This article was downloaded by: [University of Western Ontario]On: 12 November 2014, At: 06:02Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,London W1T 3JH, UK

Reading Research andInstructionPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ulri19

The instructional beliefsand decisions of middle andsecondary teachers whosuccessfully blend literacyand contentElizabeth G. Sturtevant a & Wayne M. Linek ba George Mason Universityb Texas A&M University‐Commerce , CommercePublished online: 05 Feb 2010.

To cite this article: Elizabeth G. Sturtevant & Wayne M. Linek (2003) Theinstructional beliefs and decisions of middle and secondary teachers whosuccessfully blend literacy and content, Reading Research and Instruction, 43:1,74-89, DOI: 10.1080/19388070309558401

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19388070309558401

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of allthe information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on ourplatform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensorsmake no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy,completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views ofthe authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis.The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should beindependently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor andFrancis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings,

demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, inrelation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private studypurposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of accessand use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

6:02

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Reading Research and InstructionFall 2003, 43(1) 74-90

The Instructional Beliefs and Decisions of Middle andSecondary Teachers Who Successfully Blend Literacy

and Content

Elizabeth G. SturtevantGeorge Mason University

Wayne M. LinekTexas A&M University-Commerce

Abstract

This study explored the perspectives of nine content area middle and high schoolteachers who were considered to be "outstanding" teachers of their disciplines and whoalso used a variety of literacy practices in their instruction according to their principalsand supervisors. The teachers were interviewed to explore their instructional beliefs anddecision-making, with specific attention to how these beliefs and decisions impactedtheir uses of literacy. A cross-case analysis revealed that all nine teachers had strongbeliefs about meeting students' needs, the value of interpersonal relationships, andparticipating in lifelong learning. In addition, all of the teachers reported effects ofpersonal experiences, context and/or teaching conditions, and professional developmenton their instruction. Overall, the teachers described both a strong focus on meetingstudent needs and a wide variety of uses of literacy within active teaching/learningenvironments.

Adolescent literacy is of critical concern to educators (e.g., Alvermann,2002; International Reading Association & National Middle SchoolAssociation, 2002) as well as the general public. However, teaching strategiesdesigned to enhance middle and high school students' literacy developmentoften go unused in content area classrooms, even though information aboutthese methods has been disseminated through widely attended preservicecoursework and inservice programs for the past quarter century (O'Brien,Stewart, & Moje, 1995).

About two decades ago, researchers began to conduct classroom-basedstudies related to secondary teachers' uses of reading, writing, and discussion intheir instruction. Early studies focused on how reading and textbooks were usedin content area classrooms (e.g., Smith & Feathers, 1983), and why manycontent teachers seemed "resistant" to using literacy strategies (e.g., O'Brien,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

6:02

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Instructional Beliefs and Decisions 75

1988). More recently, studies have focused on potential influences on secondaryinstruction, including the sociocultural context of schools and classrooms,teachers' belief systems, and teachers' decision-making processes. Findingsfrom this line of inquiry include: (a) that contextual conditions within schoolsas well as societal forces may be related to teachers' decisions to adopt literacypractices (Moore, 1996); (b) that "to learn how and why teachers use literacywithin the subjects they teach, it is necessary to examine [their] beliefs" aboutboth literacy and their content areas (Readence, Kile, & Mallette, 1998, p. 143);and (c) that what teachers verbally espouse as good teaching may not be clearlyreflected in their classroom instruction (Bean, 2000).

Overall, research has identified a variety of dilemmas that may interferewith attempts to increase the use of literacy strategies and practices insecondary school classrooms. These include time constraints, rigid curriculumrequirements, high stakes tests, and a potential clash between the student-centered philosophy underlying many content literacy strategies and acurriculum-centered secondary school culture (O'Brien et al., 1995). Inaddition, studies of secondary schooling find that secondary instruction,especially in high schools, has been extremely consistent over the past centuryand resistant to change (Cuban, 1993).

Despite these sources of difficulty, a few reports of middle andsecondary teachers who have experienced success in blending effective literacypractices into their content instruction are available. These reports include firstperson classroom accounts written by teachers themselves, especially Englishand social studies teachers in middle schools who have dramatically changedtheir curriculums (e.g., Atwell, 1998; Noden & Vacca, 1994). Case studies ofteachers who have adopted theory-based literacy practices to varying degrees(e.g., Hinchman & Zalewski, 2001; Moje, 1964; Sturtevant, Duling, & Hall,2001) are also available. As a group, these reports provide an importantfoundation for understanding the situated day-to-day decision making processesof teachers in middle and high schools as they relate to uses of literacy.However, it remains that much more is known about teachers who seem to havedifficulty blending literacy strategies into content instruction than about theperceptions, beliefs, and experiences of those who are somewhat to verysuccessful in doing so.

Recently, there have been calls for the value of exploring theexperiences and decision-making processes of teachers who are consideredexemplary (Allington, 1997; Ruddell, 1997). Ruddell (1997), after extensivelongitudinal studies of "influential" teachers, reported many sharedcharacteristics, beliefs, and attitudes across content areas and grade levels. AsRichard Allington has asked, "Why is it we know so little about teachers whoare... successful?" (1997, p. 8). It is clear that the research community needsto call on the expertise of classroom teachers in order to learn more about ways

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

6:02

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

76 Reading Research and Instruction Fall 2003, 43 (I)

theory-based teaching practices can be implemented in day-to-day practice. Thestudy reported here seeks to address this question, with a specific focus onteachers who are considered "outstanding" teachers in their content areas andwho also blend reading, writing, and discussion into their instruction. Datacollected for this study were part of a larger, multi-year project related toliteracy in content area classrooms.The guiding questions for the study were:

1. What are "outstanding" content area middle and secondary teachers'perceptions of good teaching?

2. What are these teachers' perceptions of influences that affect theirinstruction, including uses of literacy?

Participants

For this study, nine teachers, from two regions in the United States,were identified based on the recommendations of supervisors and principals aswell as follow-up interviews and observations by the researchers. Wespecifically chose to include teachers who were diverse in terms of teachinglocation, grade level, discipline, and number of years of teaching in order toprovide a broad picture of teachers' perceptions and experiences. In addition,the research literature indicates that teachers' instructional decisions related touses of literacy may be affected by the context in which they teach, their careerstage, or their content area (e.g., Moore, 1996; Sturtevant, 1996).

The process used to select participants was as follows. First, theresearchers invited school principals and supervisors to nominate content areateachers in grades 6-12 whom they considered to be excellent teachers.Nominators were asked to consider primarily a teacher's reputation forexcellence as a content teacher; however, they also were told that we wereinterested in locating teachers who used a variety of types of reading, writing,and discussion within their content area instruction. A pool of 24 nominees wasdeveloped across several states with the first call.

Next, the researchers categorized the 24 nominees by grade level/staught and by subject/s taught. Content areas and grade levels not included werenoted and a second call for nominations went out specifying grade levels andcontent areas. Eight additional nominees were acquired in the second call.

A researcher then telephoned each nominator for follow-up informationabout his/her nominee's professional practice. Each researcher took notesduring the interview to share with the other researcher. The researchers, bothuniversity-based literacy teacher educators with experience as content areaclassroom teachers, then rank ordered each nominee by content area anddeveloped a matrix to insure that each grade level, content area, and communitycontext (rural, urban, suburban) would receive representation in the project.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

6:02

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Instructional Beliefs and Decisions 77

The researchers then began contacting top-ranked potential participantsout of the total pool of 32 teachers to see if they would be willing to participatein interviews and observations. After conversations with the potentialparticipants and verification of their school district's willingness to permit theresearch project to be conducted, the researchers selected the pool ofparticipants representing a variety of content disciplines, grade levels, andcommunity contexts. Participants from the limited pool were then observed andinterviewed by one of the researchers. With the nominee's permission,conversations about the nominee's instruction were also held with her or hisimmediate supervisor. Congruence among the nominator's perception, theimmediate supervisor's perception, and the teacher's instruction during anobservation was required for inclusion in the final pool of participants. Thegeneral criteria for selection are listed in Figure 1. The characteristics of thenine final participants are detailed in Figure 2. Additionally, examples of thetypes of literacy practices observed in the participants' classrooms are presentedin Figure 3.

Figure 1: Summary of Basic Criteria Used for Teacher Selection1. Nomination by a supervisor or principal familiar with the teacher's work.

These individuals were asked to nominate teachers they believed were"outstanding teachers" of their content area.

2. In telephone interview, teacher could describe specific ways that reading,writing, and discussion were integrated into content area instruction.

