The Capaciousness of No: Affective Refusals as Literacy Practices

© 2020 The Authors. Reading Research Quarterly published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Literacy Association The authors considered the capacious feeling that emerges from saying no to literacy practices, and the affective potential of saying no as a literacy practice. The authors highlight the affective possibilities of saying no to normative understandings of literacy, thinking with a series of vignettes in which children, young people, and teachers refused literacy practices in different ways. The authors use the term capacious to signal possibilities that are as yet unthought: a sense of broadening and opening out through enacting no. The authors examined how attention to affect ruptures humanist logics that inform normative approaches to literacy. Through attention to nonconscious, noncognitive, and transindividual bodily forces and capacities, affect deprivileges the human as the sole agent in an interaction, thus disrupting measurements of who counts as a literate subject and what counts as a literacy event. No is an affective moment. It can signal a pushback, an absence, or a silence. As a theoretical and methodological way of thinking/feeling with literacy, affect proposes problems rather than solutions, countering solution-focused research in which the resistance is to be overcome, co-opted, or solved. Affect operates as a crack or a chink, a tiny ripple, a barely perceivable gesture, that can persist and, in doing so, hold open the possibility for alternative futures

Districts as Institutional Actors in Educational Reform.

Purpose: Intermittent attention to the district as the unit of study has left a void in our understanding of the complexities associated with the ability of district-level leaders to contribute to successful, systemic educational reform. In this article, the authors address this void by providing a narrative synthesis of previous findings, proposing a theory of districts as institutional actors in systemic reform with the goal being to increase achievement and advance equity, and suggesting areas of future research that extend our understanding of districts as institutional actors in educational reform and build our knowledge of reform that improves achievement and advances equity. Proposed Conceptual Argument: The four roles of districts evident in research to date are (a) providing instructional leadership, (b) reorienting the organization, (c) establishing policy coherence, and (d) maintaining an equity focus. These four roles, which are interdependent, variably coupled, and coevolving through a nonlinear process, serve as a foundation for the authors\u27 proposed framework of districts as institutional actors in improving achievement and advancing equity. Implications for Research and Practice: The discontinuous and limited nature of previous research has contributed to the lack of theoretical advancement with regard to a research-based understanding of district reform and thus to a lack of research-based guidance for district leaders to follow to create systemically districts that improve achievement and advance educational equity for all children. The framework presented here contributes toward the resolution of these issues by developing an intentional, coherent, and integrated framework of districts as institutional actors in reform