Recognition of boys as readers through a social justice lens

Abstract

This paper considers whether societal changes are making space for some working-class boys to go against the grain and foster positive reader identities. Drawing on interviews with 30 Australian boys about their experiences at school, Nancy Fraser's social justice framework is used to explore their parity of participation as readers. Responses raise questions about the need for recognition of boys as readers across demographics and more equitable redistribution of reading resources to the most economically marginalised educational contexts. Boys' narratives also challenge homogeneous images of boy/girl reading preferences that are often represented in literacy policies. The article explores nuances in how working-class boys conceive of themselves as readers within their local communities amidst global shifts in the post-industrial era. It also positions Fraser's social justice framework as a transferable lens for situated analysis that educators interested in enhancing parity of participation for marginalised students can draw upon.

Disrupting the 'boys don't read' discourse: Primary school boys wholovereading fiction

“…Stereotypical views in educational policies that filter into the classroom (National Literacy Trust, 2012) may work against opportunities in the classroom to expand boys'-particularly working-class boys'-repertoires of experience as readers and to engage in reading fiction for pleasure (Cremin et al, 2009;Scholes, 2018bScholes, , 2020. Jerrim and Moss's (2019) analysis of the 'fiction effect' is relevant here, as limiting ideas about boys as readers may have a compounding effect on boys' engagement and achievement in reading.…”

“…Performative policy-led literacy reforms have also shaped the space in which reading at school is understood, with interest in students' reading outcomes voiced in terms of efficacy, levels of skill and the most efficient teaching method to secure the best results (Comber, 2012;Moss, 2012). In this discursive landscape, education policy tends to prioritise curriculum choices and pedagogies that have a strong focus on achieving accountabilities, such as benchmarks on standardised tests (Comber, 2013;Scholes, 2020). The result is a thinning out of pedagogies, curricula and experiences of education, with a focus on reading abilities that can be segmented, taught and tested (Comber & Nixon, 2009;Comber, 2012;Moss, 2012;Cormack & Comber, 2013;Scholes, 2020).…”

“…In this discursive landscape, education policy tends to prioritise curriculum choices and pedagogies that have a strong focus on achieving accountabilities, such as benchmarks on standardised tests (Comber, 2013;Scholes, 2020). The result is a thinning out of pedagogies, curricula and experiences of education, with a focus on reading abilities that can be segmented, taught and tested (Comber & Nixon, 2009;Comber, 2012;Moss, 2012;Cormack & Comber, 2013;Scholes, 2020). As students are sorted and categorised as (non)readers through classroom practices, providing limited positions, particularly for economically marginalised boys (Moss, 2012), the significance of different attitudes towards reading and preferences is often overlooked.…”

“…As we discuss below, this is highly problematic for boys who would rather not read in class if they do not have access to their preferred choices and the books they love to read. Issues of access to desired reading materials are also complicated by economic disadvantage when family and school resources are more limited (Scholes, 2020).…”

Reading Skill among Malaysian ESL Lower Secondary Students: Which Girls and Which Boys are Achieving and Underachieving?

“…To address the problem of underachievement and disengagement with learning, particularly with regard to boys, positive actions have been taken, particularly by developed countries. In Australia and the United Kingdom, a considerable amount of research and official inquiries at the national level have been conducted to empirically ascertain the factors that are associated with underachievement and lack of retention in school (see Collins et al, 2000;Cortis & Newmarch, 2000;Lloyd, 2011;Scholes, 2020). Based on the findings of these studies and inquiries, nation-wide intervention initiatives have been formulated to address this predicament.…”