Donna Alvermann

Last updated

Donna Alvermann is an American educator and researcher in the field of Language and Literacy Education whose work focuses on adolescent literacy in and out of school, inclusive of new media and digital literacies. Her most recent research interest involves developing historical-autobiographical methods for uncovering silences in scholarly writing that mask more than they disclose. [1] She is the Omer Clyde and Elizabeth Parr Aderhold Professor in Education in the Mary Frances Early College of Education at the University of Georgia (UGA). She is also a UGA-appointed Distinguished Research Professor in the Department of Language and Literacy Education. [2]

Contents

Education

Alvermann graduated from Syracuse University in 1980 with a Ph.D. in Reading and Language Education, and an M.L.S in Information Studies. She also holds an M.A. from the University of Texas at Austin, with a major in Education and minor in History. [2]

Theoretical framework

Alvermann's research builds on James Paul Gee's concepts of capital "D" Discourse and New Literacies, [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] and Allan Luke's Four Literacies Model. [4] [8] [9] [10] She is also influenced by Michel Foucault's philosophy on Discourse and Social Constructionism [5] [9] [11] (especially in regard to Maxine Greene's philosophy on how educational institutions should encourage students to challenge social categorization and power structures, [5] and Judith Green's further development of these ideas [6] [10] [12] ), and Harold L. Herber's research on how students read. [7] Patty Lather and Elizabeth St. Pierre's development of post-structuralist and Feminist theory also play a role, and their work on qualitative research in the field of Education provides an important research model. [5] [12]

Research

Multi-literacies

Currently, Alvermann's primary area of research is that of multi-literacies. In an increasingly digitized world, students use not only print-based texts, but those involving image, sound, and body interaction. [3] [6] [13] Students develop different literacies, some for in-school and some for out-of-school, but the boundaries between academic and non-academic may be illusory. [3] [13] The texts students engage with are often interconnected and multimedia, as they perform online searches on academic materials to supplement school materials, and seek help on their school work in online communities. [3]

Students develop these literacies for personal as well as academic reasons. [3] [6] Even many students who claim not to be readers engage in online discourse about their favorite media properties (including “remixing” texts through things like fan-fiction). [6] They also learn technical skills independently, editing videos, creating music, and designing web-pages. [3] [6] These digital practices can help students academically and in personal development. Those who might not have had the chance otherwise are able to cultivate a voice and an audience. [3] [6] [13] [14] In fact, many try on multiple voices, which may or may not resemble the identities they present in physical spaces. [3] [6] [13]

Many teachers are wary of digital literacies, thinking of them as irrelevant to academics at best. [4] [6] However, these multiple literacies are a reality in students' lives. [3] [6] With the high volume of information available, it can be difficult for students to learn to focus on what is important and think critically about the texts they engage; this is why it is important for teachers to help students develop their literacy skills for success in academics and beyond. [3] [6] [14] In Alvermann's view, “preferable are studies designed to treat contexts not as structured, impermeable containers but as sieves through which social, cultural, economic, and political discourses animate one another.” [13]

Related to Alvermann's studies in multi-literacies is her research on students' interests in popular culture and whether this can be used in the classroom. Although conventional thinking tends to view pop culture as shallow and unworthy of discussion, [6] [8] students are motivated to think critically about their favorite media; even those considered “struggling readers” for their failure to live up to cultural academic standards often read and engage with the texts they enjoy of their own free will. [15] This kind of “play” encourages free thinking. [4] [8] [9] Alvermann advocates for bringing these personal interests into the classroom, mixing them with more traditional academics, and facilitating classroom discussion instead of unilateral lecture transmission of information from the teacher. [4] [8] [9] Notably, this interaction should not be made to feel like work, as this will cause students to lose interest, nor should it focus solely on enjoyment, because this does not teach critical thinking skills. [4] [8] In addition to the motivational factor, students are also validated and feel appreciated when teachers take an interest in the media they enjoy. [8] Teachers can collect information on students' interests through survey and conversation. [8]

