Search

The violence of incarceration creates greater responsibility for higher education administrators in supporting students who are in prison. Using focus group data with incarcerated students and formerly incarcerated alumni who participated in or are actively participating in Second Chance Pell, we explore their perceptions and understandings of the Pell Grant and eligibility for the Pell Grant, including lifetime eligibility used limits. Through a lens of Witnessing, we argue that deprivation and censorship of information negatively influence students' access to accurate and timely information about federal student aid and their ability to fully participate in the process. Accordingly, college and university staff have a fiduciary duty to incarcerated applicants and students who are subjected to the information deprivation and censorship that characterizes imprisonment in the U.S.

Antiblackness is a persistent feature of American society with continued implications for the experiences, outcomes, and well-being of Black communities. In the wake of widespread protests against antiblack police brutality and heightened awareness of racial injustices in 2020, federal, state, and local political actors swiftly began a concerted effort to maintain the illusion of racial progress within the United States. These efforts, which we identify as manifestations of what Carol Anderson (2016) describes as White rage, have taken the form of educational censorship policies that have been successfully enacted in at least 18 states. This study interrogates the policy development process of two such censorship policies in Texas and North Dakota. Drawing on Black critical theory and insights from critical policy analysis, we demonstrate the ways that antiblackness was made legible in the policy development process and conclude with recommendations for combatting the further spread of antiblack educational censorship.

According to the ACLU (2005), ". . .at times of national stress -- real or imagined -- First Amendment rights come under enormous pressure." So, too, academic freedom of expression for faculty, staff, and students has become a casualty in the post-9/11 world. Academics were criticized and reprimanded for not being patriotic enough. Using a conceptual framework that includes historical reanalysis, terror management theory, contradictory constructions of patriotism, and electronic discourse, this essay explores the nexus between patriotism and free expression in higher education. We examine historical trends in freedom of expression, analyze three higher education case studies (Chilling Churchill; 9/11 and Middle Eastern Studies; and Shunning Bob Jensen), and suggest why patriotism and censorship go hand and glove in times of national crisis. We end one a cautionary note, expressing concern about how easily words can be turned against academics, the very people who should have the highest level of protection for their words. Nearly 20 years ago, Professor Pat Somers joined the faculty at the University of Texas at Austin bringing her trademark wit and her seemingly indefatigable energy to root out injustice. The paper below represents one such branch of her academic curiosity in response to a perceived injustice to a fellow member of the Academy. This paper was first presented as a draft manuscript at the American Educational Research Association and later submitted to a notable journal. Unfortunately, a second paper on academic freedom was already included in the edition, but the editors encouraged Pat and her team to pursue other publications. And then, as with many things, this paper fell to the side as Pat pursued a new branch of academic curiosity and stewarded her many doctoral students through the dissertation process. As you will note in the dedication, Pat was a deeply curious and pedagogically dynamic member of the Academy and this paper stands at the ready for updating and resubmission. We present it today unadulterated as a testimony to Pat's prescience, her passion and her drive -- a historical glimpse into the early days of a very real threat to academic freedom that persists today.

Despite the recent anti-CRT (Critical Race Theory) movement within U.S. education, teachings of Native histories and perspectives have never been accurately taught, or even taught. From their perspectives as teacher educators in predominantly white institutions (PWI), the authors share counterstories from their existing IRB-approved research projects to explore the impacts of CRT bans on teacher education and how the bans continue to perpetuate systemic erasure of Native perspectives. They review how legislators in the Western U.S. passed anti-CRT laws as well as its impact on teacher education. Using the TribalCrit framework with an emphasis on the first tenet, "colonization [being] endemic to society" (Brayboy, 2005, p. 430), the authors discuss how Native invisibilization and erasure are perpetuated in predominantly white classrooms by silencing Native perspectives in policy making and curriculum implementation, banning Natives in public education, and explicit refusal of white teachers to learn culturally sustaining pedagogies (Paris & Alim, 2017). While erasure and colonization may no longer be explicit U.S. federal policy aims in the education of Native youth, the subjugation of Native rights, cultures, knowledges, and histories remains a contemporary feature of state-sanctioned public education. Telling these stories of structural violence toward Native peoples reflected in the ignorance enforced by mainstream teachers and educational policymakers makes salient the overwhelming need to teach Native history and content at all levels of public education.

