國立虎尾科技大學 |

Amplifying Faculty Voices on the Field of Developmental Education : = A Critical Examination of Practitioner Discourse.

紀錄類型:	書目-語言資料,手稿 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Amplifying Faculty Voices on the Field of Developmental Education :/
其他題名:	A Critical Examination of Practitioner Discourse.
作者:	McGee, Barrie E.
面頁冊數:	1 online resource (260 pages)
附註:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 85-07, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International85-07A.
標題:	Curriculum development. -
電子資源:	click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9798381382808

Amplifying Faculty Voices on the Field of Developmental Education : = A Critical Examination of Practitioner Discourse.
McGee, Barrie E.

Amplifying Faculty Voices on the Field of Developmental Education :A Critical Examination of Practitioner Discourse. - 1 online resource (260 pages)

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 85-07, Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Texas State University - San Marcos, 2023.

Includes bibliographical references

Terminology and language use related to the field of developmental education (DE) has long been discussed by scholars and practitioners to determine the most appropriate forms to use (i.e., developmental vs remedial) to reflect our purposes, our work, and our students (Arendale, 2005; Arendale, et al., 2007; Paulson & Armstrong, 2010; Nist, 1984; Rubin, 1991). Some within the field of DE and related fields, particularly those who identify with DE, seek to articulate our mission in terms that underscore our efforts towards holistic student success in postsecondary settings, especially for those who arrive under- or mis-prepared for college study (Boylan & Bonham, 2014; Boylan & White, 2014; Casazza, 1999). However, the dominant discourse surrounding DE originates from research and policy groups such as the Community College Research Center (CCRC), MDRC, and Jobs for the Future (JFF) which promote a narrative of failure based upon studies that highlight statistics of low graduation rates and high withdrawal rates (Mangan, 2015).The power of this narrative has had material affect as seen in education policies across the U.S. which have reduced and, in some cases, eliminated DE courses. More significantly, however, is that the voices of faculty who teach developmental literacy courses-those tasked with adhering to the roll-out and implementing the prescribed changes-and are the experts on topics of reading curriculum and instruction-are difficult to hear in national- and state-level conversations. Indeed, it is challenging to locate authorial voices from experts whose work is or is related to practice within the studies and reports that policy groups and research entities draw on to craft the dominant narrative of the field. This study, therefore, sought to amplify the voices of instructors of developmental literacy in order that they, too, can be heard in conversations about the essential work these educators perform. Additionally, the purpose of this study was to critically examine instructors' language choices to articulate their conceptualize of the field of DE, descriptions of their work, and their self-constructed professional identity to make sense of their professional work and world through an analytic framework based on Fairclough's (2015) approach to CDA and Freire's (1973) call for laborers to exercise their power and agency to describe their work and world. The major findings from the study showed that the participants did not professionally identify with their field of practice, the field of DE, or any other professional field or discipline, but rather connected to their community of practice as instructors. Also, the findings showed that the participants represented themselves with authority but had limited evidence of agency. Finally, the participants were shown to have a strong sense of professionalism as seen in their engagement with professional organizations at the local, state, and national level, but with no connection to their field or the field of DE. Implications for practice and future research are discussed.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2024

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798381382808Subjects--Topical Terms:

1148494
Curriculum development.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Developmental educationIndex Terms--Genre/Form:

554714
Electronic books.

Amplifying Faculty Voices on the Field of Developmental Education : = A Critical Examination of Practitioner Discourse.
LDR:04573ntm a22004217 4500 001 1146226
005 20240711092114.5
006 m o d
007 cr bn ---uuuuu
008 250605s2023 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798381382808
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI31060097
035 $a (MiAaPQ)1035vireo3892McGee
035 $a AAI31060097
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a McGee, Barrie E. $3 1471582
245 1 0 $a Amplifying Faculty Voices on the Field of Developmental Education : $b A Critical Examination of Practitioner Discourse.
264 0 $c 2023
300 $a 1 online resource (260 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 85-07, Section: A.
500 $a Advisor: Suh, Emily K.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Texas State University - San Marcos, 2023.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a Terminology and language use related to the field of developmental education (DE) has long been discussed by scholars and practitioners to determine the most appropriate forms to use (i.e., developmental vs remedial) to reflect our purposes, our work, and our students (Arendale, 2005; Arendale, et al., 2007; Paulson & Armstrong, 2010; Nist, 1984; Rubin, 1991). Some within the field of DE and related fields, particularly those who identify with DE, seek to articulate our mission in terms that underscore our efforts towards holistic student success in postsecondary settings, especially for those who arrive under- or mis-prepared for college study (Boylan & Bonham, 2014; Boylan & White, 2014; Casazza, 1999). However, the dominant discourse surrounding DE originates from research and policy groups such as the Community College Research Center (CCRC), MDRC, and Jobs for the Future (JFF) which promote a narrative of failure based upon studies that highlight statistics of low graduation rates and high withdrawal rates (Mangan, 2015).The power of this narrative has had material affect as seen in education policies across the U.S. which have reduced and, in some cases, eliminated DE courses. More significantly, however, is that the voices of faculty who teach developmental literacy courses-those tasked with adhering to the roll-out and implementing the prescribed changes-and are the experts on topics of reading curriculum and instruction-are difficult to hear in national- and state-level conversations. Indeed, it is challenging to locate authorial voices from experts whose work is or is related to practice within the studies and reports that policy groups and research entities draw on to craft the dominant narrative of the field. This study, therefore, sought to amplify the voices of instructors of developmental literacy in order that they, too, can be heard in conversations about the essential work these educators perform. Additionally, the purpose of this study was to critically examine instructors' language choices to articulate their conceptualize of the field of DE, descriptions of their work, and their self-constructed professional identity to make sense of their professional work and world through an analytic framework based on Fairclough's (2015) approach to CDA and Freire's (1973) call for laborers to exercise their power and agency to describe their work and world. The major findings from the study showed that the participants did not professionally identify with their field of practice, the field of DE, or any other professional field or discipline, but rather connected to their community of practice as instructors. Also, the findings showed that the participants represented themselves with authority but had limited evidence of agency. Finally, the participants were shown to have a strong sense of professionalism as seen in their engagement with professional organizations at the local, state, and national level, but with no connection to their field or the field of DE. Implications for practice and future research are discussed.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2024
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Curriculum development. $3 1148494
650 4 $a Education policy. $3 1107727
650 4 $a Linguistics. $3 557829
650 4 $a Sociolinguistics. $3 555401
653 $a Developmental education
653 $a Critical discourse
653 $a Narrative
653 $a Self-representation
653 $a Faculty
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 local $3 554714
690 $a 0727
690 $a 0636
690 $a 0290
690 $a 0458
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 1178819
710 2 $a Texas State University - San Marcos. $b Curriculum and Instruction. $3 1182718
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 85-07A.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=31060097 $z click for full text (PQDT)