Literacy and domain knowledge

Another of Alvermann's prominent areas of research is on how teachers learn to teach not only the content but the discourse of their field. Alvermann argues that different academic disciplines require different and sometimes conflicting discourses, with different terminology, signs, and symbols. [10] Students who are not familiar with the different discourses in their core subject areas (e.g., English, social studies/history, mathematics, and the sciences) may have difficulty understanding the content; therefore, it is important that all subject matter teachers instruct students in how to comprehend materials in the different content areas. [7]  

Domain knowledge is also affected by how completely or incompletely the content is presented in the various disciplines when important information is missing. [1]

Classroom discussion

Alvermann has advocated for classroom discussion of texts, rather than unilateral transmission of information from teachers. [11] This encourages students to engage with on a critical level, as opposed to simply memorizing information. [5] Students are also empowered and more encouraged to read when their personal thoughts and opinions on texts are validated. [5] [11] Class discussion also facilitates a sense of community among classmates. [11] Strategies range from encouraging students to answer questions with detailed answers that draw from the text, to breaking students up into smaller groups so that everyone is involved in the discussion. [11]

Alvermann acknowledges pitfalls of class discussion, such as the tendency for students to get off topic, for a few to dominate the conversation, or for engagement in gendered behavior (female students qualifying or apologizing for their speech, reinforcement of beliefs about which texts will appeal to which gender, etc.). [5] [11] [12] This is why it is important for teachers to moderate.

While the type and degree of moderation necessary is still a topic of debate (and admittedly somewhat dependent on the class and subject matter), Alvermann advocates for an approach that encourages students to consider the social-political forces that have shaped not only the texts, but also their relationships to the texts and their identities as a whole. [5] [12] Graphic organizers (i.e. diagrams of central questions and topics for discussion) can also help focus discussion. [16]

Selected peer-reviewed articles

Alvermann is the author or co-author of over 100 peer-reviewed articles, including:

Alvermann, D. E., Cho, A., Gannon, M., Mondi, J., Obradovic, M., Pulliam, A., Qi, F., Readhead, S., Wright, W. T., & Yeom, E. Y. (in press). Archival encounters via podcasts: Diversity and voice in practice and research. English Education.

Hoffman, J. V., & Alvermann, D. E. (2020). What a genealogical analysis of Nila Banton Smith’s American Reading Instruction reveals about the present through the past. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(2), 251-269.  

Alvermann, D. E., & Wilson, A. A. (2011). Comprehension strategy instruction for multimodal texts in science. Theory into Practice, 50(2), 116-124.

Alvermann, D. E. (2008). Commentary: Why bother theorizing adolescents' online literacies for classroom practice and research? Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52, 8-19.

Alvermann, D.E., & Hruby, G. G. (2000). Mentoring and reporting research: A concern for aesthetics. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 46-63.

Alvermann, D. E., Young, J. P., Weaver, D., Hinchman, K. A., Moore, D. W., Phelps, S. F., Thrash, E. C. & Zalewski, P. (1996). Middle and high school students' perceptions of how they experience text- based discussions: A multicase study. Reading Research Quarterly. 31, 244-267.

Alvermann, D. E., O'Brien, D. G., & Dillon, D. R. (1990). What teachers do when they say they're having discussions of content reading assignments:  A qualitative analysis.  Reading Research Quarterly, 25(4), 296-322.

Alvermann, D. E., & Hayes, D. A. (1989). Classroom discussion of content area reading assignments:  An intervention study.  Reading Research Quarterly, 24(3), 305-335.

Alvermann, D. E., Smith, L. C., & Readence, J. E. (1985). Prior knowledge activation and the comprehension of compatible and incompatible text. Reading Research Quarterly, 20(4), 420-436.