3. During an observation, students were actively engaged in reading, writing,and discussion related to the learning of content

Design

This study was developed within a social constructivist framework(Berger & Luckmann, 1967) with the purpose of understanding the perspectiveof the participants. All nine case studies followed a qualitative approach(Merriam, 1998) using ethnographic techniques to gather and analyze data(Huberman & Miles, 1994). A cross case analysis was also conducted in orderto compare and contrast the responses of the teachers.

Data SourcesSince the focus of the research questions was on the teachers'

perceptions, semi-structured interviews constituted the primary data source.Each participant was interviewed at least twice for one hour each time.Interview questions (see Appendix) related to the teachers' description of their

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

6:02

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Figure 2. Characteristics of the Nine Teachers by Discipline, Gender, Grade, Community Context,Student Context, and Classroom Context

1

Pseudonym

Beth

Sari

Linda

Kelly

Gail

Michael

Cindy

Kevin

Mary

Discipline

SocialStudiesMath

English

Biology

Civics

ESL

SocialStudiesIndustrialArtsEnglish

Gender

Female

Female

Female

Female

Female

Male

Female

Male

Female

Grade/sTaught6

9,12

10, 11,12

11,12

8

6,7,8,9,10, 11, 12

7

7

8

CommunityContextSmall TownRuralUrban

Rural

Suburban

Suburban

Rural

Urban

Urban

Suburban

Student Context

Culturally and EconomicallyDiverseCulturally, Linguistically, andEconomically Diverse

Culturally and EconomicallyDiverseCulturally and LinguisticallyDiverse

Culturally Diverse

Culturally, Linguistically, andEconomically DiverseCulturally, Linguistically, andEconomically DiverseCulturally, Linguistically, andEconomically DiverseCulturally Diverse

Classroom Context

Heterogeneously Grouped;Grade 6Homogeneously GroupedGrade 12 (Advanced); andHomogeneously GroupedGrade 9 (Low Achievement)Heterogeneously Grouped,Grades 10,11, and 12"Advanced Placement" Grades11 and 12; HeterogeneouslyGrouped Grades 11 and 12.Homogeneously Grouped"Gifted and Talented"Grade 8Heterogeneously Grouped;Classes included Grades 9-12Heterogeneously Grouped,Grade 7Heterogeneously Grouped,Grade 7Homogeneously Grouped,Gifted and Talented, Grade 8

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

6:02

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Instructional Beliefs and Decisions 79

Figure 3: Examples of literacy-related instructional practices that wereused as one basis for teacher selection:

• Interdisciplinary middle school Social Studies/English projects thatincluded interviews of community members and related group discussion,presentations, writing, artwork, and quilt making.

• High school mathematics instruction that included using graphingcalculators with partners; linking mathematics concepts with geography;and using graphs for practical purposes.

• High school ESL instruction that included students' researching andwriting accounts of their family histories, which were published in anemail newsletter.

• Middle school history instruction that included researching the MiddleEast using the Internet and writing to a former classmate who had movedto Saudi Arabia.

• High school science instruction, in which students collaborativelydeveloped their own research questions, read published research reports,conducted experiments, and wrote results.

• Technology/art/social studies projects in which students studied conceptsusing reading materials, writing, computer technology, and hands-oncreations in the art room and woodshop.

teaching situation, school and community context, types of instruction typicallyused, types of reading, writing, and discussion used, and rationale forinstructional choices. Observations of classroom instruction were conductedand field notes were taken before each initial interview primarily to familiarizethe researcher with the teacher's setting and to guide the interview questions.All observations and interviews were scheduled in advance at the teacher'sconvenience. At least a full day, or the equivalent hours, had been spent in eachteacher's classroom at the time of the first interview. On a second occasion, atleast two months later, observations followed by a second interview wereconducted to gain additional insight into the teachers' beliefs, teaching practice,and context. In addition, artifacts and photos related to each teacher'sinstruction and context were collected.

Interview questions for the second interview were based on the firstinterview protocol, with additional questions added based on issues that hadbeen raised by the first interview and observation. In several cases videotapesof classroom instruction and E-mail messages between researchers andparticipants served as an additional data source to verify findings.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

6:02

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

80 Reading Research and Instruction Fall 2003, 43 (1)

Data Analysis ProceduresAll interviews were tape-recorded and transcribed. Analysis included

coding for themes and categories (Merriam, 1998). The secondary data sources(field notes from observations, artifacts, and photos) were used to corroboratethe themes and categories as they were generated and refined. Case descriptionsof each teacher were then prepared.

Next, for the cross-case analysis, an external research assistant notpreviously involved with the project employed a case-oriented strategy(Huberman & Miles, 1994) using grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) tobuild a framework inductively. The initial framework included three majorthemes comprised of eleven categories. The framework was tested and refinedby reading and re-reading the data and discussion between the researchers andresearch assistant. This process resulted in two major themes comprised of ninecategories. The researchers conducted an audit on the cross-case analysis usingthree of the six levels of attention described by Schwandt and Halpern (1988).The three specific questions employed in the audit were: Are findings groundedin the data? Are inferences logical? Is the category structure appropriate? Theresearchers then jointly reanalyzed all primary and secondary data forconsistency.

Results

The teachers who participated in this project were found to havestrikingly similar perceptions about what a "good teacher" is and aboutinfluences that affected their own abilities to teach well. These perceptions willbe described below according to the two major themes that emerged from cross-case analysis. The themes and categories are outlined in Figure 4.

Figure 4: Themes and categories that emerged from the interview data.

Theme I: Teachers' perceptions of the qualities of a good teacher

• Category A: Teachers' focus on classrooms that are "student centered" inwhich students are "problem-solvers."

• Category B: Teachers' focus on student needs beyond the classroom.• Category C: Teachers' focus on the value of a their own relationship with

students.• Category D: Teachers' focus on lifelong learning.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

6:02

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Instructional Beliefs and Decisions 81

The first theme, Teachers' perceptions of the qualities of a good teacherincluded categories related to beliefs about students' needs, beliefs about "bestpractice" to meet those needs, beliefs about the value of interpersonalrelationships, and beliefs about lifelong learning. The second theme, Teachersperceptions of influences on their teaching included categories related to thepffects of current and past personal experiences, context and/or teachingconditions, and professional development. Each of these themes will bedescribed in more detail below.

Theme I: Teachers' perceptions of the qualities of a good teacherDuring the interviews, all of the teachers made numerous comments

about their perceptions of what it meant to them to be a "good teacher." Thesecomments were linked to questions about their decision-making about theirpractice. The four categories that emerged within Theme I in the cross caseanalysis are listed below, with quotes representing the comments of teachersfrom different contexts, grade levels and content areas.

The first category in Theme I was entitled, Teachers' focus onclassrooms that are "student centered" in which students are "problem-solvers."The nine teachers all believed that students should be actively engaged inlearning. There was a strong emphasis on student participation and on linkingcontent disciplines. For example, Kelly, a high school biology teacher in Texaswho connected students' questions to their science learning, said, "I believe thateducation should be student-centered." Kelly's students developed manyoutstanding science fair projects based on questions they developed by readingresearch reports, experimenting, and brainstorming with one another. Kevin, atechnology education teacher for seventh graders in Virginia, discussed theimportance of engaging students in problem solving and linking technology toother subjects: "I think that in technology, kids can do problem solving, andthey can use a lot that they've learned in some of the core subjects.. .it's an areawhere they can put a lot of things together." In his teaching, Kevin had studentsdesign toys on computers and then implement the designs in his woodshop. Healso developed an interdisciplinary unit with teachers in social studies and artin which students enacted a 19th century sweatshop to create the toys, whichwere later donated to Toys for Tots.

Cathy, a social studies teacher who also taught seventh graders in. Virginia, commented on involving students by connecting literacy to music andart: "I think that approaching a topic from multiple levels and multipleintelligences has to be helpful...you're bringing in the reading and the writing[and] the drawing on the same topic, and the music of the same era, and it'shands-on." Cathy also worked with other teachers in her building to createinterdisciplinary units that included art, reading, writing, and social studiescontent. Thus, although the participant teachers had different means of creating

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

6:02

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

82 Reading Research and Instruction Fall 2003, 43 (1)

active environments for learning, they all spoke of and demonstrated a belief instudents participating in their own learning.

The second category for Theme I was entitled, Teachers' focus onstudent needs beyond the classroom. The teachers all spoke of the importanceof making the curriculum relevant to students' lives and of connecting theirstudents to the world beyond the classroom. Many also spoke of the need forstudents to learn to contribute to their communities. For example, Gail, aneighth grade civics teacher in Virginia who had created an extensivevolunteerism unit with a language arts colleague, explained, "One of mypersonal goals for the students is that they become contributing members of thecommunities they live in" (Grade 8 Civics, Virginia). Sari, a high schoolmathematics teacher near Washington, D.C. commented on the importance ofhelping her urban students understand how the curriculum related to their ownlives: "You have to find a way to relate [mathematics] to their li[ves], becausethese kids are not math motivated. They cannot always see how this informationis valuable for them." Similarly, over a thousand miles away, Linda commentedthat her high school English students in a small Texas town lacked informationand experience beyond their own environment: "...because they are from asmall town, and they don't get to go to places and see things, like.. .the museumor [an] opera." Linda made a great effort to take her students to cultural eventsin Dallas which most had never attended. Finally, Beth, a sixth grade socialstudies teacher in rural Texas, summed up the beliefs we found mentioned byall of the teachers when she said:

I truly believe that all kids can learn. I think that kids have lots ofdifferent ways of learning...if material is made relevant to them they willdevelop an interest. You can always tie the material in some way that touchestheir life, and...that is where the key is.

The third category in Theme I was entitled, A focus on the value of ateacher's relationship with students. These teachers uniformly believed thatrapport with students and risk-free learning environments were essentialcomponents of "good teaching." For example, Beth, the sixth grade teachermentioned above said:

[The] first thing I like to try to do is create a good rapport withthe kids...I've tried real hard to create a risk-taking environmentwhere the kids were comfortable with answering. And if someonesaid a wrong answer I tried very hard to take them in anotherdirection and not make a big deal out of it so that they wouldn't beafraid to speak out and try.

Sari, the urban high school mathematics teacher, recalled what she toldstudents in a class designed to boost student achievement in Algebra:

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

6:02

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Instructional Beliefs and Decisions 83

"Sometimes, I have to say, 'You have to do it for me.' They want to please me,because I have taken a personal interest in them." Linda, the high schoolEnglish teacher in the small Texas town, summed up her feelings related to thistheme by saying, "I think that teaching is more than just transferringinformation...there has to be some kind of relationship between myself and[my] students. And as I get older that relationship gets easier."

The fourth category in Theme I was entitled, A focus on lifelonglearning. All of the participants talked about and exhibited a belief in theimportance of on-going learning about their practice as teachers. For example,Kelly, the high school biology teacher said, "To me, to be a teacher is toconstantly accept learning, and I want to learn to be the best teacher I can be formy students." Beth, the sixth grade social studies teacher, mentioned that sheshares her own feelings about learning with her students, "I've always enjoyedlearning myself, and so I want to try to relate that enthusiasm to the kids. [I]teach them above all else that learning is a lifelong process; it's not somethingthat they'll finish after 12 years; it goes on forever whether you're in school ornot." Linda, the high school English teacher, linked her own learning as a childto her current teaching and learning:

I learned to read at an early age and I love to read. I think thatinforms everything else that I do. So I see books and literature asbeing essential. If they [the students] are going to become thinkingmembers of society, they have to expose themselves to as manyideas as possible and as many different ways of expressing thingsas possible.... Learning is a reward in itself. I'd like them to comeout of my class knowing that. That's what I'm shooting for.

Theme II: Teachers perceptions of influences on their teachingThis theme related to influences the teachers identified as affecting

their instructional decisions. As noted earlier, the categories within this themerelated to the teachers' personal experiences, the context of their teaching, andtheir own professional development. The first category in Theme //was entitled,A focus on how the teachers perceived that their own past and currentexperiences affect their teaching. Personal experiences with students, teachers,and their own children are included. For example, Gail, the eighth grade civicsteacher said:

I do not think I would have been an especially good middle schoolteacher before I had my own children.... I think when you watchyour own children you see how at one stage in their life they make atremendous leap forward and then they sort of plateau for a while....I don't think I had a sense of that.. .until I had my own family.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

6:02

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

84 Reading Research and Instruction Fall 2003, 43(1)

Other teachers mentioned experiences they had when they were youngadults and connected this to their understanding of their students' experiencesand feelings. For example, Michael, an ESL teacher, reflected on hisinternational experiences: "When [I was] in Spain, I was [working] illegally,and I didn't know the language. I learned it while I was working and socializing.[My] students not only face normal adolescent issues but are also faced withrace and language barriers." Many of the teachers also talked about experiencesthey had as students that they believe had an impact on the way they teach. Forexample, Linda, who taught high school English, mentioned a college historyprofessor who had his students participate in writing test questions. Lindanoted, "We could not just recite facts; we had to show that we could [explain]an idea." Linda recalled that she "felt powerful" in the class.

The second category in Theme II was entitled, Contextual conditionsthat teachers perceived as affecting their teaching. Conditions such ascurriculum regulations (flexibility versus rigid standards and requirements),general administrative support, availability of materials, and time constraintsare included in this category. All of the teachers believed they were stronglyaffected by contextual conditions, although they saw these playing out indifferent ways. For example, state-mandated high stakes tests impacted teachersdifferently. While Gail, a civics teacher in Virginia, talked about seriouscurriculum constraints that resulted from the institution of state-mandated tests,Michael, an ESL teacher in the same state, said that he was not required to givea state test. He was, however, required to help his students do well in theirsubject area classes, as well as design and provide an English curriculum of hisown. He sometimes found these requirements overwhelming in the short timehe had with students each day. Timing issues were also mentioned by otherteachers, and included concern about time for team teaching (Kevin, technologyeducation) and preparation (all teachers).

On the positive side, many teachers also mentioned helpful orsupportive contextual conditions. For example, Beth, the sixth grade socialstudies teacher, mentioned that she had strongly benefited from working withher district's technology coordinator when she was a beginning teacher. Inaddition to showing her teaching strategies, he suggested she apply for a grant.Beth said she was amazed when she won the grant, which provided multiplecomputer stations for her classroom and supported her inquiry-based teaching.

The third category in Theme II was entitled, Engaging in professionaldevelopment. All of the nine teachers indicated involvement in a variety offormal and informal professional development activities beyond those requiredby their districts. Moreover, they seemed to be savvy consumers of professionaldevelopment, utilizing those that were helpful and avoiding those theyconsidered "a waste of time." Many of the teachers were involved in multipleactivities. For example, Michael (ESL teacher) noted:

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

6:02

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Instructional Beliefs and Decisions 85

Now that I have the Master's degree, what I do now is just continueprofessional development. I present at conferences. I am a memberof TESOL International. I'm a member of WATESOL. I'm amember of Virginia TESOL. I'm on a couple of list serves that areall directed to bilingual education and ESL. Every day I'm readingarticles and research.

Other teachers mentioned informal and personal connections. Mary, aneighth grade English teacher with 40 years of experience, spoke of instructionalconversations with her sister, a linguist:

[A] few years ago when the sentence combining was such a bigthing.. .1 thought that was great and fell into that... [but].. .my sister,who's in linguistics tells me...yes, these students will write more

r sophisticated sentences, but in a few years, there's no difference, thedifference disappears.

Mary said she modified her instruction based on her sister's advice.Many teachers also offered examples of specific courses they took in

which they learned strategies they later included in their teaching. For example,Linda mentioned a university content reading class where "big light bulbs wentoff' for her. She said that while her teaching "didn't dramatically changeovernight," the course gave her "a lot of ideas to work with" that she was slowlyadding to her teaching. Kelly, the high school biology teacher, mentionedpositive effects of district workshops, such as "reading workshops and theFORMAT workshops." Kelly went on to say that she truly enjoyed thesemeetings: "I love it and go out as much as I can."

Results SummaryAs noted earlier, it is interesting that the nine teachers had such similar

perceptions about both the qualities of good teaching, as well as what hadaffected their own ability to be a "good teacher." Despite differences in personalcharacteristics, region, content area, and grade level taught, all of the teachersdescribed good teachers as strongly concerned about student needs and lifelonglearning, and as implementers of instruction that engaged students in thinking,problem solving, and discussion.

When describing what influenced their ability to be good teachers, thenine teachers identified influences on their instruction from their past andcurrent personal experiences as well as the context of their teaching. Theteachers also demonstrated a uniformly strong interest in their own lifelonglearning and professional development.

Importantly, in all cases these teachers also perceived interactions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

6:02

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

86 Reading Research and Instruction Fall 2003, 43 (1)

among influences to be important. For example, Gail, the eighth grade civicsteacher, said she substantially changed her instruction when state-mandatedtests became required one spring. She perceived her instructional change to bea result of an interaction of political influences, time constraints present in theschool setting, her students' level of achievement in relation to the stateobjectives, and her own knowledge of teaching and learning. Gail believed thatthis change was not positive, because the standards in her state requiredmemorization of facts rather than demonstration of higher order thinking aboutsocial studies.

Most of the teachers also described a very recursive style of decision-making within the classroom, with classroom events affecting decision-making,and decision-making affecting classroom events. The nature of this process,however, was not the same across classes. For example, Sari, the high schoolmathematics teacher, said she always did in-depth planning for her advancedmathematics classes for juniors and seniors, and required that students "stick toher schedule" in order to get through the content before the final exam. By thisshe meant that she did not deviate from her plan if students were not preparedfor class. However, for lower-track classes, the same teacher said she operatedwith much more flexibility, making decisions on the spot based on howreceptive students seemed that day.

The concept of "lifelong" or on-going learning was seen across ThemesI and II. The teachers described learning as a continuous, enjoyable process forthemselves; they also discussed relevancy for students as the "key" to helpingstudents enjoy learning. During the observations, the researchers recordedefforts made by every teacher in the study to make learning relevant forstudents. All were also engaged in ongoing learning about teaching and/or theirsubject matter. Interestingly, many of the teachers talked explicitly with theirstudents about their own formal or informal professional development in aneffort to serve as role models for the value of learning. This was furtherevidence that their students' appreciation of the value of learning was central tothese teachers' beliefs and practice.

Discussion and Implications

Previous research has identified multiple influences on teachers andstudents in content area classes that may affect instruction and literacy practices(e.g., Moore, 1996; Readence et al., 1998). In addition, studies have shown thatinfluences on teachers' literacy practices can emanate from a wide variety ofsources or locations (Sturtevant, 1996). The present study sought to extend thiswork by exploring what well-regarded middle and high school content teacherswho use a variety of literacy practices define as "good teaching," and influencesthey believed impacted their own efforts to be "good teachers." Like Allington

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

6:02

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Instructional Beliefs and Decisions 87

(1997) and Ruddell (1997), we proposed that identifying similarities insuccessful teachers' perceptions and decisions might provide valuableinformation to those who work for educational change in the area of literacy.

Overall, the teachers who participated showed strong consistencyacross grade levels and disciplines in their focus on student problem solving,curriculum relevancy, relationships, and lifelong learning for themselves andtheir students. These findings are similar to Ruddell's "shared beliefs ofinfluential teachers" (1997, p. 41). They also seem consistent with Allington's(1997) assertions that the "most successful teachers" may have morecommonality in the environments they create than in particular curriculums orlesson plans.

As O'Brien and his colleagues (1995) have indicated, an understandingof "why efforts to infuse content literacy into schools succeed or fail" (p. 452)requires an understanding of the belief systems of persons who work in schools.Yet, researchers, program developers, school officials, and politicians oftenseek to "improve" schools without gaining the perspective of the most centralinstructional decision-maker, the classroom teacher. The teachers in this studyseemed to take a decidedly "professional" stance: they cared deeply aboutstudents and learning, and they worked actively to improve their own learningand design a learning environment that would meet their students' needs.

Information on influences that affect teachers' decision-making is vitalfor developing grounded theory that illuminates why instruction occurs as itdoes. An expanded, research-based theory of instructional influences also isessential for a fuller understanding of school cultures, which is basic todeveloping plans for school improvement. Through its focus on teachers' ownperceptions about teaching and literacy, this study seeks to give voice to theteacher perspective and to add to our knowledge about how and why middle andsecondary teachers make instructional decisions that may affect students'literacy and learning. While the teacher's perspective is certainly not the "wholestory" of teaching and learning, it is a very valuable part of the picture andshould not be ignored.

Limitations of this study include its focus on a small number ofteachers. In addition, the selection of teachers was limited to the processoutlined earlier. We need to know more about how all teachers' perceptions of"good teaching" develop, how they change over time, and how teachers connectthese beliefs to their literacy practices. We also must pursue in our research theperspectives of adolescents, and explore how their literacy and learning isimpacted by their own and their teachers' beliefs and decisions.

References

Allington, R. C. (1997). Why does literacy research so often ignore what really

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

6:02

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

88 Reading Research and Instruction Fall 2003, 43 (1)

matters? In C.K. Kinzer, K. A. Hinchman, & D. J. Leu (Eds.), Inquiries inliteracy theory and practice. Forty-sixth yearbook of the National ReadingConference (pp. 1-12). Chicago: National Reading Conference.

