What trends in contemporary literary studies have to offer English education

References

• Anagnostopoulos, D. 2005. “Testing, Tests, and Classroom Texts.” Journal of Curriculum Studies 37 (1): 35–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027042000229350.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Applebee, A., J. A. Langer, M. Nystrand, and A. Gamoran. 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. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312040003685.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Au, W. 2007. “High-Stakes Testing and Curricular Control: A Qualitative Metasynthesis.” Educational Researcher 36 (5): 258–267. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X07306523.
   Google Scholar
• Beck, S. W., K. Jones, S. Storm, J. R. Torres, H. Smith, and M. Bennett. 2021. “Moves That Matter: Dialogic Writing Assessment and Literary Reading.” English Teaching: Practice & Critique 20 (1): 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1108/ETPC-12-2019-0167.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colwell, J., K. Gregory, and V. Taylor. 2020. “Examining Preservice Teachers’ Perceptions of Planning for Culturally Relevant Disciplinary Literacy.” Journal of Teacher Education 72 (2): 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487120913853.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• #DisruptTexts Collective. 2020. “#disrupttexts: An Empowerment-Centered Pedagogy.” Research in the Teaching of English 55 (1): 82–84.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dorfman, M. H. 1996. “Evaluating the Interpretive Community: Evidence from Expert and Novice Readers.” Poetics 23 (6): 453–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-422X(96)00004-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dressman, M., and D. Rao. 2020. “On Savvy Reading.” English in Education 54 (2): 161–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/04250494.2019.1626712.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eaglestone, R. 2021. “IMPACT 26: ‘Powerful knowledge’, Cultural Literacy and the Study of Literature in Schools.” (Accessed October 1, 2022). https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/2048-416X.2020.12006.x.
   Google Scholar
• Eagleton, T. 2008. Literary Theory: An Introduction. Anniversary ed. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Elliott, V., and J. Hodgson. 2021. “Setting an Agenda for English Education Research.” English in Education 55 (4): 369–374. https://doi.org/10.1080/04250494.2021.1978737.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fahnestock, J., and M. Secor. 1991. “The Rhetoric of Literary Criticism.” In Textual Dynamics of the Professions: Historical and Contemporary Studies of Writing in Professional Communities, edited by C. Bazerman and J. Paradis, 76–96, Madison, WI:: University of Wisconsin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Graves, B., and C. H. Frederiksen. 1996. “A Cognitive Study of Literary Expertise.” In Empirical Approaches to Literature and Aesthetics, edited by R. J. Kruez and M. S. MacNealy, 397–418. New York: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Hall, A. H., and S. R. Goldman. 2022. “Why are We Doing This? Teacher and Student Perspectives on Literary Reading.” English Teaching: Practice & Critique 21 (1): 44–56. https://doi.org/10.1108/ETPC-06-2021-0076.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hillocks, G., and P. Smagorinsky. 2016. “The Territory of Literature.” English Education 48 (2): 109–126.
   Google Scholar
• Kane, B. D., K. C. Keene, and S. Reynolds. 2022. “Collaborative Literary Reasoning as a Support for Preservice English Language Arts teachers’ Learning About Disciplinary Literacy.” English Teaching: Practice & Critique 21 (1): 84–97. https://doi.org/10.1108/ETPC-06-2021-0065.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krippendorff, K. 2019. Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. 4th ed. Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071878781.
   Google Scholar
• Lave, J., and E. Wenger. 1991. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, C. D., S. R. Goldman, S. Levine, and J. Magliano. 2016. “Epistemic Cognition in Literary Reasoning.” In Handbook of Epistemic Cognition, edited by J. A. Green, W. A. Sandoval, and I. Bråten, 165–183, New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Le-Khac, L. 2018. “Bildungsroman Hermeneutics in the Post-Civil Rights Era.” American Literature 90 (1): 141–170. https://doi.org/10.1215/00029831-4326439.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, S. 2019. “Using Everyday Language to Support Students in Constructing Thematic Interpretations.” Journal of the Learning Sciences 28 (1): 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2018.1485023.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, S., D. P. Moore, E. Bene, and M. W. Smith. 2023. “What if It Were Otherwise? Teachers Use Exams from the Past to Imagine Possible Futures in the Teaching of Literature.” Reading Research Quarterly 58 (1): 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.488.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maclear, K. 2018. “Something so Broken: Black Care in the Wake of Beasts of the Southern Wild.” ISLE: Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment 25 (3): 603–629. https://doi.org/10.1093/isle/isy060.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moje, E. B. 2015. “Doing and Teaching Disciplinary Literacy with Adolescent Learners: A Social and Cultural Enterprise.” Harvard Educational Review 85 (2): 254–278. https://doi.org/10.17763/0017-8055.85.2.254.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muhammad, G. E. 2018. “A Plea for Identity and Criticality: Reframing Literacy Learning Standards Through a Four-Layered Equity Model.” Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 62 (2): 137–142. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.869.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olivier, B. 2018. “Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and Ecological Responsibility.” Journal of Literary Studies 34 (4): 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/02564718.2018.1538075.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pen America. 2022. “Banned in the USA: The Growing Movement to Censor Books in Schools.” https://pen.org/report/banned-usa-growing-movement-to-censor-books-in-schools/.
