Research-based Policy Statements on Adolescent Literacy

• Students who become “fully literate” through articulating meaning in discussion-based classes demonstrate higher levels of achievement than peers who do not participate in discussions.
(Applebee et al., 2003)

• Effective teachers portray literacy learning as an on-going process, and they acknowledge students’ non-school literacy practices.
 (Alvermann, 2001; Sturtevant & Linek, 2003)

• Students whose teachers participate in sustained professional development read better than those with less well-prepared teachers.
( Fisher, 2001)

• Attending to student preference in creating classroom libraries and selecting reading material enhances motivation, and this, in turn, increases achievement. (Worthy et al., 1999)

• School-based literacy coaches prepare teachers to use instructional practices that boost student achievement in reading.
(Russo, 2004)

Alvermann, D.E. (2001). Effective literacy instruction for adolescents.  Executive
Summary and Paper Commissioned by the National Reading Conference.  Chicago, IL: National Reading Conference.
www.nrconline.org/publications/alverwhite2.pdf

Applebee, A. Langer, J . Nystrand, M. and Gamoran, A. (2003). Discussion-based
approaches to developing understanding:  Classroom instruction and student
performance in middle and high school English.  American Educational Research
Journal 40 (3), 685-730.

Fisher, D. (2001). We’re moving on up: Creating a schoolwide literacy effort in an urban high school.  Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 45 (2), 92-101.

Sturtevant, E.G.& Linek, W.M. (2003). The instructional beliefs and decisions of middle and secondary teachers who successfully blend literacy and content. Reading Research & Instruction 43 (1), 74-90.

Russo, A. (2004). School-based coaching. Harvard Education Letter July/August 1-6.

Worthy, J. Moorman, M. & Turner, M. (1999). What Johnny likes to read is hard to find in schools.  Reading Research Quarterly, 34, 12-27.