Hello Muchativugwa Liberty Hove,

Notably, professional teachers and educational experts conduct their own investigations concerning literacy to identify  and solve problems by  analyzing and interpreting the targeted results  related to their classrooms and schools. This process of double loop learning in which the application of theories in real practice provides  practitioners with interesting feedback about the utility and efficacy of the said theories has become a powerful tool  for professional and identity development and is an index of high quality teaching. As such,  research and practice are essential parts of professional development.  More specifically, an ongoing  evaluation of research findings in teaching practices  is a prerequisite to ensuring the effectiveness of instruction because it helps teachers to know what they are using benefits the teaching and learning processes and is in line with the desired outcomes. Therefore, as you have rightly observed, research findings in literacies should be taken seriously because the integration of theory and practice is the backbone of teachers' professional competence in the post-method era.

Best of luck,

R. Biria

I agree with Dr.Reza

Good Morning,

I agree that the utilization of research findings in literacy is vitally important for the classroom and the success of teacher and students alike.  Unfortunately, it is not that simple.  What kinds of research data are you talking about?  I have found both as a classroom teacher (back in the late 1970s and early 1980s) and as a researcher and university professor that there is often a conflict regarding research findings in literacy.  Much of the work done on "code-based" approaches to literacy and literacy learning are in conflict with work done on "meaning-based" approaches.  This is due to the theoretical starting point one has and the research methodologies employed.  Experimental designs are typically oriented to behavioristic theoretical orientations to learning and the results...because of how experimental studies are designed...are often not oriented to authentic reading and writing.  For this reason, many people dealing with literacy research have opted for more qualitative research designs that enable the methodologies to be more oriented to the complexities of this meaning-making system and are more oriented to the actual teaching and learning of complex social phenomena like literacy in the classroom.  I have attached an article and a chapter that we have written about this.  Consequently, teachers often DO NOT implement research findings because the research results and data are not really relevant to he actual work in the classroom but only to the narrow experimental design. To directly answer your question, I find that teachers in the United States predominately DO NOT employ research findings in the classroom...Frankly, many simply use a programmed approach that has been selected (often for economic and non- pedagogical reasons) that are selected by their school districts. 

Dear Jack

I really appreciate the materials attached for my perusal and shall add my views as soon a s I get through the reading. As you rightly preface in this note, not many teachers of reading and writing tap on the strategies and recommendations of researchers in literacies in their pedagogic practices but because of the tyranny of examinations and assessment boards rely too heavily on programmed approaches privileged in textbooks and school boards.

Professor Liberty,

I believe we should first consider: how (often)  is research seen as a part of  the teaching process. Should it be? I definitely think it should! 

I´d like to address the question you posed regarding  scenarios where the association teacher + research is actually prevented. 

Regarding such prevention, one question resonates:  how many teachers develop  or are institutionally encouraged/supported to develop this sense of critically examinig his/her own classrooms/ institutions in terms of literacy levels, practices and theoretical affiliation?

From the point of view of Discourse, being a researcher , for example, in a institution which seeks to prevent teacher´s autonomy and possibilities of transgressing institutional recommendation (imposition) may be a problem. Institutions that 'block' or seek to prevent teacher´s autonomy are committed to a kind of prefab, commodified, commercial  and "efficient"  ( in a Chaplin´s "Morden Times" fashion) line of literacy research and development that first blocks, enframes  and disciplines the teacher him/herself and, hence, his/her possibilities of being open to get in touch with research and teaching-learing refinement. They work torwards a pre-defined goal. Failure and success are seen as 'clearly identifiable' from the start. No research is needed. "It´s not the teacher´s role", this configuration says.

That´s how the institutional blockage seems to operate while limiting teacher´s possibilities of getting in touch and generating or questioning research fidings. 

I think my post took a different  perspective on the topic and, consequently, a different direction but I hope you may find it useful to continue the debate somehow.

All the best!