You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Back to the Future: Contrasting Scientific Styles in Understanding Reading
Carol McDonald Connor, Christopher Schatschneider, Frederick J. Morrison, Claire Cameron Ponitz, Shayne B. Piasta, Barry J. Fishman, Elizabeth Coyne Crowe, Stephanie Glasney and Phyllis S. Underwood
Vol. 38, No. 7 (Oct., 2009), pp. 537-540
Published by: American Educational Research Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25592158
Page Count: 4
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Educational research, Reading research, Learning, Observational research, Reading instruction, Literacy, Child psychology, Consilience, Classrooms, Research methods
Were these topics helpful?See something inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
In this rejoinder to Willis, Smagorinsky, and Douglas (this issue of Educational Researcher), the authors discuss how many of the points raised by Willis and Smagorinsky regarding their original article, which appeared in the March 2009 issue of Educational Researcher, are concerned less with the methods themselves than with different styles of science. The authors of this rejoinder examine their differing styles of science, using Stanovich's 2003 framework, and call for consilience and the understanding that multiple perspectives and methods are needed to solve the important and perplexing problems that students and teachers will face in the 21st century.
Educational Researcher © 2009 American Educational Research Association