Paradigmatic diversity within the reading research community

Patrick Willard Shannon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Diversity among research paradigms offer us alternative ways to think about and to act upon the apparent crisis in literacy learning and use in the United States. Accordingly, the articles from the Reading Research Quarterly and the Journal of Reading Behavior were classified as examples of Empirical/Analytic, Symbolic, or Critical Science in order to obtain a clearer picture of the types of assumptions which underlie the research most celebrated within the reading research community. Each paradigm includes different goals, different values and social interests, different conceptions of reading and writing, different understanding of causality, and different methods and forms of logic. Results demonstrate that nearly all of the articles employ the assumptions from natural and physical (Empirical/Analytic) science. Discussion centers on possible explanations for and the consequences of this lack of diversity.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)97-107
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Literacy Research
Volume21
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1989

Fingerprint

community
paradigm
reading behavior
science
causality
literacy
Paradigmatics
lack
learning
Values
Research Paradigms
Literacy Learning
Conception
Logic
Causality
Physical
Paradigm

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Education
  • Language and Linguistics
  • Linguistics and Language

Cite this

Shannon, Patrick Willard. / Paradigmatic diversity within the reading research community. In: Journal of Literacy Research. 1989 ; Vol. 21, No. 2. pp. 97-107.
@article{7fe9068e901d44998aaeae6869b6f2c6,
title = "Paradigmatic diversity within the reading research community",
abstract = "Diversity among research paradigms offer us alternative ways to think about and to act upon the apparent crisis in literacy learning and use in the United States. Accordingly, the articles from the Reading Research Quarterly and the Journal of Reading Behavior were classified as examples of Empirical/Analytic, Symbolic, or Critical Science in order to obtain a clearer picture of the types of assumptions which underlie the research most celebrated within the reading research community. Each paradigm includes different goals, different values and social interests, different conceptions of reading and writing, different understanding of causality, and different methods and forms of logic. Results demonstrate that nearly all of the articles employ the assumptions from natural and physical (Empirical/Analytic) science. Discussion centers on possible explanations for and the consequences of this lack of diversity.",
author = "Shannon, {Patrick Willard}",
year = "1989",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/10862968909547663",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "21",
pages = "97--107",
journal = "Journal of Literacy Research",
issn = "1086-296X",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "2",

}

Paradigmatic diversity within the reading research community. / Shannon, Patrick Willard.

In: Journal of Literacy Research, Vol. 21, No. 2, 01.01.1989, p. 97-107.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Paradigmatic diversity within the reading research community

AU - Shannon, Patrick Willard

PY - 1989/1/1

Y1 - 1989/1/1

N2 - Diversity among research paradigms offer us alternative ways to think about and to act upon the apparent crisis in literacy learning and use in the United States. Accordingly, the articles from the Reading Research Quarterly and the Journal of Reading Behavior were classified as examples of Empirical/Analytic, Symbolic, or Critical Science in order to obtain a clearer picture of the types of assumptions which underlie the research most celebrated within the reading research community. Each paradigm includes different goals, different values and social interests, different conceptions of reading and writing, different understanding of causality, and different methods and forms of logic. Results demonstrate that nearly all of the articles employ the assumptions from natural and physical (Empirical/Analytic) science. Discussion centers on possible explanations for and the consequences of this lack of diversity.

AB - Diversity among research paradigms offer us alternative ways to think about and to act upon the apparent crisis in literacy learning and use in the United States. Accordingly, the articles from the Reading Research Quarterly and the Journal of Reading Behavior were classified as examples of Empirical/Analytic, Symbolic, or Critical Science in order to obtain a clearer picture of the types of assumptions which underlie the research most celebrated within the reading research community. Each paradigm includes different goals, different values and social interests, different conceptions of reading and writing, different understanding of causality, and different methods and forms of logic. Results demonstrate that nearly all of the articles employ the assumptions from natural and physical (Empirical/Analytic) science. Discussion centers on possible explanations for and the consequences of this lack of diversity.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84970155040&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84970155040&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/10862968909547663

DO - 10.1080/10862968909547663

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84970155040

VL - 21

SP - 97

EP - 107

JO - Journal of Literacy Research

JF - Journal of Literacy Research

SN - 1086-296X

IS - 2

ER -