To understand the effect of library science coursework on student perceptions of issues related to intellectual freedom, researchers surveyed students at the start and end of their enrollment in a Master of Library Science program. When the results were compared, the percentage of graduating students who indicated that they might rethink purchasing a resource because of non-age-appropriate content and potential parent objection was significantly higher than that of beginning students. The percentage of graduating students who identified sexual content and profanity as potential reasons not to acquire an item was also significantly higher than that of beginning students. On the other hand, graduating students were less likely to classify their own personal views as potential reasons to avoid collecting a title. Finally, a greater percentage of graduating students were uncertain about the appropriateness of restricted collections for potentially controversial items than beginning students. In the second phase of the study, researchers interviewed program graduates with at least five years of professional experience in libraries to ascertain how their work experiences and environments had affected their perception of intellectual freedom, censorship, and the right of access to information regardless of age. These librarians were strong advocates for diverse collections despite increasing external pressure to censor resources, particularly items with LGBTQ content and characters. Most felt it necessary to have some type of restricted collections so that children did not check out material above their grade or age level.

The recent spike in book challenges has put school libraries at the center of heated political debates. I investigate the relationship between local politics and school library collections using data on books with controversial content from a sample of 6,631 public school libraries. Libraries in conservative areas have fewer titles with LGBTQ, race/racism, or abortion content and more Christian fiction and discontinued Dr. Seuss books. This is true even though most libraries have at least some controversial content. State laws that restrict curricular content are negatively related to access to some LGBTQ and race/racism titles. Finally, I present short-term evidence that book challenges in the 2021-22 school year are associated with decreases in the acquisition of new LGBTQ materials.

Since 2020, a network of actors and organizations have united in the implementation of education censorship--posing school-wide implications and impositions on the practice of mental health practitioners. States have outlined race and diversity curricula bans, sports and restroom bans, anti-Diversity, Equity and Inclusion legislation, and laws to undermine Social-Emotional Learning. In this paper, we explore the impact of education censorship and anti-Social-Emotional Learning legislation in relation to school mental health. To discuss the responses and advocacy of school mental health practitioners, we provide an overview of education censorship, noting the scope, prevalence, and evolution of topics to explicate a deeper understanding of the legislative action imposed over the last few years. Next, we delineate three non-exhaustive explanations of the legislation: the evolution of education censorship, education governance and corporate curricula control, and the shift to transformative Social-Emotional Learning. To strategize on how to respond to these trends we provide two alternative response pathways, offer implications, and discuss aspects of advocacy, resistance, and action. In conclusion, we provide a discussion to extend each response pathway, providing additional considerations, implications, and outline calls for action.

Universities in many liberal democracies, such as the US, the UK, or Germany, grapple with a pivotal question: how much room should be given to controversial utterances? On the one side, there are those who advocate for limiting permissible speech on campus to create a safe environment for a diverse student body and counter the mainstreaming of extremist views, particularly by right-wing populists. On the other side, concerns arise about stifling the free exchange of ideas and creating an atmosphere of fear and censorship. The debate is further complicated by participants' occasional uncertainties about the legal norms relevant in the given context, such as when freedom of speech is an issue and when it is not. This paper addresses the question of whether universities should allow actors with primarily political (as opposed to scholarly) agendas to speak on campus. Focusing on German universities, we begin by discussing some of the potentially relevant legal norms. We then propose shifting emphasis from "whether" we should make room for public political discussions on campus to "how" such events must be organized so that they deliver the goods that their advocates emphasize while avoiding the dangers of which critics warn. Drawing on conflict management literature concerned with process design, we make several practical suggestions on how to organize an event that brings political discourse to the university campus without causing harm.

