This naturalistic case study focuses on 2 preservice students in a secondary language arts program. I wanted to know how their histories as readers and students of literature intersected with their secondary-school literature course and how their developing stances on teaching literature changed as they moved through their preservice teaching. Data collection included fieldnotes; audiotaped interviews; reading protocols; documents such as syllabi, handouts, and assignments; preservice students' portfolios, logs, lesson plans, and tests; and videotapes of the participants teaching literature during their preservice teaching. I made observations of additional classes, and I collected teaching logs, lesson plans, and other relevant artifacts. I used a constant-comparison analysis to produce grounded theory about the preservice experience. The data revealed two broad sources of knowledge that were important to the participants' entering perceptions on teaching literature: prior experiences with literature and preexisting conceptions of the role of a teacher. The ideas they brought with them were often in conflict with what they encountered in the preservice course. Their cases illustrate the impact of a secondary-literature course and preservice teaching on participants' ideas about teaching literature.
References
1.
AlpertB. (1991). Students' resistance in the classroom. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 22, 350–366.
2.
AppleM. W. (1979). Ideology and the curriculum.London: Routledge.
3.
AppleM. W. (1982). Education and power.New York: Routledge.
4.
ApplebeeA. N. (1993). Literature in the secondary school: Studies of curriculum and instruction in the United States (Research Report No. 25). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
5.
AronowitzS.GirouxH. A. (1988). Schooling, culture, and literacy in the age of broken dreams: A review of Bloom and Hirsch. Harvard Educational Review, 58, 172–194.
6.
AtwellN. (1987). In the middle.Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
7.
BallD.WilsonS. (1990). Knowing the subject and learning to teach it: Examining assumptions about becoming a mathematics teacher (Report No. 90–7). East Lansing, MI: National Center for Research on Teacher Education.
8.
BallD. L.McdiarmidG. W. (1991). The subject-matter preparation of teachers. In HoustonW. R.HabermanM.SikulaJ. (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (p. 437–449). New York: Macmillan.
9.
BarnesD. (1992). From communication to curriculum (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
10.
BeachR. (1995). Constructing cultural models through response to literature. English Journal, 84, 87–94.
11.
BloomeD. (1987). Reading as a social process in a middle school classroom. In BloomeD. (Ed.), Literacy and schooling (pp. 123–149). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
12.
BrookhartS. M.FreemanD. J. (1992). Characteristics of entering teacher candidates. Review of Educational Research, 62, 37–60.
13.
BrunerJ. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
14.
BrunerJ. (1996). The culture of education.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
15.
CarterK. (1990). Teachers' knowledge and learning to teach. In HoustonW. R.HabermanM.SikulaJ. (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 291–310). New York: Macmillan.
16.
CazdenC. (1988). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
17.
ClarkC. M.PetersonP. L. (1986). Teachers' thought processes. In WittrockM. C. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 255–296). New York: Macmillan.
18.
DelpitL. D. (1988). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating other people's children. Harvard Educational Review, 58, 280–298.
19.
DenzinN. K. (1989). Interpretive interactionism.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
20.
DiasP. (1992). Literary reading and classroom constraints: Aligning practice with theory. In LangerJ. A. (Ed.), Literature instruction: A focus on student response (pp. 131–162). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
21.
DillonJ. T. (1985). Using questions to foil discussion. Teaching & Teacher Education, 1, 109–121.
22.
DixonJ. (1990). Students exploring literature across the world. In FarrellE. J.SquireJ. R. (Eds.), Transactions with literature.Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
23.
EricksonF. (1984). School literacy, reasoning, and civility: An anthropologist's perspective. Review of Educational Research, 54, 525–546.
24.
Feiman-NemserS. (1983). Learning to teach. In ShulmanL. S.SykesG. (Eds.), Handbook of teaching and policy (pp. 150–170). New York: Longman.
25.
FordhamS. (1993). “Those loud black girls”: (Black) woman, silence, and gender ”passing” in the academy. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 24, 3–32.
26.
FoxD. L. (1991). From English major to English teacher: Case studies of student teachers and their first year of teaching English. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri-Columbia.
27.
FrankP. (1988). Alas, Babylon.New York: Bantam. (Original work published 1959).
28.
FreireP. (1996). Pedagogy of the oppressed.New York: Continuum. (Original work published 1970).
