EJ1253934

Journal of Language and Literacy Education Vol.
16 Issue 1—Spring 2020
Placemaking and the Child Reader: Toward a Place-

Conscious Framework for Reader Response Research
and Pedagogy
Sarah Fischer
Abstract: All children are placemakers (Chawla, 1992). While we know that a child's sense of place is linked
to a sense of belonging (Brillante & Mankiw, 2015), the implications of placemaking in the lived experiences of
child readers, specifically, has not been widely explored. The primary purpose of this literature review is to
& a conceptual and methodological framework
aid reader response researchers and educators in developing
that prioritizes the fundamentality of placemaking in the lives of child readers. Torraco’s (2005) framework
for an integrative literature review and conventional content analysis (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005) were used to
select and analyze seventy-eight sources for this review. The findings suggest that within a place-conscious
framework for reader response, researchers can explore (1) how child readers engage in placemaking as reader
response at various developmental stages, (2) the ways texts function as both artifacts of place(s) and as
vehicles for developing readers’ place-consciousness, and (3) how the sociocultural contexts of reading
experiences can be situated within broader place experiences. To operationalize a place-conscious framework
for future reader response work that builds upon the scholarship presented in this review, the author
recommends that traditional schematic representations of reader response theory be expanded or modified.
Keywords: placemaking, place-based education, readers as placemakers, reader response
Sarah Fischer is a former elementary teacher and a current assistant professor of literacy education at
Messiah College in Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania. She also volunteers as the Education Coordinator for
Craighead House, an environmental nonprofit that was once the childhood summer home of children’s
nature writer Jean Craighead George. Her research interests include the intersections of childhood reader
identity and place identity, as well as child readers’ marginalia. Contact the author at
[email protected].
1
Journal of Language and Literacy Education Vol. 16 Issue 1—Spring 2020
Introduction1 foundational assumptions of reader response theory

are consistent with a place-conscious pedagogy that
ll children are placemakers; from birth or
A
acknowledges the lived experiences of the child
even before, children act on needs (for reader, there has been a lack of research and theory
survival) and desires (for belonging) to development in this area. If explored further, this
understand the various dimensions of rich, child-centered pedagogical landscape could
place. These elements include the layers of both expand the field’s conceptualizations of reader
pragmatic and sociocultural meanings ascribed to
response that often come to bear on literacy
objects and locations, through embodied,
curricula and methods in school contexts.
multisensory phenomenal engagement with their
physical environment (Chawla, 1992; Tuan, 2002). As The primary purpose of this literature review is to
children’s autonomy and independent accessibility aid researchers and educators whose work aligns
of immediate environments expand from the home with reader response theory in developing a
in early childhood to larger geographic areas in conceptual and methodological framework that
middle childhood (e.g., the backyard or prioritizes the fundamentality of placemaking in the
neighborhood), placemaking practices evolve as well lives of child readers in and beyond the school
(Hart, 1979; Sobel, 2005). Some theorists and building. I established this goal at the onset of my
educators have described placemaking as the research, and it was integral to my analysis of the
universal developmental phenomenon of children literature. My expectation is not that the body of
creating their own physical spaces (e.g., fashioning a scholarship presented here serves as an
house out of sofa cushions, constructing a bush fort, interdependent, comprehensive vernacular for
exercising proprietorship over a corner of a room, place-conscious reader response work, but that this
etc.) (Sobel, 1993). However, Derr, Chawla, and resource will allow researchers and educators to
Mintzer (2018) promoted a degree of explicit situate their work within a broader body of
facilitation in their definition that can be read as a scholarship while emphasizing the concepts that are
challenge for educators: the “participatory act of most integral to their research questions or teaching
imagining and creating places with other people. It philosophy.
cultivates a sense of hope and possibility” (p. 2).
A secondary aim of this article is to continue to
As a literacy educator who believes reading can expand the ways the field conceptualizes and
change us and nurture a sense of belonging, I employs context in reader response work in order to
inquire into the following questions, assuming the more fully explore transactions between readers and
primacy of placemaking in the lived experiences of place as a mode of reader response. This goal
children: (1) How do reading experiences or emerged during my research as I worked to build
experiences of enacting one’s reader identity connections and relationships between concepts
contribute to placemaking or a developing sense of across disciplines (i.e, literacy education, reader
place in childhood? and (2) How might placemaking response, and place-based education). Although
nurture, challenge, and extend reader identity, reader response’s construction of “context” and
agency, and response in childhood? Although the place-based pedagogy’s construction of “place” are
1
I acknowledge that there is a gender spectrum and that use pronouns to refer to individuals that correspond with
myriad pronouns exist that people can use when referring the pronouns that they use to refer to themselves.
to individuals in their writing. Throughout this article I
2
theoretically compatible concepts, they represent have shifted back and forth from an emphasis on
different approaches to considering readers’ literary theory to educational inquiry “almost decade
interactions with their environments. My synthesis by decade” (Benton, 2009, p. 88). Literacy teachers
of the literature required me to reconcile these have been challenged to examine and articulate
terms in a hierarchal manner, which I will discuss in their own theoretical perspectives, because the
the conclusion to this paper. discipline of reader response is made up of “an
extremely wide range of attitudes toward, and
Background assumptions about, the roles of the reader, the text,
Reader Response in Schools and the social/cultural context shaping the
transaction between reader and text” (Beach, 1993, p.
With roots in Rosenblatt’s (1978) conception of 2) that are often inconsistent with the methods of
reader-driven reading, modern reader response New Criticism.
theory was developed during the 1960s out of the
theoretical and pedagogical limitations of New Additionally, Eppley (2015) and Eppley and Shannon
Criticism that dominated literary theory in the mid- (2017) argued that these observable shifts in literacy
twentieth century (Connell, 2000). Unlike New instruction are symptomatic of a market
Criticism, which conceptualized texts as stable, self- fundamentalist perspective of education embodied
contained aesthetic objects with inherent meanings, by the current standardization-era education
reader response theory acknowledged the role of the policies. Rather than enabling literacy classrooms to
reader’s lived experiences in constructing the prepare students to take part in their communities,
meaning of texts. As theorized by Rosenblatt (1978), both large and small, as invested and engaged
meaning is not constructed unidirectionally during a citizens who experience both an individual and
reader’s engagement with a text (from text to communal sense of belonging, current educational
reader), but rather reading experiences are a policies promote an individualistic mindset that
transaction between a reader and a text within a defines success primarily in economic terms and
particular context. Rosenblatt proposed that every neglects ways of knowing and responding to texts
reader draws from their own unique personal beyond prescribed cognitive processes (Noddings,
histories and prior knowledge while reading, and 1992; Orr, 2004). Agreeing with this perspective,
therefore a text will take on new meaning each time Gilbert (2014) concluded that “to subvert this reality,
it is read and with each new reader. teachers must practice subterfuge by foregrounding
Personal Standards as the primary drivers of
Another pedagogical contribution of Rosenblatt’s instruction” (p. 27).
theoretical work was that it distinguished between
different purposes for reading. Readers engage in By the time Richard Beach published A Teacher’s
efferent reading when they read to elicit information Introduction to Reader-Response Theories in 1993,
or facts from a text, while they engage in aesthetic reader response theories had already begun to take
reading for the experience of reading itself. root in educational discourse, not only at the
Rosenblatt (1978) concluded that a reader’s purpose broader policy level, but in terms of what constitutes
for reading is an important factor in a text’s meaning good practice (Benton, 2009). Teachers were
construction. encouraged to use trade books to teach reading
strategies within authentic reading contexts
Since these foundations of modern reader-response (Tunnell & Jacobs, 1989), integrate multimodal
criticism were laid, trends in reader response studies
3
methods of personally responding to texts (Probst, with environmental education, place-conscious

1994), create early literacy learning environments pedagogies assume that individual and collective
that mimic optimal home environments (Holdaway, identities are complexly tied to the perceptual,
1982), devote instructional time to independent sociological, ideological, political, and ecological
reading (Sanden, 2012), and provide explicit dimensions of the local places we dwell (Greenwood,
instruction in developing readerly habits (Nodelman formerly Gruenewald, 2003). Seamon (2014)
& Reimer, 2003). More recently, iterations of reader described place as “any environmental locus in and
response theory in literacy classrooms have afforded through which individual or group actions,
educators the pedagogical space to integrate social experiences, intentions, and meanings are drawn
justice-oriented methodologies and philosophical together spatially” (p. 11). Whereas space is often
convictions, such as critical literacy (McLaughlin & regarded as location in the abstract that exists
DeVoogd, 2004), culturally-sustaining pedagogy outside socioculturally-ascribed meanings, place is
(Paris, 2012), and trauma-informed teaching theorized as a physical environment in which
(Crosby, 2015). Although reader response theory has boundaries are defined by “worlds of meaning and
had a significant, reader-centric influence on literacy experience” (Cresswell, 2004, p. 11).
instruction over the last several decades, the
Because all lived experiences are made meaningful
trajectory of state and federal education policy—
in our immediate, sensorial environments, local
most notably, the fruition of the
corporate-supported Common thinking, rather than precluding
“…literacy instruction that participation in a global society,
Core State Standards (CCSS)
and accompanying high-stakes fails to nurture children’s is actually a site of it (Holloway
assessments— has brought developing place identity & Valentine, 2000; Vanclay,
2008). Therefore, the loss of
about a paradigmatic risks more than irrelevancy.” vernacular knowledge in the
resurgence of New Criticism
rhetoric to PK-12 classrooms. push for standardized, place-
generic curricula is detrimental to children’s sense
Constructing exclusionary conceptualizations of
of belonging and wellbeing. Altman, Stires, and
what it means and looks like to be a reader,
maintaining a limited scope of the purposes of Weseen (2015) pressed educators to see the urgency
of this dilemma and proposed that a connection to
reading, and promoting a narrow description of
place should be seen as a teachers’ and students’
response, the Common Core’s emphasis on “close
reading” fundamentally requires readers to ignore rights issue. In other words, literacy instruction that
fails to nurture children’s developing place identity
their lived experiences and reader identity narratives
risks more than irrelevancy. Place-conscious
in order to take part in “an exercise in
understanding text independent of prior knowledge” pedagogy “concerns the critical dimension of
consciousness in literacy classrooms that positions
(Eppley, 2015, p. 209).
children as active agents who transform social,
The Timeliness of Place-Conscious Pedagogy material, and ecological places” (Hall, Cremin,
Comber, & Moll, 2013, p. 415).
Among the philosophical alternatives to the current
push for standardization and privatization in Because our experiences are so integrally rooted in
educational policy in the United States is the place, place-conscious pedagogy must be, to some
movement for place-based, or place-conscious degree, explicit (Chawla, 1992). Place-conscious
education. Although it is often erroneously conflated educators view children’s experiences of place as,
4
not only legitimate, but central to the classroom Literature Identification

curriculum. Brillante and Mankiw (2015) have
The selection of materials for this review was guided
concluded, “A developing sense of place is linked to
a sense of belonging. A sense of belonging by Torroco’s (2005) recommendations for carrying
out an integrative literature review of “emerging
contributes to children’s overall social and
topics” (p. 357). I used academic search engines
emotional development and is an essential aspect of
school readiness” (n. p.). Additionally, a positive specific to the field of education, several
interdisciplinary academic search engines, and
sense of place that is developed in childhood—the
academic library catalogues to identify materials for
awareness of and appreciation for a place’s
distinctive qualities (Ryden, 1993)—influences potential inclusions in this review. With my research
questions as a guide, I combined numerous
people’s affection for and the ways in which they
variations of the search terms literacy, readers, text,
engage with the places they dwell in into adulthood
(Sobel, 1993). Exploring the interdependency of reading, reader response, reader identity, and
literature, with the terms place, environment, sense
developing a sense of place and the role of story,
of place, materiality, place identity, landscapes,
both those created through direct experience and
the narratives acquired through literary experiences, place-based education, place-consciousness, theories
of place, and place pedagogy. My search was
has important implications for formal literacy
narrowed to scholarship specifically concerned with
instruction, particularly formal literacy instruction
that seeks to validate children’s authentic, rooted children aged fourteen or younger (Bergen &
Fromberg, 2010) and those that discussed research
responses to texts (Findlay, 2008; Lane-Zucker,
methods or pedagogy with implications for school-
2005) and nurture a sense of belonging through a
place-conscious culture of reading. aged children more generally. Furthermore, the
foundational tenets and methods of both place-
Methods based education and reader response pedagogy most
commonly employed today were established in the
Soja (2011) pointed out that over the last several early 1990s, so I also narrowed my search to
decades, “attention to the spatial aspects of human materials published from 1990 onward. I reviewed
life and social relations have spread in material abstracts and summaries, and included
unprecedented ways into nearly every academic those that were within the scope of this project in
discourse” (p. ix). Although several researchers have the review.
contributed valuable reviews of scholarship related
to children and theories of place (Elfer, 2011; Although several articles and books about place-
Morgan, 2010), this work does not look specifically based education (Bai, Elza, Kovacs, & Romanycia,
at the child as reader. This literature review 2010; Payne, 2010; Sobel, 1993, 1998, 2005; Wason-
specifically brings together scholarship that engages Ellam, 2010) included explorations of the
place and place identity in childhood as it intersects relationship between children’s reading experiences
with the components of reader response theory, and developing affection for place, the vast majority
albeit to varying degrees of explicitness, from three of materials identified were from the fields of
broad academic fields: literacy education, children’s literacy education and reader response. Therefore, I
literature, and place-based education. conducted another round of database searches using
expanded inclusion criteria that included materials
that discussed children’s aesthetic activities more
broadly and their relationship to the development of
5
place-consciousness. Several more materials were approaches to exploring the intersection of reader
added to the review during this round, including response and place represented in these sources.
Chawla (1992) and Unt (2009). As a result of these Therefore, I conducted a second round of analysis
database searches, seventy-eight peer-reviewed using conventional content analysis (Hsieh &
materials representative of several different Shannon, 2005), an inductive approach, to further
disciplines were identified for review, including delineate the three main themes into subthemes
journal articles, books and book chapters, doctoral representative of these nuances within the
dissertations, and conference papers. literature. This method of analysis allowed me to
pursue my research questions while also organizing
Analysis the review in a way that would serve its intended
The first phase of analysis was to determine a purpose: to aid educators and researchers in
guiding theory for my synthesis (Torraco, 2005). developing a place-conscious conceptual and
Based on the purpose of this review, reader response methodological framework for reader response
theory served as the structure for my analysis. research and pedagogy.
Although the literature included in this review Limitations
approaches the intersections of reader
experience/identity and place experience/identity This review has several limitations that must be
from a wide variety of theoretical perspectives and regarded. First, I have chosen to omit an explicit
methodologies, I organized my materials into the discussion of the implications of digital texts to this
three main components of reader response theory— work. Although many of the materials synthesized
readers, texts, and contexts— by analyzing material conceptualize “text” from a New Literacy Studies
abstracts and summaries to determine which reader perspective (Street, 2003) in which digital forms of
response component was being foregrounded or communication are validated as texts, I do not
emphasized. During this preliminary analysis, I was attempt to differentiate readers’ engagement with
able to further qualify the themes emerging in each these various multimodal formats of texts from their
of these three areas. The resulting three main engagement with more traditional
themes of my analysis and the number of materials conceptualizations of text like books. As theory is
reviewed in each are (1) Young Readers as further developed in this area of reader response,
Placemakers-23, (2) The Rootedness and Rootability this framework may need to be expanded.
of Children’s Texts-39, and (3) Context within
Broader Phenomenal Landscapes-16. Second, the literature used in this review was
limited to academic database searches. Therefore,
Benton (2009) pointed out that the breadth of potentially important primary sources are not
studies that have come out of the basic assumptions represented here. Websites, blogs, newsletters, and
of reader response theory has been tremendous, curriculum guides created by teachers, parents,
each foregrounding and backgrounding the three educational non-profits and other stakeholders may
components (reader, text, context) to varying provide additional qualitative data that could be
degrees and applying a wide range of theoretical explored in future research.
lenses, emphases, and conceptualizations. For this
Finally, at the beginning of this paper, I introduced
reason, it was especially important to develop
the theoretical notion that all children engage in
subthemes that would adequately highlight the
placemaking to both survive in their environments
variety of conceptual and methodological
6
and realize desires. The aspect of placemaking childhood, defined here as birth until around age
inherent in my research questions is children’s eight (National Association for the Education of
manipulation of place(s) to pursue desires and Young Children, 2020), presents unique challenges
engage in aesthetic experiences. Consequently, the because children have often not yet mastered the
scholarship included in this review largely conventions of oral and/or written language at this
represents places and childhoods that assume developmental stage. However, many aspects of
children’s basic needs for survival and well-being their meaning-making processes can be observed. In
have been met, that they have access to texts, and early childhood, readers’ autonomy as placemakers,
that they have the luxury of recreational reading their independent geographic accessibility, is usually
time. Therefore, it is critical that this review be read limited to small spaces in the home environment
with this limitation in mind so that we do not like a bedroom or a corner of a communal living
unintentionally diminish the experiences and voices space (Chawla, 1992). Having proprietorship over
of child readers whose places and childhoods would small spaces has consequences for young readers as
not be characterized from such a position of placemakers, because early childhood is a critical
privilege. Such children have been absent from the time for place identity development and attachment
research base, and might provide a very different (Green, 2013; Rainbird & Rowsell, 2011) when
portrait of place than do the more affluent children children seek out places associated with positive
studied to this point. feelings (Langhout, 2003) that are characterized by
“security, social affiliation, and
Review of Literature “Independent geographic creative expression and
accessibility increases at the exploration” (Chawla, 1992, p.
Young Readers as
same time that reading 68). To the extent that adults
Placemakers
nurture, tolerate, or plan for
independence often develops.”
For a place-conscious this kind of reader autonomy
educator, reader response’s and accessibility, Green (2013)
most useful quality as a theory and methodology is has observed that even preschool-aged readers can
its validation of readers’ agency in constructing begin to identify or create favorite places to read
texts’ meaning. Interestingly, though, reader that embody these desired place characteristics.
response research studying real readers has
Before they have mastered oral language, we can
overwhelmingly explored the cognitive meaning
observe readers’ responses to texts oscillating
making processes that take place when a reader
between inner cognitive processes and outer
reads, thus minimizing the multimodal,
embodied engagement with the immediate physical
multisensory dimensions of experience
environment. Throughout early childhood, children
characteristic of place theory. The scholarship
test the permeability of real and fictional landscapes
included in this section, work foregrounding the
in observable ways (Fischer, 2017b; Green, 2013;
experiences of actual child readers, integrates these
Spitz, 2006; Sharon & Woolley, 2004), such as
two emphases by working from a developmental
matching real-life objects to objects in a picturebook
understanding of how children, at various stages,
illustration or scribbling on characters in a
engage in placemaking.
picturebook while talking to them. Because
Studying readers as placemakers in early children’s identities are not compartmentalized in
childhood. Studying reader response in early early childhood, these responses are often
7
transmedial and transmodal as they extend beyond children’s manipulation of their physical
reading experiences to permeate interactions with environment, add narrative layers of meaning to
media, imaginative play, drawing, etc. (Spitz, 2006; objects and places, and contribute to a positive
Spencer, 2003; Nilsson, 2009; Wohlwend, 2011). sense of place. When children engage in
Multisensory engagement with story across all of placemaking as a form of reader response, it can
these various aesthetic activities can nurture place promote readers’ affection for both the text and the
attachment, so gatekeepers to young children’s place the reading experience occurred. Through
experiences with texts need to recognize these cognitive immersion, readers have the sense of being
placemaking behaviors as valid modes of reader transported to and immersed in a literary landscape
response in early childhood. while reading (Blackford, 2004; Esrock, 1994; Ryan,
2001). These aesthetic experiences can leave readers
Studying readers as placemakers in middle with lasting memories similar to visiting “real”
childhood. Perhaps the developmental stage most places (Unt, 2009). Response can also be tied to
warranting an exploration of the intersections artifacts, such as when readers often collect or create
between placemaking and reader response is middle physical objects, “souvenirs” (Cassidy, 2008; Tatar,
childhood, defined here as approximately the ages of 2009) reminiscent of literary experiences
eight to fourteen (Bergen & Fromberg, 2010). (Goodenough, 2003; Nilsson, 2009; Tatar, 2009). In
Independent geographic accessibility increases at my own research building from Unt’s (2009) work, I
the same time that reading independence often explored placemaking as reader response in middle
develops. This expansion of possibilities means childhood explicitly and concluded that these
readers are exposed to a myriad of new ideas, behaviors can be categorized as Transportation
concepts, perspectives, and phenomenological (being cognitively immersed in a literary landscape
experiences of place at once. while reading), Repositioning (seeing oneself
Here we see the importance of proprietorship differently as a result of interacting with a text),
carrying on from early childhood. Throughout Nesting (aesthetically manipulating the
middle childhood, children participate in a environment to create a place to read), and Layering
phenomenon of constructing their own private (imaginatively manifesting a literary landscape in
places, such as forts and clubhouses as caregivers the immediate physical environment) (Fischer,
grant them more freedom and autonomy (Sobel, 2017a). All of these placemaking behaviors can begin
1993). The developmental purposes of placemaking even before a reader starts reading a text and can
in middle childhood parallel intrinsic motivations to continue long after as readers recollect past reading
read and become a reader: to practice new social experiences.
roles, further develop and exercise personal In summary, place-conscious reader response
aesthetic tastes, take over or extend existing social research and pedagogy concerned with the
systems, and explore realms of hopeful possibility meaning-making processes of real readers must take
for the real world (Bergen & Fromberg, 2009; Ellis, children’s development as readers and placemakers
2005; Leander & Boldt, 2012). into consideration. As is evident from the literature
It is important for us to see beyond readers’ reviewed in this section, these phenomena often
cognitive processes to observable placemaking parallel one another in observable ways. Readers,
behaviors, because Unt (2009) concludes that even those who have not mastered conventional
aesthetic experiences like reading can incite language, engage in placemaking as a way of
8
responding to texts. These behaviors are epistemological assumptions it represents as an

characterized by multimodality and multisensory artifact constructed within a particular place (Pahl &
engagement, and as with much of children’s Rowsell, 2010), how texts work as aesthetic objects
narrative play, they extend beyond the boundaries of that promote a sense of place, and how texts can
specific reader-text transactions. function as historical records of readers’ engagement
with their immediate physical environment. This
This body of scholarship provides us with direct area of place-conscious reader response work is not
insights into my first research question, how reading only relevant for scholars engaged in literary
experiences or experiences of enacting one’s reader criticism, but for place-conscious educators, as well,
identity contribute to placemaking or a developing as they select texts for instruction and aim to
sense of place in childhood. However, there is less validate the material aesthetics of children’s reading
research that can help explain how placemaking experiences.
might nurture, challenge, and extend reader
identity, agency, and response in childhood. Filling Highlighting texts’ ideological assumptions
in this gap is particularly important for work with about place(s). Reader response criticism assumes
children who do not see themselves as readers. that texts, having been created in particular milieu,
Through this framework, researchers can begin to can be studied as sociocultural artifacts imbued with
ask important questions, such ideological assumptions about
as How does providing children the various dimensions of
with opportunities for
“Ecocriticism has exercised a place(s) and the relationships
placemaking as a mode of wide range of approaches and between people and place. By
reader response in classrooms perspectives in exploring the critiquing, or “reading against”
influence readers with low self- (West, 1994), texts through a
relationship between
efficacy? This area deserves place-conscious lens, critics
further attention in the future.
children’s texts and place.” can highlight these
assumptions, draw
The Rootedness and Rootability of Children’s conclusions about cultural values, and weigh their
Texts potential influence on the responses of theoretical
Almost half of the materials reviewed in this study readers.
foregrounded or analyzed the role of the text in the Although all literary criticism can be helpful in
meaning-making processes. Although a place- peoples’ efforts to understand the underlying
conscious theoretical perspective privileges the ideologies at work in their place(s), the most
experiences of real children/readers, texts in and of explicitly place-conscious area of literary criticism is
themselves are also worth examination. Engagement ecocriticism, which examines the relationship
with literature can be young children’s very first between literature and the environment (Dobrin &
exposure to the world beyond their immediate lived Kidd, 2004). Ecocriticism has exercised a wide range
experiences (Kiefer & Tyson, 2018), and the of approaches and perspectives in exploring the
literature discussed above suggests that child relationship between children’s texts and place, but
readers sometimes take up these narratives in their has a rich history overall of challenging an
placemaking. Therefore, exploring their implied anthropocentric worldview and promoting an
messages can shed light on, and sometimes environmental ethic through critically examining
challenge, a text’s rootedness, the ontological and what ideals and attitudes texts teach children about
9
nature. Through an ecocritical lens, imaginative reading educators gain more insights into children’s
texts can be explored by considering topics such as placemaking.
an author’s own place identity or environmental
imagination (Copeland, 2004; DuPlessis, 2004; Exploring writer’s craft and the construction of
literary landscapes. What qualities of texts make
Slater, 2015; Wake, 2004), comparing depictions of
them evocative and compelling fodder for children’s
nature across children’s media and over time
(Holton & Rogers, 2004), reading nature as placemaking? In addition to reading against texts as
ideological representations of places, literary
metaphor (Noda, 2018), and discussing the effect
criticism can also be used to explore the aesthetic
that anthropomorphism has on the message in both
imaginative literature and narrative nonfiction qualities of texts as imaginative, self-contained
literary landscapes made up of geographical,
(Harju, 2006).
cultural, and socio-political concerns similar to
The history of ecocriticism is largely grounded in those that affect material territories (Carroll, 2011).
conservationist, environmental ideologies, but To the degree that authors are able to evoke a sense
broader conceptualizations of “place” have also been of place through their writing, a text’s literary
a subject of literary criticism. Children’s texts are landscape can heighten child readers’ sensitivity
problematic representations of the lived place toward place in more general terms, introducing
experiences of actual children, but studying the them to the idea that places can change/be changed,
ways children’s geographies are depicted in that places can provide pleasure and intrigue, and
literature can highlight the spatial politics of that places connect to who they are.
people’s own places. This approach has also allowed
Because different genres of children’s texts engage
for the critique of idealized, exclusionary
readers in place in different ways, some emphasizing
constructions of those childhood place experiences,
such as pastoral biases or power dynamics between differences between real and fictional landscapes
and others emphasizing similarities, an author’s
child and adult characters (Alston, 2007; Bavidge,
appropriation of genre conventions, particularly
2006; Doughty & Thompson, 2011).
with regard to world-building in imaginative
The materials represented in this subtheme largely literature, is an important facet of this work. The
represent an approach to literary criticism built genre of fantasy, for example, makes an appeal to
upon adult-oriented definitions of, perceptions of, readers as placemakers to contrast storyworlds with
and engagements with the multiple dimensions of their own place, often demonstrating that although
place. This work is very important in bringing to they are rooted in reality to support believability,
light the qualities that people take for granted in they differ drastically with regard to power
their places, as well as the place narratives people structures, geographic accessibility, and the function
construct for their children. It can even contribute of objects and spaces (Dewan, 2010; Hudson, 2018).
to adults’ agency as placemakers as they work On the other hand, the conventions of world-
toward constructing a sense of place in their building in realistic fiction emphasize sameness
classrooms and communities. However, literary between the reader’s world and literary landscapes
criticism has not yet considered texts through the (Kiefer & Tyson, 2018), but as works of imaginative
theoretical lens of the child reader as placemaker, an literature, a stories’ representation of realistic places
important distinction to make and perhaps an area (or even real places as in the case of regional
of criticism that can continue to be developed as literature) still requires a reader to contrast places.
Slater (2015) argued that a translocal lens for
10
interpreting realistic fiction provides one way to picturebooks combine the form and function of
develop a robust and dynamic examination of place traditional illustrations and maps to provide readers
in literature, as it “requires us to reorient our with a “mobile cartography” of literary landscapes by
concept of scale, not as a system of bounded, focusing the plot, told through both text and
discrete, and hierarchical units, but as a mutually illustration, on a character walking through a place
constitutive network where local place forms with a particular point-of-view (Cantavella, 2017). All
through both everyday, low-range practices and of these visual components of texts model a range of
global exchanges” (p. 5). vantage points or perspectives in which readers
could situate themselves within places.
Illustrations, maps, and other visual representations
of real and/or imagined places in children’s texts can Several studies of postmodern literary devices in
contribute to a reader’s spatial understanding of children’s picturebooks have taken the study of
place and appeal to their affect. For instance, the literary landscapes in a compelling direction for
media an illustrator uses can evoke the mood or place-conscious reader response theorists.
atmosphere of a text’s setting. An illustrator’s use of Postmodern literary devices are intended to blur
artistic principles, such as proportion, line, color, readers’ perception of the boundaries between
perspective and shape also emphasize particular literary landscapes and the “real” world. They
nuanced details about setting and offer readers a encourage readers to see possibilities in their places.
particular point-of-view or way of seeing place For example, metafictive texts, or intrusion
(Kiefer & Tyson, 2018; Nodelman & Reimer, 2003). fantasies, promote a distinct way for readers to see
Additionally, the inclusion of familiar or their own immediate physical environment through
recognizable objects within illustrations, though a lens of story. By addressing readers directly or
often taken for granted, can serve as “transitional referencing the “real world,” these stories invite
objects,” especially for very young readers, that children to immerse themselves in a pleasurable
connect their inner and outer worlds (Jones, 1996; fictional landscape while suggesting that the setting
Wilkie-Stibbs, 2005). Again, we see an opportunity of the book can penetrate readers’ real world lived
here for young readers’ exploration of these experiences in place (Bhadury, 2013; Nelson, 2006).
aesthetic elements of text to invite comparison In metafictive texts, illustrators can also break the
between real and fictional landscapes. As discussed fourth wall by manipulating borders and perspective
above, these prompts can feed into children’s to play with the permeability between two fictional
fantasies that are bound up in their aesthetic worlds (Mackey, 2003) or to suggest that “fictional
engagement with their immediate environments characters have agency beyond what the original
(Spitz, 2006). author or illustrator may have intended” (Nelson,
2006, p. 224).
Through literary criticism, maps can be explored for
both content and implied function in the reading Peritextual features of texts, such as the dust jacket,
experience (e.g., aesthetic, ideological, or book cover, endpapers, copyright page, dedication
pedagogical) (Pavlik & Bird, 2017). As a tool page, title page, author biography, etc., can also
fundamentally intended to support autonomy in a create the perception of a permeable literary
place, literary maps appeal to the theoretical reader landscape. Fictional or metafictional peritexts,
as placemaker. A unique and interesting approach to specifically, encourage young readers’ imaginations
immersing readers in the phenomenological as placemakers. Magnusson (2012) notes,
experiences of characters in place, some
11
Though often overlooked in textual analysis, text selection, but there are other important
paratexts structure a work’s presentation and characteristics that should be considered, such as
reception. Gérard Genette describes the whether or not the text positions readers as having
paratext as a “threshold” or “fringe of a agency (Bigger & Webb, 2010) and the ease with
printed text” which controls the reading which the text might be integrated with other
experience: a “zone not only of transition” content areas (Murphey, 2002; Wells & Zeece, 2007).
between text and off-text, “but also of
The underlying assumption in the aforementioned
transaction” between text and audience. (p.
scholarship on text selection is that the content or
87)
topic of a text elicits a somewhat predictable
In the field of place-based education, literary response in readers. Cognitive reasoning is
analysis has often stopped short of exploring these emphasized as the primary way readers make sense
post-modern literary devices as criteria for inclusion of texts and engage in placemaking. However,
in curricula even though they support the because all literature is experienced in the
developmental needs of child readers as immediate, local environment, imaginative
placemakers. literature that evokes themes of “secrecy, intrigue,
and adventure” (Sobel, 1998, p.
Investigating texts’ place- 92) should be valued as highly
conscious curricular
“…educators can mediate the
as literature with an explicit
potential. Another subtheme kinds of embodied, sensorial
environmental or place-
of research highlighting the experiences with literature conscious theme during text
role of the text in the
that appeal to readers selection (Fischer, 2015; Payne,
meaning-making process is 2010).
concerned with analyzing a
developmental needs as
text for its potential to meet placemakers and contribute to The instructional activities
curricular goals while a positive sense of place.” designed to accompany place-
nurturing students’ sense of conscious texts in school
place. This scholarship employs a rhetoric of reader settings often focus on cognitive meaning-making
as student and primarily focuses on the use of texts processes, such as inviting readers to connect text
in formal learning settings. content to real world places or studying authors’
hometowns (Cahalan, 2008). These approaches to
Text selection is a key component in this literature, analyzing and using texts are effective at developing
and the same evaluative criteria are often used for readers’ interest in and knowledge of place, but
choosing both fiction and nonfiction texts. To begin, other methods described by Burke and Cutter-
curricular goals must be articulated, distinguishing Mackenzie (2010), Heard and McDonough (2009),
between whether the intended goal or outcome for Payne (2010), and Wason-Ellam (2010) incorporate
children’s engagement with a text is to nurture the role of the body in absorbing and engaging with
readers’ affection for a particular place or for a type story. By determining a text’s potential to be paired
of place (e.g., forests, city neighborhoods, etc.) or to with the visual arts, mapmaking, or immersive
promote place-conscious habits of mind and experiences in nature, educators can mediate the
perspectives more broadly (Sobel, 1998; Wason- kinds of embodied, sensorial experiences with
Ellam, 2010; Wells & Zeece, 2007). More often than literature that appeal to readers’ developmental
not, a text’s topic is used as the main criterion for
12
needs as placemakers and contribute to a positive reader response. The work of children’s book
sense of place. historians intersects with concepts of place in
unique ways as they aim to study books as
Payne (2010) has made a persuasive case for the representational objects of places in time and as
design of instructional activities that bridge texts artifacts documenting children’s lived experiences in
and children’s embodied engagement with the places. Grenby (2011) notes,
physical environment:
This reminder of the materiality of reading,
In education, we are too often confronted its embeddedness in its location and
with the teaching and telling of a particular occasion, and its social functions, seems
state-sanctioned curriculum story, or especially germane to children’s reading.
document. Children’s literature, potentially, After all, children’s ”book use”- a more
and the arts, potentially, retain the inclusive, and frequently more accurate,
possibility of being different, other or term than ”reading”- has very often been
wild….That opportunity, potentially, is the more physical and interactive than cerebral
source of a revitalized means of promoting and solitary. (p. 194)
the sensual, perceptual and conceptual
dimensions of an aesthetic education, in this Children’s marginalia--their writing and drawing on
instance an ecoaesthetic opening in and in books--has been well documented by book
‘experiencing’, ‘living’, being the story and historians as occurring for centuries. These
becoming other than what we currently are. historical records suggest conclusions about
Their confluence might well be the readership and engagement (Grenby, 2011; Jackson,
remarkable. (pp. 305-306; emphasis in 2001; Lerer, 2012). Although many of these
original) inscriptions annotate the text, some are seemingly
extra-textual and have more to tell about the social
The benefits of pairing embodied learning dimension of the place in which the child was
experiences with place-conscious texts in formal reading than their actual experience of reading, such
learning settings not only includes academic and as proprietary claims and book plate inscriptions.
curricular advantages, it also facilitates children’s Other examples of book markings suggest the book
intrinsic motivation and engagement (Wason-Ellam, being used over and over by the same child or
2010). within the same family over time (Grenby, 2011). The
Examining the materiality of texts as artifacts of existence of this artifactual memory (Reid-Walsh,
reader-place transactions. Finally, within a place- 2013) in a book’s materiality support the notion that
conscious framework for reader response, texts can a book has served as an important artifact within a
be studied, not just for their content or literary child’s material landscape and within the social and
merit, but as a historical record of children’s aesthetic dimensions of a child’s placemaking (Pahl
material engagement or play with texts in place(s). & Rowsell, 2010).
Although this area of the research represents the Context within the Broader Landscapes of Place
smallest portion of the scholarship reviewed, it is an Experience
area for future research that can provide the field
with new and interesting ways to observe and Within reader response work, context is usually
document children’s placemaking as a method of defined as the sociocultural dimensions that
13
influence meaning-making within a reading Exploring a sense of place in children’s in-

experience. However, the literature included in this school reading spaces. Because the design of a
subtheme--those that emphasized the role of the physical space has been linked to behavior, the
context or setting in readers’ meaning making design of schools and classrooms should be linked to
processes, and to some degree, connected to a purpose (Roskos & Neuman, 2011). Spaces
theoretical construct of place--represents broader designated for reading in school either encourage or
conceptualizations of context. Not only do the inhibit the kinds of responses parents, educators,
methodologies presented here expand notions of and children value (Clark, 2010; Curtis & Carter,
context to include the physical environments of 2003; Edwards, Gandini, & Forman, 2012; Hille, 2011;
reading experiences, they challenge the very O’Donnell, Wicklund, Pigozzi, Peterson, & Mau,
spatiotemporal boundaries that make up 2010; Tarr, 2004). Literacy educators have long
traditionally-defined reading events. discussed the relation between the physical
classroom space and a classroom culture of reading.
Highlighting the spatial politics of reading Chambers (1996) wrote about designing classroom
experience and accessibility. The physical spaces reading nooks to mimic the intimacy of home
in which people access, read, and respond to texts reading environments. Though this work did not
are influenced by the various dimensions of place: explicitly align with a concept of place (which was
perceptual, sociological, ideological, political, and just gaining traction in academia), it highlighted the
ecological (Gruenewald, 2003). Building from the importance of children’s earliest placemaking
assumption that a sense of place is connected to a experiences to their developing identities as readers.
sense of belonging, a semiotics of place is central to
discussions of reader autonomy and self-efficacy A helpful facet of the scholarship on school reading
(Murray, Fujishima, & Uzuka, 2014). This approach spaces considers characteristics of place that might
highlights and critiques the spatial politics that be detrimental to reader identity development.
influence children’s reading experiences in order to Because the walls in classroom reading spaces
dismantle power structures that promote singular influence how children respond and interact in the
constructions of literacy and create barriers to space, Tarr (2004) urged teachers to be critical of the
accessibility (Nichols, 2011; Nichols, Nixon & materials they bring into the classroom space and
Rowsell, 2011; Nixon, 2011; Pahl & Allan, 2011). avoid cluttering the walls with commercialized
literacy materials that carry little meaning to
Although traditional conceptualizations of context children. Effective teachers view the walls as texts
are made up of the social, cultural, and political with the potential to add to collective classroom
dimensions of places, a semiotics of place narratives and permeate identity discourses, such as
additionally privileges the materiality of intersections of reader identity and place identity, so
environments. Nichols (2011) described the methods long as they remain uncluttered, appealing, and
of a semiotics of place as aimed at exploring “how purposeful (Roskos & Neuman, 2011).
space is ‘read’ and takes into account materiality,
lighting, the built environment, the natural When considering the function and aesthetics of
environment and the overall aesthetic” (pp. 169-170). reading spaces, children’s purposes for using
A semiotics of place provides unique opportunities designated reading spaces often differ from teachers’
to better understand what consequences children’s expectations. Here, again, it is important to consider
agency as placemakers might have on reader the ways adults’ perceptions and experiences of
identity. place differ from those of children. Clark (2010)
14
found that some children feel that the reading literacy life-world emphasizes reader perception and
corner is a place to go for solitude or rest while experience. A child reader’s literacy life-world is a
others see it as an imaginative space holding the phenomenological landscape made up of “the acts of
potential for play. Contemporary school architects reading or literary affinity…that one takes for
have been responsive to these developmental needs granted as one does them” (Robison, 2011, p. 2), of
as placemakers by integrating soft textures and literacy events enacted across various sociocultural
elements intended to promote imaginative play into contexts and discourses. Leander (2011) and Robison
school reading areas (Curtis & Carter, 2003; (2011) challenged the traditionally-held
O’Donnell et al., 2010), making recreational reading conceptualization of “reading event” that has
areas a central focus of school spaces. Libraries may become so integral to the constructions of reading,
open up to an outdoor courtyard or greenspace, reader, and response employed in school settings: “a
promoting a connection between aesthetic specific reader and a specific text at a specific time
engagement with nature and recreational reading and place” (Rosenblatt, 1978, p.14). Robison,
(Hille, 2011). Considered apart from a theoretical advocating for the study of readers’ life-worlds in
perspective of readers as placemakers, these play- literacy research, defined a literacy event as “any
and sensory-based reading spaces might seem activity in which literacy plays a role” (Robison, 2011,
disconnected from reader identity development. p. 6). This broader, more inclusive conceptualization
However, a place-conscious of literacy events allows
lens focuses on reading spaces “Although it may seem a bit various reader experiences to
as tangible sites where reader
abstract, the literacy life-world be studied collectively as sites
and place identity intersect of response and meaning
and readers make meaning of is a promising concept for negotiation (Kendall, 2008)
texts. place-conscious reader that extend beyond singular
response work.” spatiotemporal transactions
Although the social aspects of with texts and intersect with
reader and place identity are young readers’ lived experiences as placemakers
not explicitly discussed in this work, attempts to over time.
develop a communal sense of place around reading
spaces through design is reminiscent of Derr, Although it may seem a bit abstract, the literacy life-
Chawla, and Mintzer’s (2018) definition of world is a promising concept for place-conscious
placemaking provided at the beginning of this reader response work. A variety of very concrete
paper. An architectural and design perspective on methods have been used to document literacy
classroom and school reading spaces should be events within a reader’s life-world, such as having
empowering to reader response practitioners readers map reader life-worlds and create visual
because this approach encourages educators to be literacy narratives (Kajder, 2006). Visual literacy
thoughtful placemakers themselves in ways that are narratives invite readers to represent and reflect on
evolving and responsive to the readers under their their reader history through the visual arts (e.g.,
care. film, photography, painting, etc.) in order to break
down contextual boundaries between in-school and
Studying placemaking within children’s literacy out-of-school reading experiences. Using these
life-worlds. Although a design perspective of methods to inquire into children’s lived experiences
reading spaces affords a view of the influences of as readers and placemakers can help us challenge
place on readers, the theoretical concept of the
15
our own assumptions and limitations regarding

what reader response could look like and break
down the barriers between out-of-school literacy
practices and those contrived within formal school
settings.
Concluding Discussion
The primary goal of this literature review was to aid

reader response researchers and practitioners in
developing a conceptual and methodological Figure 1. Rosenblatt’s (1978) transactional theory of
framework that prioritizes the fundamentality of reader response as represented by the Reading
placemaking in the lives of child readers in and Framework for the National Assessment of
beyond the school building. By synthesizing Educational Progress. (National Assessment
scholarship that intersected, to varying degrees of Governing Board, 1992)
explicitness, reader response and place concepts, I
have found that there are a myriad of approaches
and perspectives that reading educators can take as
they further explore readers, texts, and contexts
through a place-conscious perspective. As discussed
above, there are certainly gaps throughout this body
of research. However, the scholarship included here
has provided a solid foundation to move in this
fresh, hopeful direction in reader response research
and pedagogy much more explicitly than before.
A secondary goal that emerged from my synthesis

was to continue to expand the ways the field Figure 2. Reader/text/context transactions as
conceptualizes and employs context in reader represented in Beach (1993).
response work in order to more fully explore Benton, 2009; Grossberg, 2013; Rosenblatt, 1978;
interactions between readers and place as a mode of Sipe, 1999; Smagorinsky & Coppock, 1995). At the
reader response. To operationalize a place-conscious intersections of literary theory and literacy
framework for future reader response work that pedagogy, context has primarily been emphasized as
builds upon the scholarship presented in this review, a force outside the reader that influences the
traditional schematic representations of reader-text reading process, rather than also considering how
transactions (see Figures 1 and 2) may need to be the interaction between the text and reader, the
expanded or modified, particularly to move beyond meaning-making process, can also have an influence
traditional conceptualizations of context. on context. This conceptualization has limited our
For more than half a century, context has been ability to explore readers’ responses within a broader
predominantly defined throughout reader response scope of intersecting identities, such as reader
scholarship as the sociocultural factors influencing a identity and place identity, in several ways.
reader’s meaning-making processes (Beach, 1993;
16
First, it confines reading educators to the

spaciotemporal constraints of particular,
traditionally-defined reading events. A narrow view
of context limits the field’s ability to explore the
ways response might be iterated across a variety of
permeable contexts and at various points in time
throughout readers’ personal reader narratives
(before, during, and after reading) (Leander, 2011).
Second, sociocultural context alone neglects child Figure 3. Schematic representation of a place-
readers’ developmental and experiential motivations conscious framework for reader response.
and purposes for reading. At its genesis, reader
response was theorized with fluent readers in mind. and used holistically and relationally if they were
The youngest readers construct meaning of texts conceptualized within a framework like that
and of the world with very different sets of priorities, depicted in Figure 3. This representation
conceptions of time, cultural influences, and foregrounds placemaking and the
multisensory perceptions. Smagorinsky and development/influence of place identity in the lived
Coppock (1995) start to get at this inconsistency experiences of the child reader. It acknowledges
when they point out that children’s authentic, reader response as one way in which readers
observable responses to texts often appear “illogical transform their places through both cognitive and
to teachers” (p. 273). embodied experiences with texts, broadly defined. It
The limitations of context extend to pedagogical also accounts for sociocultural context as an
implications, too. One unintended consequence of influential component in reader-text transactions,
neglecting the permeability of contexts is that it but as just one dimension of the place(s) in which a
establishes exclusionary parameters for what it reader engages with a text. Situating these
means to be a reader and reinforces a hierarchy of transactions within a reader’s broader life-world
literacies. Without seeing response within a broader requires a consideration of literacy events in relation
narrative of readers’ lived experiences over time and to one another and as they intersect with
across contexts, educators miss opportunities to placemaking.
validate out-of-school literacy practices, many of
Today, educational policy in the United States casts
which are unobservable (Robison, 2011). Therefore,
a vision for education based primarily on economic
focusing solely on the sociocultural influences on
outcomes and individuality. However, place-
readers’ experiences has narrowed the purposes,
conscious pedagogies can supplement these market
modalities, authenticity, and relevancy of the
economy ideologies by providing an inclusive,
classroom literacy experiences we design. Finally,
community-oriented context and purpose for
these limitations make it easy to see child readers as
literacy instruction that validates the affective lived
acted upon by contextual constraints/affordances
experiences of all children and positions them as
rather than as agents of change with their own
agents of change in their local places. Reader
motivations, capable of shaping their own places.
response theory is still a useful and dynamic means
The intersections of place and reader response to designing child-centered literacy instruction that
theory presented through the three main themes of privileges identity work alongside academic
this literature review might be better understood standards. From the perspective of children as
17
placemakers, reading does not just change children’s educators can continue to ask and answer new kinds
perception of themselves within a stagnant world. It of questions about how readers construct meaning,
alters the world, the ways children see, experience, and furthermore, how these meanings are taken up
and act upon the various dimensions of place. By by readers as placemakers to pursue a sense of
further exploring this rich landscape of reader-text- belonging and hopeful possibilities in the places
place transactions and building upon the they dwell.
scholarship presented in this review, reading
18
References
Alston, A. (2007). Your room or mine? Spatial politics in children’s literature. New Review of Children’s Literature
and Librarianship, 11(1), 15-31.