Academic freedom is under threat across the globe and a wave of substantial academic freedom declines affects not only autocracies but also (liberal) democracies. However, although the development of academic freedom has generated scholarly attention, this article presents the first systematic conceptualization and measurement of academic freedom growth and decline episodes. In particular, this article systematically analyzes the development of academic freedom across the globe and shows that global development follows waves of growth and decline. The first growth wave started in the mid-1940s and was succeeded by a second growth wave that started around 1977 and lasted for more than 30 years resulting in the greatest improvement in academic freedom that has been recorded since 1900. However, since 2013, we see an ongoing decline wave in academic freedom. Overall, this article highlights how academic freedom developed over time and across the globe in waves of growth and decline.

Recently, multiple health organizations and advocacy groups have pushed for giving an R-rating for movies depicting tobacco imagery. This study examined several predictors of U.S. adults' opinion toward an R-rating policy for movies depicting cigarette smoking. We used data from the Health Information National Trends Survey (2020 cycle), for a nationally representative sample of 3,865 US adults (aged = 18). The outcome variable was opinion toward an R-rating policy (support, neutral, and oppose) for movies depicting cigarette smoking. A weighted adjusted multinomial logistic regression analysis with comparisons of support versus oppose, support versus neutral, and neutral versus oppose was performed. About 48.2% of respondents were supportive of, 31.1% were neutral toward, and 20.7% were opposed to an R-rating policy. Adults aged 50 to 64 years (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.28, p = 0.008) and =65 years (aOR = 4.54, p <0.001) (vs. 18-34 years) were more likely to support the R-rating policy than oppose it. Non-Hispanic Black respondents (vs. non-Hispanic Whites) were 1.74 times more likely to support than oppose the policy (aOR = 1.74, p = 0.04), whereas adults with a household annual income of US$75,000 or more (vs. <$20,000) and those with moderate (vs. liberal) political viewpoints were more likely to be neutral than oppose the policy. Former and current e-cigarette users (vs. never users) were less likely to support than oppose the policy. Tailored messaging addressing the rationale behind R-rating policy should be directed towards communities based on age, race/ethnicity, household income, e-cigarette usage, and political ideologies.

This article examines how Florida Governor Ron DeSantis' remarks contribute to anti-intellectualism and fuel the pushback against critical race theory (CRT) championed by like-minded conservative Republicans who view its instruction as an affront to society and authentic historical narratives. Dismissing educators and scholars who uphold the teaching of CRT as unpatriotic and denigrating to American society, DeSantis, who has presidential aspirations, has effectively used the issue (along with a number of other matters) to solidify his conservative base fearful of social and hegemonic change. Although CRT is not taught in Florida public schools, similar to other conservative-dominated states which have seized on the teaching of CRT as anathema to their civic principles, DeSantis' thinly veiled attempt to appease right-wing voters is yet another example of Republicans stoking cultural wars designed to energize conservative constituents against what many of them perceive as liberal attacks on their beliefs and values.

Recent attacks on critical race theory (CRT) aim to limit discussion and understanding of race (and its intersection with class, gender, and power). Racial dialogues can be uncomfortable for those who benefit from power, suggesting that resistance to CRT or any discussion of race and power in education is rooted in emotions. This study examines the role of racialized emotions in public policy discourse that surrounds CRT bans in education that have been proposed, and in many cases, passed across the United States. Focusing on four early-adopting states of the bans, the findings reveal how emotionalities of whiteness are tacitly endorsed, invited, and animated within racialized politics, as well as how these emotionalities might be disrupted.

This case study describes how two librarians transformed an international information literacy course by creating a scaffolded open pedagogy experience for students to build transferable skills while exploring how information is produced, disseminated, and interpreted across the world. The authors discuss how we collaborated on the project to incorporate open pedagogy, tools, and strategies to enhance learning. The result was a scaffolded course using open pedagogy to help students engage with global information issues. Using Pressbooks, students published multimedia content exploring topics including global news media, censorship, misinformation, and digital divides. Then students chose to either openly license their work, share it publicly while retaining their copyright, or hide it from public view. Additionally, students used Hypothesis to socially annotate reading assignments outside of class. We reflect on our experience revising this course, what worked and what did not, and how we will adapt the course in the future.

This study documents secondary pre-service teachers (PSTs) who examined Black Lives Matter (BLM)-themed young adult literature (YAL) embedded in contemporary realistic fiction and graphic novels, as part of coursework for an online YAL course required for secondary teacher certification. An analysis of instructor mentoring, online discussions, literature evaluations, and interviews demonstrates enhanced awareness of the need to implement BLM-themed literature, against the grain of rigid curricular requirements and policies that ban critical race theory (CRT) dialogue in numerous school districts. Moreover, PSTs identified these texts as a source to guide CRT to raise awareness of the history and permanence of systemic racism and its influence on contemporary society and the implementation of culturally relevant literature.

Background or Context: Public school library book challenges have garnered ample media attention in recent years as many school districts and advocacy organizations have reported record numbers of book challenges. Book challenges are not a new phenomenon, historically speaking, but they have often illuminated values clashes in communities and raise questions about the rights and freedoms of public school students. Judicial rulings and school district policies that address book challenges could provide insights for many members of school communities (including, but not limited to, school board members, students, parents, and teachers) as they experience challenges, but these aspects of the legal record and their influence on responses to book challenges remains underexamined in scholarship. Purpose, Objective, Research Question, or Focus of Study: The 1982 Supreme Court case "Island Trees School District v. Pico" remains the lasting judicial precedent for interpreting public school students' First Amendment rights as they interact with school library books. We examine the extent to which school district book challenge policies align with court precedent set in "Pico" (1982) and the implications for students' rights and democratic participation during book challenges. Research Design: Drawing on elements of the law and society framework as well as political analysis categories, this study uses qualitative methods to illuminate specific elements of district policies that govern book challenges. Specifically, we examine 29 policies in school districts that experienced a publicly reported book challenge between 2017 and 2021 to understand relationships between school district book challenge policies and the "Pico" (1982) precedent. Conclusions or Recommendations: Our findings reveal ample space between judicial rulings and school district policies we examine. In fact, we find a broader array of relevant actors in book challenge processes than conceived by the courts and raise implications for students' constitutional rights and protections related to who policies indicate may or must be involved in these processes, the settings in which book challenge decisions are made, and the limited roles for public involvement during school library book challenges.

Across the country, effort is underway to restrict discussion, learning, and student support related to race and gender/sexual identity in educational settings, targeting schools with state legislation and politicians' orders; national conservative media and organizations; Board directives; and local actors wielding media-fueled talking points. To date, few analysts have yet explored in detail educators' lived experiences of these multi-level restriction efforts and local responses to them. In this article, we analyze 16 educators' experiences of 2021-22 restriction effort and local responses, with an eye to potential effects on student support and learning. Educators interviewed emphasized their recent experiences with "talking" about race and LGBTQ lives, with many emphasizing threatened punishment by critics for discussing these topics. Context mattered tremendously: While some educators enjoyed support and freedom in race and diversity-related discussion and learning, other educators described intensive restriction effort emanating from local, state, and national pressures. Respondents also indicated that responses from local district leaders, school leaders, and other community members amidst such multi-level restriction efforts were crucial in effecting restriction or protecting the ability to talk and learn. Data from this interview study suggest that the nation may be heading toward two schooling systems: one where children and adults get to talk openly about their diverse society and selves, and one where they are restricted or even prohibited from doing so. The fate of our nation's teaching, learning, and student support is up not only to the nation's teachers, principals, and superintendents, but us all. [This article was written with Reed Kendall, Erika Reece, Abdul-Rehman Issa, and Emilie Homan Brady.]

