Bucking the authoritative script of a mandated curriculum

References

• Abarca, A., & Domínguez, M. A. (2003). Edición del maestro: Foro abierto para la lectura. Nivel 2, Unidad 1, Compartir Cuentos [Teacher's edition: Open court reading. Grade 2, Unit 1, Sharing stories]. New York: SRA/McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Achinstein, B. A., & Ogawa, R. T. (2006). (In)fidelity: What the resistance of new teachers reveals about professional principles and prescriptive educational policies. Harvard Educational Review, 1(76), 30–63.
   Google Scholar
• Applebee, A. N., Langer, J. A., Nystrand, M., & Gamoran, A. (2003). Discussion-based approaches to developing understanding: Classroom instruction and student performance in middle and high school English. American Educational Research Journal, 40(3), 685–730.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aukerman, M. (2007). When reading it wrong is getting it right: Shared evaluation pedagogy among struggling fifth grade readers. Research in the Teaching of English, 42(1), 56–103.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aukerman, M. (2008). In praise of wiggle room: Locating comprehension in unlikely places. Language Arts, 86(1), 52–60.
   Google Scholar
• Aukerman, M. (2013). Rereading comprehension pedagogies: Toward a dialogic teaching ethic that honors student sensemaking. Dialogic Pedagogy, 1, A1–A31.
   Google Scholar
• Aukerman, M. (2015). How should readers develop across time? Mapping change without a deficit perspective. Language Arts, 93(1), 55–62.
   Google Scholar
• Aukerman, M., & Chambers Schuldt, L. (2015). Children's perceptions of their reading ability and epistemic roles in monologically and dialogically organized bilingual classrooms. Journal of Literacy Research, 47(1), 115–145.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aukerman, M., & Chambers Schuldt, L. (2016). Closely reading “Reading closely”. Language Arts, 93(4), 286–299.
   Google Scholar
• Bakhtin, M. (1981). Discourse in the novel. In M. Holquist (Ed.), The dialogic imagination (pp. 259–492). Austin: University of Texas Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bascia, N., Carr-Harris, S., Fine-Meyer, R., & Zurzolo, C. (2014). Teachers, curriculum, innovation, and policy formation. Curriculum Inquiry, 44(2), 228–248.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bereiter, C., Brown, A., Campione, J., Carruthers, I., Case, R., Hirshberg, J., … Treadway, G. (2002). Open court reading. Santa Rosa: SRA/McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Berry, M. (1981). Systemic linguistics and discourse analysis: A multi-layered approach to exchange structure. In M. Coulthard & M. Montgomery (Eds.), Studies in discourse analysis. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
   Google Scholar
• Boyd, M., & Markarian, W. (2015). Dialogic teaching and dialogic stance: Moving beyond interactional form. Research in the Teaching of English, 49(3), 272–296.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caughlan, S., Juzwik, M. M., Borsheim-Black, C., Kelly, S., & Fine, J. G. (2013). English teacher candidates developing dialogically organized instructional practices. Research in the Teaching of English, 47(3), 212–246.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charmaz, K. (2001). Qualitative interviewing and grounded theory analysis. In J. H. Gubrium (Ed.), Handbook of interview research (pp. 675–694). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Coburn, C. E. (2001). Collective sensemaking about reading: How teachers mediate reading policy in their professional communities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(2), 145–170.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Datnow, A., & Castellano, M. (2000). Teachers’ responses to success for all: How beliefs, experiences, and adaptations shape implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 37(3), 775–799.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dedoose (Version 6.1.18) (2015). Computer software. Los Angeles: SocioCultural Research Consultants, LLC.
   Google Scholar
• Great Books Foundation. (1987). An introduction to shared inquiry. Chicago: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Gutierrez, K. D., Baquedano-López, P., & Asato, J. (2000). “English for the children”: The new literacy of the old world order, language policy and educational reform. Bilingual Research Journal, 24(1–2), 87–112.
   Google Scholar
• Johnston, P., Woodside-Jiron, H., & Day, J. (2001). Teaching and learning literate epistemologies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 223–233.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kong, A., & Fitch, E. (2002/2003). Using book club to engage culturally and linguistically diverse learners in reading, writing, and talking about books. The Reading Teacher, 56(4), 352–362.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lobato, J., Clarke, D., & Ellis, A. B. (2005). Initiating and eliciting in teaching: A reformulation of telling. Journal for research in mathematics education, 36(2), 101–136.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maniates, H. (2010). When highly qualified teachers use prescriptive curriculum: Tensions between fidelity and adaptation to local context (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Berkeley: University of California.
   Google Scholar
• Mora, P. (1997). Tomás and the library lady. New York: Dragonfly.
   Google Scholar
• Moustafa, M., & Land, R. E. (2002). The reading achievement of economically-disadvantaged children in urban schools using Open Court vs. comparably disadvantaged children in urban schools using non- scripted reading programs. In Yearbook of urban learning, teaching, and research (pp. 44–53). Special Interest Group of the American Educational Research Association.
   Google Scholar
• Nystrand, M. (1997). Opening dialogue: Understanding the dynamics of language and learning in the English classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• O'Connor, C., & Michaels, S. (2007). When is dialogue dialogic? Human Development, 50(5), 275–285.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patton, M. (1987). How to use qualitative methods in evaluation. Newbury Park: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Pease-Alvarez, L., & Samway, K. D. (2008). Negotiating a top-down reading program mandate: The experience of one school. Language Arts, 86(1), 32–41.
   Google Scholar
• Reznitskaya, A., & Gregory, M. (2013). Student thought and classroom language: Examining the mechanisms of change in dialogic teaching. Educational Psychologist, 48(2), 114–133.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott, P., Mortimer, E., & Aguiar, O. (2006). The tension between authoritative and dialogic discourse: A fundamental characteristic of meaning making interactions in high school science lessons. Science Education, 90, 605–631.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Segal, A., & Lefstein, A. (2016). Exuberant, voiceless participation: An unintended consequence of dialogic sensibilities? L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 16, 1–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharp, A. M. (1995). Philosophy for children and the development of ethical values. Early Child Development and Care, 107, 45–55.
   Google Scholar
• Shulman, L. S. (1992). Toward a pedagogy of cases. Case Methods in Teacher Education, 1, 1–30.
   Google Scholar
• Smagorinsky, P., Lakly, A., & Johnson, T. S. (2002). Acquiescence, accommodation and resistance to learning to teach within a prescribed curriculum. English Education, 34(3), 187–213.
   Google Scholar
• Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Valencia, S. W., Place, N. A., Martin, S. D., & Grossman, P. L. (2006). Curriculum materials for elementary reading: Shackles and scaffolds for four beginning teachers. Elementary School Journal, 107(1), 93–120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Den Branden, K. (2000). Does negotiation of meaning promote reading comprehension? A study of multilingual primary school classes. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 426–443.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weiss, R. (1994). Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview studies. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, I. A., Murphy, P., & Binici, S. (2015). Dialogue-intensive pedagogies for promoting reading comprehension: What we know, what we need to know. In L. Resnick, C. Asterhan, & S. Clarke (Eds.), Socializing intelligence through academic talk and dialogue (pp. 37–50). Washington: AERA.
   Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, I. A., Reznitskaya, A., Bourdage, K., Oyler, J., Glina, M., Drewry, R., … Nelson, K. (2017). Toward a more dialogic pedagogy: Changing teachers’ beliefs and practices through professional development in language arts classrooms. Language and Education, 31(1), 65–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zacher Pandya, J. (2011). Overtested: How high-stakes accountability fails English language learners. New York: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar