Search results

Purpose – The purpose of this chapter is to introduce the conceptual and historical genesis of the gradual release of responsibility (GRR) model (Pearson & Gallagher, 1983) which has become one of the most commonly used instructional frameworks for research and professional development in the field of reading and literacy.

Design/Methodology/Approach – This chapter uses a narrative, historical approach to describe the emergence of the model in the work taking place in the late 1970s and early 1980s in reading research and educational theory, particularly at the Center for the Study of Reading at the University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana as carried out by David Pearson, Meg Gallagher, and their colleagues.

Findings – The GRR Model began, in part, in response to the startling findings of Dolores Durkin’s (1978/1979) study of reading comprehension instruction in classrooms which found that little instruction was occurring even while students were completing numerous assignments and question-response activities. Pearson and Gallagher were among those researchers who took seriously the task of developing an instructional model and approach for comprehension strategy instruction that included explicit instruction. They recognized a need for teachers to be responsible for leading and scaffolding instruction, even as they supported learners in moving toward independent application of strategies and independence in reading. Based in the current research in the reading field and the rediscovery of the work of Vygotsky (1978) and the descriptions of scaffolding as coined by Wood, Bruner, and Ross (1976), Pearson and Gallagher developed the model of gradual release. Over time, the model has been adapted by many literacy scholars, applied to curriculum planning, used with teachers for professional development, reprinted numerous times, and with the advent of the Internet, proliferated even further as teachers and educators share their own versions of the model. This chapter introduces readers to the original model and multiple additional representations/iterations of the model that emerged over the past few decades. This chapter also attends to important nuances in the model and to some misconceptions of the instructional model.

Research Limitations/Implications – Despite the popularity of the original GRR model developed by Pearson and Gallagher and the many adaptations of the model by many collaborators and colleagues in literacy – and even beyond – there have been very few publications that have explored the historical and conceptual origins of the model and its staying power.

Practical Implications – This chapter will speak to researchers, teachers, and other educators who use the GRR model to help guide thinking about instruction in reading, writing, and other content areas with children, youth, pre-service teachers, and in-service teachers. This chapter provides a thoughtful discussion of multiple representations of the gradual release process and the nuances of the model in ways that will help to dispel misuse of the model while recognizing its long-standing and sound foundation on established socio-cognitive principles and instructional theories such as those espoused by Jerome Bruner, Lev Vygotsky, Anne Brown, and others.

Originality/Value of Paper – This chapter makes an original contribution to the field in explaining the historical development and theoretical origins of the GRR model by Pearson and Gallagher (1983) and in presenting multiple iterations of the model developed by Pearson and his colleagues in the field.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how injecting opiate users on a methadone treatment programme experience stigma as drug addicts, and as service users in health care and pharmacy settings. In particular the paper explores the rationale for injecting drugs, which the paper is argued to create the conditions for experiencing shame at the micro interactional level, influenced by macro institutional factors. The paper links this issue of being an injecting drug user in treatment to question whether the definition of recovery as “drug free” in the Scottish drug policy document The Road to Recovery (2008) creates the potential for stigma of service users receiving methadone maintenance treatment.

In all, 14 participants, all of whom identified themselves as problem intravenous users of drugs, were recruited from three voluntary sector (third sector) treatment agencies in Scotland. Participants took part in semi-structured interviews; these were recorded, transcribed and qualitatively analysed thematically.

Participants describe feelings of stigma in relation to their drug taking as problem users. Their experiences as recovering opiate injectors raises further challenges in distancing themselves from stigmatised addict identities.

Reasons for injecting rather than smoking heroin were principally financially challenging a widely held belief that users inject primarily for pleasure, which is argued as increasing the potential for stigma. Shame and perceived discrimination was documented before and during drug treatment.

Given the size of the Australian population the regional output of publications is impressive. The Australian National Bibliography, compiled and published by the National Library of Australia, includes in its annual volume a statistical survey of Australian book production. The latest figures available are those for 1976 and a comparative table for the preceding five year period shows a modest rate of growth. The titles of specific Australian interest published overseas are also shown. I have added figures for 1977 based on still unpublished information.

Most of us have some favourite books which are read over and over again, and some might perhaps agree with Schopenhauer that “any book that is at all important ought to be at once read through twice, partly because on a second reading the connexion of its parts will be better understood, and partly because we are not in the same temper and disposition on both readings.” “Every good book,” said Charles Bray, “is worth reading three times at least.” Certainly the pleasure obtained from a really good book can usually be repeated at least once later. The experience of many famous bookmen bears that much out.

The purpose of this paper is to report on the discussions that took place and the key themes raised at a conference focusing on the role of the union equality representative, held at the British Trades Union Congress (TUC), London, in February 2009.

The conference was structured around the contribution of a number of keynote speakers, reports back from project workers and question and answer sessions with delegates. The paper is based on observation, summary notes and conference documents.

The conference demonstrated the potential for a new type of union representative to help address inequality and discrimination in the workplace, with clear examples of early successes reported by unions participating in the project. However, it also highlighted barriers that may still remain until the equality rep has the same legal rights and status accorded to other union representatives in the UK.

This report highlights a key new initiative from the British trade union movement in addressing equality and diversity issues at work through the recruitment, training, organising and ongoing support of a network of specialised union equality representatives.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how school-based sexuality education has had a long and troubled history of exclusionary pedagogical practices that have negatively affected such populations as lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer (LGBTQ) individuals, people of color, and the disabled. The social ecological model is introduced as a way of offering sexuality educators and school administrators a way of thinking more broadly about how to achieve sexual health through sexuality education efforts inside and outside of the school environment.

This paper uses critical analysis of current and historical school-based sexuality education methods and curricula used in the USA. Authors use both academic journals and their own expertise/experience teaching sexuality education in the USA to analyze and critique the sources of sexuality education information and curricula used in schools.

Historically, sexuality education in school settings in the USA has been biased and has generally not offered an educational experience fostering sexual health for all students. There are now welcome signs of reform and movement toward a more inclusive and progressive approach, but there is still some way to go. Sexuality education programs in schools need to be further and fundamentally reformed to do more to foster sexual health particularly for LGBTQ individuals, students of color, and people with disabilities.

This paper offers sexuality educators ways of addressing structural issues within the sexuality education curriculum to better serve all students to increase the quality of their sexual health. Integrating critical pedagogy and anti-oppressive education can increase students’ sexual health along physical, social, emotional, intellectual, and spiritual dimensions.

This paper provides historical analysis along with the identification of structural difficulties in the sexuality education curriculum and proposes both critical pedagogy and anti-oppressive education as ways of addressing sex and relationships education.