This qualitative multiple case study examined four preservice teachers’ planning and perceptions of planning for culturally and socially relevant disciplinary literacy instruction in secondary disciplines. Four disciplines were represented: art, English, history, and physical education (P.E.)/health. This research sought to understand how a secondary literacy course and its requirements, with a particular focus on culturally relevant disciplinary literacy (CRDL) instruction. Particularities of the four disciplines of study represented were also considered to inform crosscontent literacy coursework. Findings indicated preservice teachers (PSTs) recognized potential of CRDL to engage students in critical thought. However, core disciplines (English and history) had varying viewpoints of the reality of such instruction compared with noncore disciplines (art and P.E./health), and all PSTs struggled to perceive CRDL as a primarily student-focused approach to instruction.
AndrelchikH. (2015). Reconsidering literacy in the art classroom. Art Education, 68(1), 6–11.
2.
AuW. (2009). Unequal by design: High-stakes testing and the standardization of inequality. Routledge.
3.
BarryA. L. (2012). “I was skeptical at first”: Content literacy in the art museum. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 55(7), 597–607.
4.
BragaL.ElliotE.JonesE.BulgerS. (2015). Middle school students’ perceptions of culturally and geographically relevant content in physical education. International Journal of Kinesiology and Sports Sciences, 3(4), 62–73.
5.
BrownR. (2009). Teaching for social justice: Exploring the development of student agency through participation in the literacy practices of a mathematics classroom. Journal of Mathematics in Teacher Education, 12(3), 171–185.
6.
ColwellJ. (2012). Using a collaborative blog project to introduce disciplinary-literacy strategies in social studies pre-service teacher education. Journal of School Connections, 4(1), 25–52.
7.
ColwellJ. (2016). Examining pre-service teachers’ beliefs about disciplinary literacy in history through a blog project. Action in Teacher Education, 38(1), 34–48.
8.
ColwellJ. (2019). Selecting texts for disciplinary literacy instruction. The Reading Teacher, 72(5), 631–637.
9.
ColwellJ.EndersonM. (2016). “When I hear literacy”: Using Pre-service teachers’ perceptions of mathematical literacy to inform program changes in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 53, 63–74.
10.
ColwellJ.GregoryK. (2016). Exploring how secondary pre-service teachers envision literacy in academic disciplines using online social bookmarking. Reading Horizons, 55(3), 62–97.
11.
ColwellJ.ReinkingD. (2016). A formative experiment to align middle-school history instruction with literacy goals. Teachers College Record, 118(2), 1–29.
12.
DaiseyP. (2009). The reading experiences and beliefs of secondary pre-service teachers. Reading Horizons, 49(2), 167–190.
13.
DamicoJ.BaildonM.ExterM.GuoS.-J. (2009/2010). Where we read from matters: Disciplinary literacy in a ninth-grade social studies classroom. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53(4), 325–335.
14.
De La PazS.FeltonM.Monte-SanoC.CroningerR.JacksonC.DeograciasJ. S.HoffmanB. P. (2014). Developing historical reading and writing with adolescent readers: Effects on student learning. Theory & Research in Social Education, 42(2), 228–274.
15.
Dunkerly-BeanJ.BeanT. W. (2016). Missing the savoir for the connaissance: Disciplinary literacy and content area literacy as regimes of truth. Journal of Literacy Research, 48, 448–475.
16.
FangZ.CoatoamS. (2013). Disciplinary literacy: What you want to know about it. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 56(8), 627–632.
17.
GayG. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). Teachers College Press.
18.
GillisV. R. (2014). Disciplinary literacy: Adapt not adopt. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 57(8), 614–623.
19.
HallL. A. (2005). Teachers and content area reading: Attitudes, beliefs, and change. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 403–414.
20.
Hynd-ShanahanC. (2013). What does it take?: The challenge of disciplinary literacy. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 57(2), 93–98.
21.
IrvineJ. J. (1990). Black students and school failure: Personnel, practices, and prescriptions. Greenwood.
22.
JanksH. (2010). Literacy and power. Routledge.
23.
JimenezL. M.MeyerC. K. (2016). First impressions matter: Navigating graphic novels utilizing linguistic, visual, and spatial resources. Journal of Literacy Research, 48(4), 423–447.
24.
KucanL.RaineyE.ChoB. Y. (2019). Engaging middle school students in disciplinary literacy through culturally relevant historical inquiry. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 63(1), 15–27.