Labels and epithets relating to gender, sexuality, ethnicity, color, and disability have long been divided into acceptable and offensive categories. This paper examines how differences in culture and historical contexts can cause an issue when translating English media into Arabic by examining how they are subtitled in different contexts. Examples of dialogue that used offensive or inoffensive labels were extracted from different media for the purpose of this study, which included four movies, eight series, and one TV show. The films included "Passing," "Perks of Being a Wallflower," "Gook" and "The Fundamentals of Caring"; the series comprised "Atlanta," "Breaking Bad," "Fresh of the Boat," "Derry Girls," "I Am Not Okay With This," "Dead End Paranormal Park," "Feel Good," and "Degrassi: Next Class"; and the TV show was "Atypical." The examined translations were chosen with the least potential influence of ideological manipulation and censorship; therefore, they were either Netflix or fan translations. Comparing and contrasting the degree of offense in the source and target texts and analyzing the reasoning behind this, it was found that the English and Arabic terms may have similar components but lacked the same connotations for their language speakers. What makes certain labels positive or neutral and others negative is beyond their semantic components; instead, the weight comes from the background and usage of the terms. Direct translations or even keeping the term as it was originally failed at providing the Arabic-speaking audience the same impact as that of the ST since there is still a contextual gap. This also means that having the same referent does not mean that words have the same sense. This suggests that using target language terms that refer to the same group as the source text could result in inadequate translations. The study recommends that further studies be conducted on how translators may purposely manipulate texts for ideological purposes or to meet censorship criteria.

This article explores the benefits and problems of teaching with challenged books in the English language arts classroom. Challenged books initiate important discussions and provide opportunities for students to explore diverse perspectives. Methods for helping teachers and schools prepare for potential challenges are also discussed. The authors present three young adult novels and offer strategies for teaching these novels through a critical lens.

Recent legislation restricting the topics teachers may discuss with students raises the issue of what role the teacher should play in society. We argue that this legislative scrutiny of teachers is symptomatic of an aversion to defining what a teacher is. We argue that, though a reluctance to provide an explicit definition of "teacher" may be warranted for reasons of democracy, academic freedom, and diversity, it also leaves open the possibility of political appropriations of the teacher, some of which may be the antithesis of democracy, academic freedom, and diversity. The role of the teacher thus remains subject to perpetual interrogation and change. A well-theorized and stable definition of the teacher, then, would preclude appropriations of the teacher for political purposes such as cultural assimilation, religious indoctrination, or economic gain. Such a definition would need to be sufficiently broad to be applicable to all teachers in all places, while remaining narrow enough to ward off undemocratic impositions. In other words, the definition must be ontological, structural. We employ the work of Martin Heidegger and Jacques Derrida to evaluate the meaning of "teacher." We first give an example of a legally binding document that provides only negative definitions of the teacher. We then provide an overview of Derrida's theory of iterability and Heidegger's philosophy of language, while utilizing and critiquing an alternative conception of the Derridean teacher offered by Charles Bingham. We argue that the teacher, properly construed, ought to engage in an explicit, intersubjective inquiry into the ontological foundations of existence.

Although children's literature has been challenged and banned for decades, some U.S. states have recently enacted legislation limiting how teachers can address such topics as race, sex, and gender in classrooms, which may influence teachers' selection of literature. To understand this phenomenon, this exploratory concurrent mixed-methods study involved a written children's literature course artifact and survey responses analyzed through critical literacy and self-censorship frameworks. Findings indicate that preservice teachers reported avoiding conversations about gender and gender identity more often than those about sexual orientation or race. Further, despite legislative changes, participants mostly reported self-censoring due to lack of pedagogical knowledge, lack of policy knowledge, and fear of institutional sanctions, which are long-standing reasons for self-censorship rather than new ones. Comparatively, they self-reported little desire to promote the dominant political ideology. This research indicates that topic-restrictive legislation can influence classroom practice even when teachers do not share the ideology behind such legislation.

Using a mixed-methods approach, this study uses an Internet survey to investigate the curricular freedom reported by Prekindergarten through Grade 8 teachers in the United States concerning the inclusion of children's literature into their classrooms and curriculum, particularly in the current sociopolitical climate. Drawing upon Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory, survey responses were analyzed based on the four levels of the ecological model (micro, meso, exo, and macro systems). To account for regional variations existing at the sociopolitical macro level, the study's findings were organized according to the five geographical regions of the United States: Midwest, Northeast, Southeast, Southwest, and West. Analysis indicated distinct variation in the patterns of the responses across the geographical regions, aligned with the dominant political ideology of their state. Responses of teachers from the Northeast and West were heavily influenced by events and experiences at the national level, whereas teachers from the Southeast and Southwest focused on matters concerning individual, local, and state issues. Teachers from the Midwest, a politically mixed region, least frequently commented on issues related to censorship, a trend noted in the other four regions.

This issue's Featured Article is bold! Readers are challenged to be advocates with loud voices, ready to push back on current legislation intended to silence voices in our classrooms and on our bookshelves. The author provides readers with an overview of laws and legislation currently impacting teachers and provides ideas for what you, as an educator, can do as a response. This includes innovative ideas for what reading and thinking can look like, proposing some new "literary laws" that you might apply in the face of censorship efforts that affect your teaching life.

Teachers want their students to have access to the books they need to fall in love with reading, which means having classroom and school libraries stocked with a wide variety of books. But as English teachers are well aware, Texas leads the nation in book challenges and bans. This article defines and describes the different forms of censorship and includes extensive information and resources to support classroom teachers as they prepare for and respond to book challenges, including building allies and staying in tune with organizations that provide support. The authors conclude by describing how book challenges are the current reality and that we must work toward and remain hopeful for a future in which diverse classroom libraries abound.

Educators face a reality that was unimaginable a few years ago: inclusivity is now a dirty word; anti-racist actions are labelled discrimination and lies have become a convenient substitute for facts, reality, logic, and decency. It is, indeed, dystopian and mirrors a worldwide trend towards authoritarianism (McNeill 2023). In the USA, Thomas Jefferson's vision of a vibrant and accessible public education for rich and poor as the fundamental safeguard of a fledgling American democracy is under attack (Jewett 1997). The weapon of choice: laws and policies that erode the democratic foundations and commitments of public education. Foregrounding House Bill 7 (HB7), the "Individual Freedom Act" (2022) nicknamed as the 'Stop-WOKE' [Wrongs to Our Kids and Employees] Act, this essay traces the intent and tactics underlying this legislative agenda to lay the groundwork for how one responds -- individually, collectively and institutionally -- in these challenging contexts.

Numerous states have attempted to enact sweeping curricular bans targeting Critical Race Theory (CRT) to prevent educators from teaching content that challenges the white-Eurocentric curriculum of American schooling. In this paper, we build on arguments that curricular bans are not new to education, nor is the resistance enacted by educators to curricular bans. Through centering how educators in three different states are navigating the various tightness of spaces in their resistance, we look to provide a pathway forward for those looking to enact resistance to current (and future) curricular bans. This analysis contributes to how teacher educators and educational foundations scholars can think about teacher activism and resistances as pedagogical praxis.

Visual representations (and their censorship) are carriers of messages and are powerful tools to invoke discourses. Visuals are not just supplements to written text; rather, these can be read independently as the primary text and are crucial to scientific communication, particularly in life sciences. This paper aims to investigate various textbook depictions of genitalia and examine how ideologies are manifested through visuals in relation to the human body. Here we try to unpack the visual representations of genitalia in different discursive spaces within Indian science textbooks from 6th to 12th grade. We position our study within the hermeneutic methodological landscape and apply the socio-semiotic analytic framework developed by Serafini [Serafini, Frank. 2010. "Reading Multimodal Texts: Perceptual, Structural and Ideological Perspectives." "Children's Literature in Education" 41 (2): 85-104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10583-010-9100-5], consisting of three analytic perspectives: perceptual, structural, and ideological, to interpret the visual images of genitalia and the ideological matrix that produced these images. Our analysis of textbooks' portrayal reveals a tendency to censor or obscure genital depictions. The paper discusses the potential effects of these representations on students' health and relationships with their bodies and argues that they must engage in dialogue with discourses challenging normative understandings of the body and remain open to change.

Divisive Concepts Laws (DCL) are legislative acts and state and local policies that restrict teaching, learning, and professional development in PK- 20 education regarding race, gender, sexuality, and history. In November 2022, we surveyed NAfME members to ascertain the perceived impacts of DCL on music educators, music teacher educators, and music education. Respondents (N = 318) held mixed views. Many described restricted curriculum, self-censorship, inconsistent interpretations and implementation processes, fear about their own identities becoming an issue, and challenges with student relationships. In contrast, about half reported no impacts from DCL, for reasons including living in a place that does not have them, agreeing with the laws, or refusing to acquiesce to the laws. Respondents also demonstrated resistance to the survey and stances we coded as homophobic and/or transphobic. We focused our discussion of these findings on analyzing discourses evident in survey responses, which included use of euphemisms, anti-political rhetoric, de facto DCL, cognitive dissonance, and anti-queer discourses. DCL affect music students, educators and teacher educators across the United States, and they need better information, language, and strategies for managing DCL impacts.

Purpose: From book challenges to anti-critical race theory and anti-lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and questioning legislation, US English teachers have been on the receiving end of a considerable amount of far-right conservative pushback. This study aims to explore the effects of conservative pushback on individual English teachers and their classroom practice. What pushbacks have individual English teachers faced? How has pushback impacted their teaching? What strategies have they developed for navigating pushback? Design/methodology/approach: This qualitative study explores secondary English teachers' reported experiences with conservative backlash as reported in 15 semi-structured interviews conducted between May 2022 and August 2023. Findings: Participants reported feeling the pressure of increased levels of pushback, and many reported censoring their book selections to avoid additional public scrutiny. At the same time, they also described a range of strategies they have developed for protecting themselves and their practice, such as codifying curriculum, increasing transparency, formalizing review processes for challenging books and strengthening their resolve to resist. Originality/value: This study offers a timely window on a pressing problem affecting the daily practice of English teachers in the USA.

We advocate for the reading of young adult literature (YAL) as a means for justice-oriented education, and we also recognize how the recent surge in challenges to youth-centered texts in the U.S. attempts to limit such work in classrooms. In response, we wondered about the ways in which YAL offers pathways for critically framing and situating global concerns, such as censorship, in time and space as a means of entering public conversations on issues. In this article, we offer waypoints as a critical reading framework for approaching sociopolitical issues in YAL as gateways for shifts in perspectives, orientations, and actions towards justice. We argue that such a framework for approaching YAL can help further unravel the social issues critical literacy aims to name and act on by locating topics in relation to politics and power.

As of May 2022, 42 state legislatures had introduced bills that would limit how (and whether) teachers can address inequities based on race, gender, and other marginalized identities. At the same time, book bans are becoming increasingly common across the country. Given the importance of providing children opportunities to critically engage with texts from a variety of perspectives and representing a diversity of experiences, teachers should use picturebooks to facilitate critical discussions with children as young as kindergarten. This study reports findings from an activity in which K-8 in-service teachers used an equity-focused text analysis tool to critically analyze the picturebook "Marisol McDonald doesn't match/Marisol McDonald no combina." I conducted thematic analysis on a key component of critical literacy teachers addressed--identifying stereotypes the author and illustrator both disrupt and perpetuate in this book. This work helps us understand how teachers themselves learn to engage in critical analysis of picturebooks.

