The Teaching of Children's Poetry
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE TEACHING OF CHILDREN’S POETRY: AN EXPLORATION OF INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES IN UNIVERSITY COURSES OF CHILDREN’S LITERATURE, ENGLISH, LANGUAGE ARTS, AND READING EDUCATION June Marie Jacko, B.A., B.S., M.E.T. Dissertation Prepared for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPY UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS December 2004 APPROVED: M. Jean Greenlaw, Major Professor Herman Totten, Minor Professor Nora White, Committee Member Leslie Patterson, Committee Member Robin Henson, Committee Member Alexandra Leavell, Reading Program Coordinator M. Jean Keller, Dean of the College of Education Sandra L. Terrell, Dean of the Robert B. Toulouse School of Graduate Studies Jacko, June Marie, The Teaching of Children’s Poetry: An Exploration of Instructional Practices in University Courses of Children’s Literature, English, Language Arts, and Reading Education. Doctor of Philosophy (Reading Education), December 2004, 225 pages, 29 tables, references, 96 titles. There are no studies which focus on the instructional practices employed in the teaching of children’s poetry at the university level. This project aimed to describe the instructional practices utilized in the teaching of children’s poetry at universities across the United States. Limited to the practices of the university professors and adjunct instructors who were members of the Children’s Literature Assembly (CLA) of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) at the time of this study, this investigation attempted to ascertain the general perceptions of poetry held by these university professors and adjunct instructors, their in-class instructional practices, and the types of poetry assignments given. Additionally, this study revealed both the poets typically highlighted and the goals held by professors and instructors in courses of children’s literature, English, language arts, library science, and reading education. A mixed-methods design provided the framework for the descriptive data gleaned from the Poetry Use Survey. Quantitative data analysis yielded descriptive statistical data (means, standard deviations, ranges, percentages). Qualitative data analysis (manual and computer-assisted techniques) yielded categories and frequencies of response. Major findings included respondents’: (a) belief that the teaching of poetry was important, (b) general disagreement for single, “correct” interpretations of poetry and general agreement in support of multiple interpretations, (c) general disagreement whether current curricular demands have prevented or impaired their teaching of poetry, (d) high frequency of reading poetry out loud in class, (e) emphasis on inclusion of award-winning poets in assignments, (f) instructional emphasis on variety and breadth in the selection of poets highlighted in a particular course, (g) goals for inclusion of poetry centered on pedagogical issues (e.g., frequent use, appreciation of craft; writing models; thematic uses) in language arts and across content areas. Copyright 2004 by June Marie Jacko ii DEDICATION For Joan: Who reminded us that love is life’s greatest gift. And, for Janice: Whose gift of life offered hope. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Jerome Bruner acknowledges, “No one creates in a vacuum.” This was well illustrated by the people mentioned here—their many voices, their intersecting and (sometimes) competing influences, and, most of all, their abundant support and strong encouragement. Each of these people, in one way or another, contributed to the crafting of this document. I am profoundly grateful to the following people: For Joe, my husband: who encouraged me to pursue a doctorate (and then endured seven years of it). Your model of high-functioning continues to challenge and stretch me. I appreciate all you have done. For David and Kevin, my boys: who have taught me perspective, who have thwarted all attempts at perfection in parenting, and who have taught me to laugh, cry, and love more than I thought possible—even (and especially) through the most difficult and demanding days of this doctoral experience. You have brought me great joy. For Joseph and Frances Barber, my parents: who instilled in me a sense of duty, a strong work ethic, and a solid spiritual foundation. I am grateful for the many untold sacrifices you have made on my behalf. For Janice, Joan, Jean, Judy, and Joe, my siblings: who have shaped my drive to succeed…the littlest sister just trying to keep up. Thank you for supporting my efforts to reach and grow and mature. For Dr. M. Jean Greenlaw, my major professor: whose keen sense of what was essential steered my course through peaceful--and turbulent--waters. I am profoundly grateful for your guidance, your listening ear, and your voice of reason. For Dr. Herman Totten, my minor professor: whose seasoned expertise, bright enthusiasm, and unfailing kindness were so appreciated. Thank you for taking part in this endeavor, despite the rigorous demands of your schedule. For Dr. Robin Henson, a committee member: whose assistance with the development of this study was peppered by colorful bits of verse, witty discourse, and solid advice. I have appreciated and greatly valued your participation and guidance. For Dr. Leslie Patterson, a committee member: whose global perspective and quiet encouragement never failed to challenge and expand my thinking. You have been a powerful influence in my professional development. Thank you. iv For Dr. Nora White, a committee member: whose qualitative expertise challenged me to reach further, understand more, and continually situate my thinking and research “at the paradigm level.” I am grateful for your contribution to this committee and to my emerging role as researcher. For Drs. Lettie Albright, Betty Carter, Leslie Patterson, Kathleen Tice, and Sylvia Vardell: for expert assistance, advice, and guidance in the development of the survey created for this study. I am beholden to each of you for your significant contributions to this project. For Dr. Nancy Hadaway: for assistance in securing the sample for this study and for recognizing my potential way back when. Thank you. For President Shirley Ernst and Members of the Children’s Literature Assembly: for your generous response—in words, in numbers, in spirit—to the survey that became the centerpiece of this study. You have opened new doors for the advancement of research in children’s poetry. It has been my privilege to represent your voices in this piece. For Janet Wong, poet: for creating a poem specifically for use in this dissertation. For Jill Kleister, UNT Graduate Reader: for patience with my impatience and tremendous assistance in formatting this document. For Jane Gaudet: for managing the printing, mailing, and retrieval of this survey. I appreciated the calm professionalism and enthusiastic interest you sustained throughout this project. For Kathy Pole: whose generous assistance in data analysis allowed for the agony and the ecstasy of denuding Nudist. I admired the persistence of your inquiries into, and your genuine desire to become invested in, data that was completely removed from your own doctoral work. For Angela Nelson: who maintained the sample database and fielded pedestrian computer questions while juggling twins, a preschooler, and a dog. Thank you. For Kathy Wilde: whose gentle and consistent hand shepherded my boys with love, kindness, prayer (and a meal or two) through the long days (and nights) of residency and the demanding days of dissertation writing. I will always treasure the patient and stable influence you have provided in our lives. For the Hall and Schwab Families, our Texas “Friends Like Family”: for your encouragement, interest, and kindness throughout this process. For Sylvia Vardell: whose advice, counsel, humor, and TIRELESS support--via email pep-talks (complete with suggested “to-do” lists), phone calls, and chicken and artichoke lunches--always brought about fresh perspectives, newfound respect, and deep appreciation. I am honored to call you my mentor and my friend. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .............................................................................................iv LIST OF TABLES.........................................................................................................vii LIST OF POEMS...........................................................................................................ix Chapter I. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 1 II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ........................................................... 18 III. METHOD ............................................................................................... 69 IV. RESULTS .............................................................................................. 85 V. DISCUSSION ...................................................................................... 170 APPENDICES ........................................................................................................... 194 REFERENCES.......................................................................................................... 213 vi LIST OF TABLES Page 1. Summary of Analysis Procedures..................................................................... 84 2. Total Surveys Returned.................................................................................... 89 3. Eligible Surveys................................................................................................ 90 4. Breakdown of Other Category for Eligible Surveys..........................................