Selected books

Alvermann has authored or co-authored over twenty books, including:

Alvermann, D. E., Unrau, N. J., Sailors, M., & Ruddell, R. B. (Eds.). (2019). Theoretical models and processes of literacy (7th ed., 624 pp.). New York, NY: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group

Alvermann, D. E., Unrau, N. J., Sailors, M., & Ruddell, R. B. (Eds.). (2019). Theoretical models and processes of literacy (7th ed., 624 pp.). New York: Routledge.

Alvermann, D. E., & Hinchman, K. A. (Eds.). (2012). Reconceptualizing the literacies in adolescents’ lives (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.

Alvermann, D. E. (Ed.). (2010). Adolescents’ online literacies: Connecting classrooms, digital media, and popular culture. New York: Peter Lang.

Alvermann, D. E. (Ed.). (2002). Adolescents and literacies in a digital world.  New York: Peter Lang.

Alvermann, D. E., Moon, J. S., & Hagood, M. C. (1999). Popular culture in the classroom: Teaching and researching critical media literacy. Newark, DE: International Reading Association

Selected peer-reviewed chapters

Alvermann is the author or co-author of over 100 book chapters, including:

Alvermann, D. E., Wynne, E., & Wright, W. T. (2022). Tales from TikTok: Gender and cultural intersectionalities. In Genders, cultures and literacies: Understanding intersecting identities (pp. 198-211). Routledge.

Alvermann, D. E., & Wright, W. T. (2021). Adolescent literacies. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.1532

Alvermann, D. E., & Sanders, R. K. (2019). Adolescent literacy in a digital world. In The international encyclopedia of media literacy. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Alvermann, D. E., & Moje, E. B. (2019). A relational model of adolescent literacy instruction: Disrupting the discourse of “every teacher a teacher of reading.” In Theoretical models and processes of literacy (7th ed., pp. 362-380). New York: Routledge.

Alvermann, D. E., & Robinson, B. (2017). Youths’ global engagement in digital writing ecologies. In Handbook of Writing, Literacies and Education in Digital Cultures (pp. 161-172). New York: Routledge.

Alvermann, D. E., Beach, C. L., & Boggs, G. L. (2016). What does digital media allow us to “do” to one another? Economic significance of content and connection. In Handbook of research on the societal impact of digital media (pp. 2151-2174). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.  

Alvermann, D. E. (2011). Popular culture and literacy practices. In Handbook of reading research: Volume IV (pp. 541-560). New York: Routledge.

Alvermann, D. E. (2010). The teaching of reading. In Reading the past, writing the future: A century of American literacy education and the National Council of Teachers of English (pp. 55-90). Urbana, IL: NCTE.