Books for and in schools are commodities. They form a central part of the political economy of publishing. They are also, profoundly, sites of cultural and ideological conflict. While always there, there are periods when these economic and ideological conflicts are even more powerful. This is just such a time. This reality asks us to also examine places in school buildings that might (often wrongly) seem to some people to be "less important." Among these places is the school library as a resource, a teaching device, an access point to things seen as controversial, a mirror of conflicts and economic and political transformations, and for many students, at times a sanctuary. American Public School Librarianship: A History provides us with a richly sourced account of the development of a key pedagogic site in schools and of many of the personal, institutional, and political reasons why they do-and do not do-certain things.

The annual "What's Hot in Literacy" survey uncovers the current focal points within literacy education. A panel of twenty-five literacy leaders participated and engaged in interviews to identify the most and least emphasized literacy topics, as well as those deserving more attention. The findings for 2023 spotlight several topics categorized as "very hot," including dyslexia and other specific learning disabilities, early literacy, phonics/phonemic awareness, and social justice/equity/anti-racism in literacy. The topics of the science of reading and structured literacy emerged as "extremely hot," and the sole topic ranked as "should not be hot" for the 2023 survey cycle. Assessing these outcomes and their potential impacts on literacy education holds importance for educators across all levels.

Purpose: Artificial intelligence (AI) has become increasingly important and influential in reading and writing. The influx of social media digital spaces, like TikTok, has also shifted the ways multimodal composition takes place alongside AI. This study aims to argue that within spaces like TikTok, human composers must attend to the ways they write for, with and against the AI-powered algorithm. Design/methodology/approach: Data collection was drawn from a larger study on #BookTok (the TikTok subcommunity for readers) that included semi-structured interviews including watching and reflecting on a TikTok they created. The authors grounded this study in critical posthumanist literacies to analyze and open code five #BookTok content creators' interview transcripts. Using axial coding, authors collaboratively determined three overarching and entangled themes: writing for, with and against. Findings: Findings highlight the nuanced ways #BookTokers consider the AI algorithm in their compositional choices, namely, in the ways how they want to disseminate their videos to a larger audience or more niche-focused community. Throughout the interviews, participants revealed how the AI algorithm was situated differently as both audience member, co-author and censor. Originality/value: This study is grounded in critical posthumanist literacies and explores composition as a joint accomplishment between humans and machines. The authors argued that it is necessary to expand our human-centered notions of what it means to write for an audience, to co-author and to resist censorship or gatekeeping.

This article offers a current perspective on George Orwell's 1984 (1949) utopian society in the context of 2022 and implications for higher education and society in the United States. Societies have experienced numerous issues portrayed in 1984 including power struggles and censorship, and identity politics and cancel culture are impeding an open discussion of ideas. Higher education has been considered a bastion of intellectual inquiry and spirited discussions, where faculty members are in a position of authority in the classroom. This authority can influence the learning environment and experiences; however, both faculty and students are feeling threats from various sectors both internally and externally. To address these matters, findings from various reports and studies indicate a need for greater diversity in perspectives on critical issues in academia, which could impact the preparation and the nature of learning experiences provided for students.

A plethora of studies on the decentering and decolonializing knowledge construction and production in global academic writing and publishing has ineluctably cast important light on how Euro-Western-centric hegemonic knowledge is preserved and perpetuated in the academia, often leading to detrimental consequences for non-Anglophones researchers and writers. While laudable, the insights generated from such studies need to be further accentuated from another look - 'the politics of production of nonexistence' proposed initially by Boaventura de Sousa Santos. This article will first argue that undergirded this politics are the notions of Eurocentricism and metonymic reason. Then, using samples of some of the reviewers' comments on the author's own manuscripts, this article will untangle how the politics of the production of nonexistence has been perpetuated and even sustained in academic writing and publishing practices primarily through a mode of the monoculture of rigor of knowledge. In so doing, this study further expands, and hence enriches valuable findings derived from the previous studies on hegemonic knowledge decoloniality.