   Google Scholar
• Peskin, J. 1998. “Constructing Meaning When Reading Poetry: An Expert-Novice Study.” Cognition and Instruction 16 (3): 235–263. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1603_1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rainey, E. C. 2017. “Disciplinary Literacy in English Language Arts: Exploring the Social and Problem-Based Nature of Literary Reading and Reasoning.” Reading Research Quarterly 52 (1): 53–71. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.154.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rainey, E. C., C. A. Humphrey, and G. Morales. 2023. “Teaching and Learning Literary Literacy.” In Unpacking Disciplinary Literacies: From Research to Practice, edited by E. T. Ortlieb, B. D. Kane, and E. H. Cheek, 19–35. New York: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Rainey, E. C., and S. Storm. 2021. “English Teacher Interpretive Communities: An Exploratory Case Study of Teachers’ Literacy Practices and Pedagogical Reasoning.” Literacy Research and Instruction 60 (4): 352–371. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2020.1867264.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reynolds, T., L. S. Rush, J. P. Holschuh, and J. P. Lampi. 2023. “Generating, Weaving and Curating: Disciplinary Processes for Reading Literary Text.” English Teaching: Practice & Critique 21 (1): 29–43. https://doi.org/10.1108/ETPC-06-2021-0070.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reynolds, T., L. S. Rush, J. P. Lampi, and J. P. Holschuh. 2021. “Moving Beyond Interpretive Monism: A Disciplinary Heuristic to Bridge Literary Theory and Literacy Theory.” Harvard Educational Review 91 (3): 382–401. https://doi.org/10.17763/1943-5045-91.3.382.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reynolds, T., and B. Townsend. 2018. “To Speak or to Remain Silent: An Examination of Two English Teachers’ Styles of Leading Whole-Class Discussion.” English in Education 52 (3): 200–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/04250494.2018.1509672.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rowsell, J., and K. Pahl. 2007. “Sedimented Identities in Texts: Instances of Practice.” Reading Research Quarterly 42 (3): 388–404. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.42.3.3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schieble, M. 2013. “Reframing Equity Under Common Core: A Commentary on the Text Exemplar List for Grades 9-12.” English Teaching: Practice & Critique 13 (1): 155–168.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shelton, S. A., and T. Brooks. 2019. ““We Need to Get These Scores up”: A Narrative Examination of the Challenges of Teaching Literature in the Age of Standardized Testing.” Journal of Language & Literacy Education 15 (2): 1–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Storm, S., K. Jones, and S. W. Beck. 2022. “Designing Interpretive Communities Toward Justice: Indexicality in Classroom Discourse.” English Teaching: Practice & Critique 21 (1): 2–15. https://doi.org/10.1108/ETPC-06-2021-0073.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Storm, S., and E. C. Rainey. 2022. “Designing for Criticality: Cultivating Textual Practice for a Pluralistic Society.” English Leadership Quarterly 45 (2): 6–9. https://doi.org/10.58680/elq32106.
   Google Scholar
• Storm, S., and E. C. Rainey. 2023. “Toward Capacious Representations of Disciplinarity: Topic Modeling Contemporary Literary Scholarship.” Manuscript in Revision.
   Google Scholar
• Street, B. 1997. “The Implications of the “New Literacy Studies” for Literacy Education.” English in Education 31 (3): 45–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-8845.1997.tb00133.x.
   Google Scholar
• Tyson, L. 2015. Critical Theory Today: A User-Friendly Guide. 3rd ed. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315760797.
   Google Scholar
• Ventura, P. 2018. “Dystopian Eating, Queer Liberalism, and the Roots of Donald Trump in HBO’s Angels in America.” Journal of Popular Culture 2 (3): 318–336. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpcu.12655.
   Google Scholar
• Wilder, L. 2005. ““The Rhetoric of Literary Criticism” Revisited: Mistaken Critics, Complex Contexts, and Social Justice.” Written Communication 22 (1): 76–119. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088304272751.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wineburg, S. S. 1991. “On the Reading of Historical Texts: Notes on the Breach Between School and Academy.” American Educational Research Journal 28 (3): 495–519. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312028003495.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeitz, C. M. 1994. “Expert-Novice Differences in Memory, Abstraction, and Reasoning in the Domain of Literature.” Cognition and Instruction 12 (4): 277–312. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1204_1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar