Elementary teachers’ perspectives on science of reading mandates: a Q methodology study of autonomy and cultural responsiveness

This study examines elementary teachers’ perspectives on Science of Reading (SoR) mandates, with particular attention to tensions between instructional autonomy and cultural responsiveness. Using Q methodology, 26 elementary literacy teachers sorted 48 statements reflecting beliefs about literacy instruction, assessment, and equity. Factor analysis with varimax rotation yielded 3 distinct factors, with significant loading set at ± 0.37 (p < .01). The resulting factor structures reveal differentiated viewpoints regarding the perceived benefits and constraints of SoR-aligned policies. While some teachers emphasized the value of structured, skills-based instruction for supporting early reading development, others foregrounded concerns about reduced professional autonomy and the marginalization of culturally responsive and contextually grounded practices. Post-sort interviews were analyzed alongside factor arrays to support interpretation and to clarify how teachers articulated the reasoning underlying their rankings. The findings indicate that teachers’ responses to SoR mandates are not uniformly oppositional or compliant but reflect nuanced negotiations among policy expectations, professional judgment, and commitments to equity. By integrating quantitative patterning with qualitative interpretation, this study contributes methodologically to Q research in education and substantively to ongoing debates about prescriptive literacy reforms and culturally responsive teaching.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Quality & Quantity
Published
2026-03-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-026-02689-y
Primary Topic
Q Methodology Applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Elementary teachers’ perspectives on science of reading mandates: a Q methodology study of autonomy and cultural responsiveness

Gui Ying Annie Yang-Heim
Quality & Quantity
Q Methodology Applications
article

Elementary teachers’ perspectives on science of reading mandates: a Q methodology study of autonomy and cultural responsiveness

Gui Ying Annie Yang-Heim
article en

Abstract

This study examines elementary teachers’ perspectives on Science of Reading (SoR) mandates, with particular attention to tensions between instructional autonomy and cultural responsiveness. Using Q methodology, 26 elementary literacy teachers sorted 48 statements reflecting beliefs about literacy instruction, assessment, and equity. Factor analysis with varimax rotation yielded 3 distinct factors, with significant loading set at ± 0.37 (p < .01). The resulting factor structures reveal differentiated viewpoints regarding the perceived benefits and constraints of SoR-aligned policies. While some teachers emphasized the value of structured, skills-based instruction for supporting early reading development, others foregrounded concerns about reduced professional autonomy and the marginalization of culturally responsive and contextually grounded practices. Post-sort interviews were analyzed alongside factor arrays to support interpretation and to clarify how teachers articulated the reasoning underlying their rankings. The findings indicate that teachers’ responses to SoR mandates are not uniformly oppositional or compliant but reflect nuanced negotiations among policy expectations, professional judgment, and commitments to equity. By integrating quantitative patterning with qualitative interpretation, this study contributes methodologically to Q research in education and substantively to ongoing debates about prescriptive literacy reforms and culturally responsive teaching.

Quality & Quantity
Illinois State University (US)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 27%
Q Methodology Applications
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.