29.
GlaserB. G.StraussA. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research.Chicago: Aldine.
30.
GoodmanJ. (1988). Constructing a practical philosophy of teaching: A study of preservice teachers' professional perspectives. Teaching & Teacher Education, 4, 121–137.
31.
GrafH. (1987). The legacies of literacy: Continuities and contradictions in Western culture and society.Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
32.
GrossmanP. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education.New York: Teachers College Press.
33.
GrossmanP. L. (1991). What are we talking about anyway? Subject-matter knowledge of secondary English teachers. In BrophyJ. (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching (Vol. 2, pp. 245–264). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
34.
GumperzJ. J. (1986). Interactional sociolinguistics in the study of schooling. In Cook-GumperzJ. (Ed.), The social construction of literacy (pp. 45–68). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
35.
HansberryL. (1959). A raisin in the sun.New York: Random House.
36.
HeathS. B. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life, and work in communities and schools.New York: Cambridge University Press.
37.
HinesM. B. (1995). Complicating the coherence quest(ions): What's theory got to do, got to do, with it?. English Education, 27, 240–257.
38.
JohnsonJ. C. (1990). Selecting ethnographic informants.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
39.
KaganD. M. (1992). Professional growth among preservice and beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 62, 129–169.
40.
LangerJ. A. (1992). Rethinking literature instruction. In LangerJ. A. (Ed.), Literature instruction: A focus on student response (pp. 35–53). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
41.
LeggoC. (1991). The reader as problem-maker: Responding to a poem with questions. English Journal, 80, 58–60.
42.
LortieD. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
43.
MarshallJ. D. (1989). Patterns of discourse in classroom discussions of literature. Albany, NY: SUNY Albany, Center for the Learning and Teaching of Literature.
44.
MunroA. (1974). The found boat. In KennedyX. J. (Ed.), Literature: An introduction to fiction, poetry, and drama (pp. 201–208). New York: Harper Collins.
45.
NesporJ. (1987). The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19, 317–328.
46.
NisbettR.RossL. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
47.
O'DonnellR. C. (1990). English language arts teacher education. In HoustonW. R.HabermanM.SikulaJ. (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 705–716). New York: Macmillan.
48.
PajaresM. F. (1992). Teachers' beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307–332.
49.
PattonM. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
50.
PerryW. G.Jr. (1968). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
51.
PetroskyA. (1992). To teach (literature)? In LangerJ. A. (Ed.), Literature instruction: A focus on student response (pp. 163–205). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
52.
PradlG. (1996). Literature for democracy: Reading as a social act. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
53.
PurvesA. C. (1993). Toward a reevaluation of reader response and school literature. Language Arts, 70, 348–361.
54.
RosenblattL. M. (1938). Literature as exploration. New York: Noble & Noble.
55.
RosenblattL. M. (1991). Literary theory. In FloodJ.JensenJ. M.LappD.SquireJ. R. (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching the English language arts (pp. 57–62). New York: Macmillan.
56.
ScholesR. (1985). Textual power. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
57.
ShuellT. J. (1992). The two cultures of teaching and teacher preparation. Teaching & Teacher Education, 8, 83–90.
58.
ShulmanL. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15 (2), 4–14.
59.
StraussA. (1990). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. (Originally published 1987).
60.
TaylorM. (1978). Roll of thunder, hear my cry. New York: Puffin Books.
61.
TigheM. A. (1991). Influencing student teacher attitudes: Who, what, and how. English Education, 23, 225–243.
62.
VygotskyL. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
63.
VygotskyL. S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
64.
WelleckR.WarrenA. (1942). Theory of literature. New York: Harcourt, Brace, & World.
65.
WilliamsR. (1977). Marxism in literature,London: Oxford University Press.
66.
WilliamsR. (1989). Hegemony and the selective tradition. In De CastellS.LukeA.LukeC. (Eds.), Language, authority, and criticism: Readings on the school textbook (pp. 56–73). Philadelphia: Falmer Press.
67.
WilsonS. (1990, November). The secret garden of teacher education. Phi Delta Kappan, pp. 204–209.
68.
WilsonS. (1992). A case concerning content: Using case studies to teach about subject matter. In ShulmanJ. H. (Ed.), Case methods in teacher education (pp. 64–89). New York: Teachers College Press.