25.
Ladson-BillingsG. (1995). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant pedagogy. Theory Into Practice, 34(3), 159–165.
Ladson-BillingsG. (2017). The (r)evolution will not be standardized: Teacher education, hip hop pedagogy, and culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0. In ParisD.AlimH. S. (Eds.), Culturally sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning for justice in a changing world (pp. 141–156). Teachers College Press.
28.
LearnedJ. E. (2018). Doing history: A study of disciplinary literacy and readers labeled as struggling. Journal of Literacy Research, 50(2), 190–216.
29.
LeeC. D. (1995). A culturally based cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching African American high school students skills in literary interpretation. Reading Research Quarterly, 30(4), 608–629.
30.
LemleyS. M.HartS. M.KingJ. R. (2019). Teacher inquiry develops elementary teachers’ disciplinary literacy. Literacy Research and Instruction, 58(1), 12–30.
31.
LopezA. (2011). Culturally relevant pedagogy and critical literacy in diverse English classrooms: A case study of a secondary English teacher’s activism and agency. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 10(4), 75–93.
32.
LukeA. (1994). The social construction of literacy in the classroom. Macmillan.
33.
MerriamS. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. Jossey-Bass.
34.
MilnerH. R. (2017). Where’s the race in culturally relevant pedagogy?Teachers College Record, 119(1), 1–32.
35.
MojeE. B. (2008). Foregrounding the disciplines in secondary literacy teaching and learning: A call for change. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52(2), 96–107.
36.
MojeE. B. (2015). Doing and teaching disciplinary literacy with adolescent learners: A social and cultural enterprise. Harvard Educational Review, 85(2), 254–278.
37.
MollL. C.AmantiC.NeffN.GonzalezN. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory Into Practice, 31(2), 132–141.
38.
ParisD. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and practice. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93–97.
39.
ParisD.AlimH. S. (2014). What are we seeking to sustain through culturally relevant pedagogy? A loving critique forward. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 85–100.
40.
PytashK. E. (2012). Engaging preservice teachers in disciplinary literacy learning through writing. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 55(6), 527–538.
41.
RaineyE. 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.
42.
RyanM. (2014). Reflexivity and aesthetic inquiry: Building dialogues between the arts and literacy. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 13(2), 5–18.
43.
ScharlachT. D. (2008). These kids just aren’t motivated to read: The influence of preservice teachers’ beliefs on their expectations, instruction, and evaluation of struggling readers. Literacy Research and Instruction, 47(3), 158–173.
44.
ScottC. E.McTigueE. M.MillerD. M.WashburnE. K. (2018). The what, when, and how of preservice teachers and literacy across the disciplines: A systematic literature review of nearly 50 years of research. Teaching & Teacher Education, 73(1), 1–13.
ShanahanT.ShanahanC. (2012). What is disciplinary literacy and why does it matter?Topics in Language Disorders, 32(1), 7–18.
47.
StakeR. E. (2006). Multiple case study analysis. The Guilford Press.
48.
TatumA. W. (2008). Toward a more anatomically complete model of literacy instruction: A focus on African American male adolescents and texts. Harvard Educational Review, 78(1), 155–180.
49.
TheriotS.TiceK. C. (2009). Teachers’ knowledge development and change: Untangling beliefs and practices. Literacy Research and Instruction, 48(1), 65–75.
50.
ThomasD. R. (2006). A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(2), 237–246.
51.
ThomasE. E. (2013). Dilemmatic conversations: Some challenges of culturally responsive discourse in a high school English classroom. Linguistics & Education, 24(3), 328–347.
52.
Van ManenM. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. State University of New York Press.
53.
WalterJ. S. (2018). Global perspectives. Making the shift from multiculturalism to culturally responsive teaching. General Music Today, 31(2), 24–28.
54.
WickensC. M.ManderinoM.ParkerJ.JungG. (2015). Habits of practice: Expanding disciplinary literacy frameworks through a physical education lens. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 59(1), 75–82.
55.
WineburgS.ReismanA. (2015). Disciplinary literacy in history: A toolkit for digital citizenship. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 58(8), 636–639.
56.
WineburgS. S. (1991). Historical problem solving: A study of the cognitive processes used in the evaluation of documentary and pictorial evidence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(1), 73–87.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
