-associated tasks and learning foci. Another major finding was that general-education faculty in this study do not provide explicit instruction on text-navigation. Instead faculty tend to use text-alternatives to deliver content. Finally, in response to the original driving question, the findings of this study suggested that there is not any widely accepted definition of college-text ready at this institution.

Examining the Conceptualizations, Perceptions, and Practices of Adolescent Writers

In this article, the authors describe a mixed-methods study in which an adapted Motivation to Write Profile (MWP)—the CLMWP—was used to investigate the conceptualizations, perceptions, and practices of adolescent writers. Results of this study suggested that participants held differing conceptualizations of writing, depending on the context. In addition, participants held differing conceptualizations of what constitutes “good writing.” Specifically, other peoples writing qualified as good based on reader-reception and holistic qualities of readability; by contrast, their own writing was good based on very specific, often surface-level readability skills such as word choice and spelling. We argue that a deeper understanding of adolescents’ writing practices outside of the school environment is crucial for developing confident, lifelong writers.