Notes

  1. 1 2 Alvermann, Donna (2022). "Chapter 3: Entanglements: Searching for Historical Authenticiy". In Sumara, Dennis; Alvermann, Donna (eds.). Ideas That Changed Literacy Practices: First Person Accounts from Leading Voices. Meyers Education Press. ISBN   9781975503970.
  2. 1 2 "College of Education Global". coe.uga.edu. Archived from the original on 2019-12-14. Retrieved 2019-12-27.
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Alvermann, Donna E.; Marshall, James D.; McLean, Cheryl A.; Huddleston, Andrew P.; Joaquin, Jairus; Bishop, John (2012-07-01). "Adolescents' Web-Based Literacies, Identity Construction, and Skill Development". Literacy Research and Instruction. 51 (3): 179–195. doi:10.1080/19388071.2010.523135. ISSN   1938-8071. S2CID   145722955.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Alvermann, Donna E. (June 2002). "Effective Literacy Instruction for Adolescents". Journal of Literacy Research. 34 (2): 189–208. doi: 10.1207/s15548430jlr3402_4 . ISSN   1086-296X. S2CID   143884081.
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Alvermann, Donna E.; Commeyras, Michelle; Young, Josephine P.; Randall, Sally; Hinson, David (March 1997). "Interrupting Gendered Discursive Practices in Classroom Talk about Texts: Easy to Think About, Difficult to Do". Journal of Literacy Research. 29 (1): 73–104. doi: 10.1080/10862969709547950 . ISSN   1086-296X. S2CID   143438457.
  6. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Alvermann, Donna (2011). "Moving on/keeping pace: Youth's literate identities and multimodal digital texts". In Abrams, S.; Roswell, J. (eds.). Rethinking identity and literacy education in the 21st century. National Society for the Study of Education Yearbook. Part I. Vol. 110. New York: Columbia University, Teachers College. pp. 109–128.
  7. 1 2 3 Alvermann, Donna; Mallozzi, Christine A. (February 2011). "Reflective Practice in an Online Literacy Course: Lessons Learned from Attempts to Fuse Reading and Science Instruction". Teachers College Record. 113 (1): 27–56. doi: 10.1177/016146811111300104 . S2CID   142660637 – via Research Gate.
  8. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Alvermann, Donna; Xu, Shelley (January 2003). "Children's Everyday Literacies: Intersections of Popular Culture and Language Arts Instruction". Language Arts. 81 (2): 145–155. doi:10.58680/la20032888 – via Research Gate.
  9. 1 2 3 4 Alvermann, Donna E.; Hagood, Margaret C. (2000-01-01). "Critical Media Literacy: Research, Theory, and Practice in "New Times"". The Journal of Educational Research. 93 (3): 193–205. doi:10.1080/00220670009598707. ISSN   0022-0671. S2CID   143827063.
  10. 1 2 3 Alvermann, Donna; Friese, Elizabeth; Beckmann, Sybilla; Rezak, Achariya (2011-05-01). "Content area reading pedagogy and domain knowledge: a Bourdieusian analysis". The Australian Educational Researcher. 38 (2): 203–220. doi:10.1007/s13384-011-0024-x. ISSN   2210-5328. S2CID   145097918.
  11. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Alvermann, Donna E.; Young, Josephine P.; Green, Colin; Wisenbaker, Joseph M. (January 1999). "Adolescents' Perceptions and Negotiations of Literacy Practices in After-School Read and Talk Clubs". American Educational Research Journal. 36 (2): 221–264. doi:10.3102/00028312036002221. ISSN   0002-8312. S2CID   145317353.
  12. 1 2 3 4 Alvermann, Donna E. (1995). "Peer-Led Discussions: Whose Interests Are Served?". Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. 39 (4): 282–289. ISSN   1081-3004. JSTOR   40013414.
  13. 1 2 3 4 5 Alvermann, Donna E.; Moore, David W. (2011). "Questioning the Separation of In-School From Out-of-School Contexts for Literacy Learning: An Interview With Donna E. Alvermann". Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. 55 (2): 156–158. doi:10.1002/JAAL.00019. ISSN   1081-3004. JSTOR   41309671.
  14. 1 2 Alvermann, Donna E. (2015). "Being in the Moment". Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. 58 (8): 625–631. doi:10.1002/jaal.415. ISSN   1936-2706.
  15. ↑ Alvermann, Donna E.; Hagood, Margaret C.; Heron-Hruby, Alison; Hughes, Preston; Williams, Kevin B.; Yoon, Jun-Chae (2007-03-01). "Telling Themselves Who They Are: What One Out-of-School Time Study Revealed about Underachieving Readers". Reading Psychology. 28 (1): 31–50. doi:10.1080/02702710601115455. ISSN   0270-2711. S2CID   143441980.
  16. ↑ Alvermann, Donna E. (1991). "The Discussion Web: A Graphic Aid for Learning across the Curriculum". The Reading Teacher. 45 (2): 92–99. ISSN   0034-0561. JSTOR   20200818.

Related Research Articles

In bilingual education, students are taught in two languages. It is distinct from learning a second language as a subject because both languages are used for instruction in different content areas like math, science, and history. The time spent in each language depends on the model. For example, some models focus on providing education in both languages throughout a student's entire education while others gradually transition to education in only one language. The ultimate goal of bilingual education is fluency and literacy in both languages through a variety of strategies such as translanguaging and recasting.

