[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-590192-105":59,"doc-detail-590192-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","teachers-self-censorship-of-childrens-literature-in-texas-whats-legislation-got-to-do-with-it","Teachers’ Self-Censorship of Children’s Literature in Texas - What’s Legislation Got to Do With It?","","Schools influence reading by selecting texts, yet teachers decide which materials to use and how. This exploratory concurrent mixed-methods study examines how recent Texas legislation limiting classroom discussion of race, sex, and gender affects teachers’ self-censorship when engaging children’s literature. Using a children’s literature course artifact and survey responses, results show preservice teachers avoided gender and gender-identity conversations more often than sexuality or race topics, citing limited pedagogical and policy knowledge and fear of institutional sanctions.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/teachers-self-censorship-of-childrens-literature-in-texas-whats-legislation-got-to-do-with-it/590192/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/teachers-self-censorship-of-childrens-literature-in-texas-whats-legislation-got-to-do-with-it/590192.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Adam","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":34},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What does the study investigate about teachers’ self-censorship?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"The study examines what topics preservice teachers report avoiding in a state with topic-restrictive legislation and how those avoided topics align with what legislation governs.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"What evidence does the research use to reach its findings?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"It uses an exploratory concurrent mixed-methods design, analyzing a written children’s literature course artifact and survey responses.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"Which topic areas did preservice teachers avoid most, according to the findings?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"Preservice teachers reported avoiding conversations about gender and gender identity more often than conversations about sexual orientation or race.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},590192,1792188635,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":34,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":36,"preview_page_count":4},1374404737137,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_155a257f0dc6eb9ab79c44ca47cae57d","AERA Open  \nJanuary-December 2023, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 1–16 DOI: 10. 1177/23328584231201814  \nArticle reuse guidelines: [sagepub.com/journals-permissions](sagepub.com/journals-permissions)[ ](sagepub.com/journals-permissions)© The Author(s) 2023. [https://journals.sagepub.com/home/ero](https://journals.sagepub.com/home/ero)  \nTeachers’ Self-Censorship of Children’s Literature in Texas—What’s Legislation Got to Do With It?  \nCatherine Lammert  \nTexas Tech University  \nVickie C. Godfrey  \nEastern Kentucky University  \nAlthough 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.  \nKeywords: censorship, children’s literature, gender studies, LGBTQIA+, literature, mixed methods, preservice teacher education, race, teacher context  \nIntroduction  \nSchools carefully select many of the texts used for teaching reading, but teachers still make decisions about which texts to incorporate and how (Conradi-Smith et al., 2022) . For decades, teacher educators have emphasized the importance of selecting literature that foregrounds authentic representations of individuals with marginalized identities (Crisp et al., 2016; Flores et al., 2019) . Examinations of how successful this emphasis has been in shaping teachers’practices (e.g., Angleton, 2021; Voelker, 2013) suggest limited incorporation of this literature. As Pace (2019) stated, centering marginalized voices “is both urgent and risky, especially in divided societies”(p. 228) . Despite calls for diverse classroom libraries, in practice, teachers continue to privilege stories that center heteronormative, cisgender, and White identities (Crisp et al., 2016) .  \nAlthough the challenge of using children’s literature to counter dominant narratives is not novel, what has changed is the legislative context. Some U.S. states have recently passed laws that define and constrain the topics teachers can discuss (see Gay, Lesbian, & Straight Education Network, 2023) .  \nElementary teachers in their inductive years, who are typically women ages 22–25 and have not held previous professional jobs (National Center for Education Statistics, 2018), hold relatively little power in school hierarchies and may view themselves as having few alternatives to adhering to this legislation. Thus, it is necessary to explore the way teachers develop critical literacy (Vasquez et al., 2019) and learn to select texts that carry higher risk of producing backlash than others.  \nThis research is especially needed because topic-restrictive legislation is imbued with deficit discourses around children’s ability to engage with complex topics. As Dyson (2015) argued, this deficit discourse further serves to erase students’ cultural assets and academic strengths (Dyson, 2015) and systematically contributes to marginalization. Some teachers claim to resist discussing particular topics with young learners to protect them from discomfort or obscenity","cbCaiullh9BcAANS","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiullh9BcAANS","pdf",432458,16,"English","# Introduction\n## Context: challenged literature and legislative change\n## Teachers’ role and critical literacy needs\n# Research Questions\n## RQ1: self-censorship topics\n## RQ2: factors influencing text selection","[{\"question\":\"What does the study investigate about teachers’ self-censorship?\",\"answer\":\"The study examines what topics preservice teachers report avoiding in a state with topic-restrictive legislation and how those avoided topics align with what legislation governs.\"},{\"question\":\"What evidence does the research use to reach its findings?\",\"answer\":\"It uses an exploratory concurrent mixed-methods design, analyzing a written children’s literature course artifact and survey responses.\"},{\"question\":\"Which topic areas did preservice teachers avoid most, according to the findings?\",\"answer\":\"Preservice teachers reported avoiding conversations about gender and gender identity more often than conversations about sexual orientation or race.\"}]","Teachers’ Self-Censorship of Children’s Literature in Texas - What’s Legislation Got to Do With It? | PDF",1792069036]