Alvermann, D. E. (2002). Effective literacy instruction for adolescents. Journalof Literacy Research, 34, 2, 189-208.

Atwell, N. (1998). In the middle: New understandings about writing, readingand learning (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers.

Bean, T. (2000). Reading in the content areas: Social constructivist dimensions.In M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal, P.D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbookof reading research, volume III (pp. 629-644). Mahwah, NJ: LawrenceErlbaum Associates.

Berger, P., & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality. GardenCity, NY: Doubleday.

Cuban, L. (1993). How teachers taught: Constancy and change in Americanschools, 1890-1990 (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.

Dillon, D., O'Brien, D., Moje, E., & Stewart, R. (1994). Literacy learning insecondary school science classrooms: A cross-case analysis of threequalitative studies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 345-362.

Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategiesfor qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.

Hinchman, K. A., & Zalewski, P. (2001). Interpreting language in globalstudies: Literacy and learning for two students in one tenth-grade class. InE. Moje & D. O'Brien (Eds.), Constructions of literacy: Studies of teachingand learning literacy in secondary classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: LaurenceEarlbaum Associates.

International Reading Association & National Middle School Association.(2002). Supporting Young Adolescents' Literacy Learning; A Joint PositionStatement of the International Reading Association and the NationalMiddle School Association [Brochure]. Newark, DA: International ReadingAssociation.

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications ineducation (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Moje, E. B. (1996). "I teach students, not subjects": Teacher-studentrelationships as contexts for secondary literacy. Reading ResearchQuarterly, 31, 172-195.

Moore, D. W. (1996). Contexts for literacy in secondary schools. In D. J. Leu,C. K. Kinzer, & K. A. Hinchman (Eds.), Literacies for the 21st century:Research and practice. Forty-fifth Yearbook of the National ReadingConference (pp. 5-46). Chicago: National Reading Conference.

Noden, H. R., & Vacca, R. T. (1994). Whole language in middle and secondary

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

6:02

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Instructional Beliefs and Decisions 89

classrooms. New York: HarperCollins.O'Brien, D. G. (1988). Secondary preservice teachers' resistance to content

reading instruction: A proposal for a broader rationale. In J.E. Readence &R.S. Baldwin (Eds.), Dialogues in literacy research. Thirty-seventhYearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 237-243). Chicago:National Reading Conference.

O'Brien, D., Stewart, R., & Moje, E. (1995). Why content literacy is difficult toinfuse into the secondary school: Complexities of curriculum, pedagogyand school culture. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 442-463.

Readence, J. E., Kile, R. S., & Mallette, M. H. (1998). Secondary teachers'beliefs about literacy: Emerging voices. In D. E. Alvermann, K. A.Hinchman, D. W. Moore, S. F. Phelps, & D. R. Waff (Eds.),Reconceptualizing the literacies in adolescents' lives (pp. 129-148).Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Ruddell, R. B. (1997). Researching the influential teacher: Characteristics,beliefs, strategies, and new research directions. In C.K. Kinzer, K. A.Hinchman, & D. J. Leu (Eds.), Inquiries in literacy theory and practice.Forty-sixth yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 37-53).Chicago: National Reading Conference.

Schwandt, T.A., & Halpern, E.S. (1988) Linking auditing and metaevaluation:enhancing quality in applied research. Newbury Park, CA: SagePublications.

Smith, F.R., & Feathers, K.M. (1983). The role of reading in contentclassrooms: Assumptions vs. reality. Journal of Reading, 27, 262-267.

Sturtevant, E. G. (1996). Lifetime influences on the literacy related instructionalbeliefs of experienced high school history teachers: Two comparative casestudies. Journal of Literacy Research, 28, 221-251.

Sturtevant, E. G, Duling, V. P., & Hall, R. (2001). "I've run a 4,000 personorganization...and it's not nearly this intense": A three-year case study ofcontent literacy in high school mathematics. In E. Moje & D. O'Brien(Eds.), Constructions of literacy: Studies of teaching and learning literacyin secondary classrooms. (pp.77-104). Mahwah, NJ: Laurence EarlbaumAssociates.D

ownl

oade

d by

[U

nive

rsity

of

Wes

tern

Ont

ario

] at

06:

02 1

2 N

ovem

ber

2014