A teaching method is a set of principles and methods used by teachers to enable student learning. These strategies are determined partly on subject matter to be taught, partly by the relative expertise of the learners, and partly by constraints caused by the learning environment. For a particular teaching method to be appropriate and efficient it has take into account the learner, the nature of the subject matter, and the type of learning it is supposed to bring about.

Social constructivism is a sociological theory of knowledge according to which human development is socially situated, and knowledge is constructed through interaction with others. Like social constructionism, social constructivism states that people work together to actively construct artifacts. But while social constructivism focuses on cognition, social constructionism focuses on the making of social reality.

Instructional scaffolding is the support given to a student by an instructor throughout the learning process. This support is specifically tailored to each student; this instructional approach allows students to experience student-centered learning, which tends to facilitate more efficient learning than teacher-centered learning. This learning process promotes a deeper level of learning than many other common teaching strategies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pedagogy</span> Theory and practice of education

Pedagogy, most commonly understood as the approach to teaching, is the theory and practice of learning, and how this process influences, and is influenced by, the social, political, and psychological development of learners. Pedagogy, taken as an academic discipline, is the study of how knowledge and skills are imparted in an educational context, and it considers the interactions that take place during learning. Both the theory and practice of pedagogy vary greatly as they reflect different social, political, and cultural contexts.

Critical literacy is the ability to find embedded discrimination in media. This is done by analyzing the messages promoting prejudiced power relationships found naturally in media and written material that go unnoticed otherwise by reading beyond the author's words and examining the manner in which the author has conveyed their ideas about society's norms to determine whether these ideas contain racial or gender inequality.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Composition studies</span>

Composition studies is the professional field of writing, research, and instruction, focusing especially on writing at the college level in the United States.

Adolescent literacy refers to the ability of adolescents to read and write. Adolescence is a period of rapid psychological and neurological development, during which children develop morally, cognitively, and socially. All of these three types of development have influence—to varying degrees—on the development of literacy skills.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Reading</span> Taking in the meaning of letters or symbols

Reading is the process of taking in the sense or meaning of letters, symbols, etc., especially by sight or touch.

Multiliteracy is an approach to literacy theory and pedagogy coined in the mid-1990s by the New London Group. The approach is characterized by two key aspects of literacy – linguistic diversity and multimodal forms of linguistic expressions and representation. It was coined in response to two major changes in the globalized environment. One such change was the growing linguistic and cultural diversity due to increased transnational migration. The second major change was the proliferation of new mediums of communication due to advancement in communication technologies e.g the internet, multimedia, and digital media. As a scholarly approach, multiliteracy focuses on the new "literacy" that is developing in response to the changes in the way people communicate globally due to technological shifts and the interplay between different cultures and languages.

A resource room is a type of support for students with disabilities in need of special education that allows them to be leave their general education classroom placement and go to another location for targeted instructional support. It is one of many support options for special education students around the world to help meet their needs and serves as a transition stage between a self-contained classroom and a general education classroom for special education students. In the resource room, students work with a special education teacher or aide in either a small group or individual instruction.

Academic discourse socialization is defined as one's growing process to realize the academic discourse and reach the expectation of the academic community. Academic discourse socialization is a form of language socialization through which newcomers or novices gain knowledge of the academic discourses by socializing and interacting with peers, experts, or more knowledgeable people in their community and social network. A dynamic and complex process, academic discourse socialization requires negotiation of both knowledge and one's identity. This kind of interaction is defined as a bidirectional process in which both novice learners and experts learn from one another.

Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction (CORI) was developed in 1993 by Dr. John T. Guthrie with a team of elementary teachers and graduate students. The project designed and implemented a framework of conceptually oriented reading instruction to improve students' amount and breadth of reading, intrinsic motivations for reading, and strategies of search and comprehension. The framework emphasized five phases of reading instruction in a content domain: observing and personalizing, searching and retrieving, comprehending and integrating, communicating to others, and interacting with peers to construct meaning. CORI instruction was contrasted to experience-based teaching and strategy instruction in terms of its support for motivational and cognitive development.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Multimodality</span> Phenomenon of human communication having different forms that combine

Multimodality is the application of multiple literacies within one medium. Multiple literacies or "modes" contribute to an audience's understanding of a composition. Everything from the placement of images to the organization of the content to the method of delivery creates meaning. This is the result of a shift from isolated text being relied on as the primary source of communication, to the image being utilized more frequently in the digital age. Multimodality describes communication practices in terms of the textual, aural, linguistic, spatial, and visual resources used to compose messages.

Robert L. Selman is an American-born educational psychologist and perspective-taking theorist who specializes in adolescent social development. He is currently a professor of Education and Human Development at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, and a professor of psychology in Medicine at Harvard University. He is also known as the author of the 1980s G.I. Joe public service announcements.

Literacy with an Attitude, written by Patrick J. Finn, attempts to redefine literacy as the term exists within the education field. In his professional life, Finn served as an Associate Professor Emeritus of the Graduate School of Education from the University of Buffalo. He also and co-chairs a committee of Urban Education through the University of Buffalo that helps provide support for the schools and school districts in Buffalo, NY. His book outlines the differences between 'domesticating' and 'liberating' education, and offers advice on how to fix the discrepancy between upper and lower class schools. Finn references studies conducted by other published authors within the field of education, including Jean Anyon and James Gee.

Newcomer education is the specialized teaching of refugees, migrants, asylees and immigrants who have resettled in a host country, with the goal of providing the knowledge and skills necessary to integrate into their country of refuge. Education is the primary way by which newcomers can adjust to the linguistic, social, and cultural environments of their new communities. Newcomer education aims to empower newcomers with a sense of self-efficacy and social integration, as well as giving them the skills to pursue employment or higher education. Newcomer education also aims to help address trauma, culture shock, and other negative effects of forced displacement. Education for newcomers can provide long-term prospects for stability of individuals, communities, countries and global society.

Mary J. Schleppegrell is an applied linguist and Professor of Education at the University of Michigan. Her research and praxis are based on the principles of Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), a theory derived from the work of social semiotic linguist Michael Halliday. Schleppegrell is known for the SFL-based literacy practices she has continuously helped to develop for multilingual and English language learners throughout her decades long career, which she began as an educational specialist before transitioning to the field of applied linguistics. As a result, her publications demonstrate a deep understanding of both the theories and practices related to teaching and learning.

In the United States, disciplinary literacy is the teaching of literacy within the defined disciplines of mathematics, science, English-language arts, and social studies. This process is defined as "the use of reading, rereading, investigating, speaking, and writing required to learn and form complex content knowledge appropriate to a particular discipline". Through the practices of disciplinary literacy, educators are to present content using real-world examples and connections, and do so in such a way as to accurately incorporate and exemplify the everyday lives of all students, regardless of race, gender, socioeconomic status, etc. As such, students are coached to become experts in each disciplinary field; that is, students are encouraged and expected to acquire and use skills, during reading, that professionals in each of the disciplines themselves are using. To note, disciplinary literacy does not demand reading skills be taught during instruction of various content areas, there is still some crossover, with the need to incorporate some reading skills, such as vocabulary instruction.

Annemarie Sullivan Palincsar is a scholar of education known for her research on literacy instruction, reciprocal teaching, and cognitive apprenticeships. Her involvement in the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Research Council on the Prevention of Reading Difficulty in Young Children, the National Research Council's Panel on Teacher Preparation, and the International Literacy Association's Literacy Research Panel, attests to her dedication to advancing educational research and improving teacher training. Palincsar is the Ann L. Brown Distinguished University Professor Emerita at the Marsal Family School of Education at the University of Michigan.

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.