Altman, R., Stires, S., & Weseen, S. (2015). Claiming the promise of place-based education: Introduction. Bank
Street Occasional Papers Series, 33. Retrieved from http://www.bankstreet.edu/occasional-paper-
series/33/.
Bai, H., Elza, D., Kovacs, P., & Romanycia, S. (2010). Re-searching and re-storying the complex and complicated
relationship of biophilia and bibliophilia. Environmental Education Research, 16(3-4), 351-365.
Bavidge, J. (2006). Stories in space: The geographies of children’s literature. Children’s Geographies, 4(3), 319-330.
Beach, R. (1993). A teacher’s introduction to reader-response theories. Urbana, IL: National Council for Teachers
of English.
Benton, M. (2009). Readers, texts, contexts: Reader-response criticism. In P. Hunt (Ed.) Understanding children’s
literature (2nd ed., pp. 86-102). London, UK: Routledge.
Bergen, B., & Fromberg, D. P. (2009). Play and social interaction in middle childhood. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(6),
426-430.
Bhadury, P. (2013). Metafiction, narrative metalepsis, and new media forms in The Neverending Story and the
Inkworld Trilogy. The Lion and the Unicorn, 37(3), 301–326.
Bigger, S., & Webb, J. (2010). Developing environmental agency and engagement through young people’s fiction.
Environmental Education Research, 16(3-4), 401-414.
Blackford, H. V. (2004). Out of this world: Why literature matters to girls. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Brillante, P. & Mankiw, S. (2015). A sense of place: Human geography in the early childhood classroom. Young
Children, 70(3), 16-23.
Burke, G., & Cutter-Mackenzie, A. (2010). What’s there, what if, what then, and what can we do? An immersive
and embodied experience of environment and place through children’s literature. Environmental
Education Research, 16(3-4), 311-330.
Cahalan, J. (2008). Teaching hometown literature: A pedagogy of place. College English, 70(3), 249–274.
Cantavella, A. (2007). Itineraries and maps: Walking as a means of building mobile cartographies in Peter Sís’
Madlenka and The Three Golden Keys. In N. Goga & B. Kümmerling-Meibauer (Eds.), Maps and mapping
in children's literature: Landscapes, seascapes, and cityscapes (pp.129-145). Amsterdam, NL: John
Benjamins Publishing Company.
Carroll, J. S. (2011). Landscape in children’s literature. New York, NY: Routledge.
Cassidy, J. (2008). Transporting nostalgia: The Little Golden Books as souvenirs of childhood. Children’s
Literature, 36, 145–161.
Chambers, A. (1996). The reading environment: How adults help children enjoy books. York, ME: Stenhouse.
19
Chawla, L. (1992). Childhood place attachments. In I. Altman. & S. M. Low (Eds.) Place attachment, Vol. 12 (pp.
63-82). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Clark, A. (2010). Transforming children’s spaces: Children’s and adults’ participation in designing learning
environments. London, UK: Routledge.
Connell, J. M. (2000). Aesthetic experiences in the school curriculum: Assessing the value of Rosenblatt’s
transactional theory. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 34(1), 27-35.
Copeland, M. (2004). The wild and wild animal characters in the ecofeminist novels of Beatrix Potter and Gene
Stratton-Porter. In S. I. Dobrin & K. B. Kidd (Eds.), Wild things: Children’s culture and ecocriticism (pp. 71-
81). Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.
Cresswell, T. (2004). Place: A short introduction. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Crosby, S. (2015). An ecological perspective on emerging trauma-informed teaching practices. Children & Schools,
37(4), 223–230.
Curtis, D., & Carter, M. (2003). Designs for living and learning: Transforming early childhood environments. St.
Paul, MN: Redleaf Press.
Derr, V., Chawla, L., & Mintzer, M. (2018). Placemaking with children and youth: Participatory practices for
planning sustainable communities. New York, NY: New Village Press,Dewan, P. (2010). The art of place in
literature for children and young adults: How locale shapes a story. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press.
Dobrin, S. I., & Kidd, K. B. (Eds.). (2004). Wild things: Children’s culture and ecocriticism. Detroit, MI: Wayne
State University Press.
Doughty, T., & Thompson, D. (Eds.). (2011). Knowing their place? Identity and space in children’s literature.
Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
DuPlessis, N. (2004). EcoLewis: Conservationism and anticolonialism in The Chronicles of Narnia. In S. I. Dobrin
& K. B. Kidd (Eds.), Wild things: Children’s culture and ecocriticism (pp.115-127). Detroit, MI: Wayne State
University Press.
Edwards, C., Gandini, L., & Forman, G. (Eds.). (2012). The hundred languages of children: The Reggio Emilia
experience in transformation (3rd ed.). Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
Elfer, C. J. (2011). Place-based education: A review of historical precedents in theory and practice [Doctoral
dissertation, The University of Georgia]. University of Georgia Libraries.
Ellis, J. (2005). Place and identity for children in classrooms and schools. Journal of the Canadian Association for
Curriculum Studies, 3(2), 55-73.
Eppley, K. (2015). Seven traps of the Common Core State Standards. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy,
59(2), 207-216.
Eppley, K. & Shannon, P. (2017). Practice-based evidence: Intelligent action inquiry for complex problems.
Literacy research: Theory, method, and practice, 66(1), 389-405.
Esrock, E. (1994). The reader’s eye: Visual imaging as reader response. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University
Press.
20
Findlay, M. (2008). Understanding place through narrative: Using stories to change the places we love and who
we are. In F. Vanclay, M. Higgins, & A. Blackshaw (Eds.), Making sense of place: Exploring concepts and
expressions of place through different senses and lenses (pp. 13-22). Canberra, Australia: National Museum
of Australia Press.
Fischer, S. (2015). Playing in literary landscapes: Considering children’s need for imaginative literature in place-
based education. Bank Street Occasional Papers Series, 33. Retrieved from
http://www.bankstreet.edu/occasional-paper-series/33/playing-in-literary-landscapes/.
Fischer, S. (2017a) Readers as place-makers: The experience of place in the literacy life-worlds of middle
childhood. Environmental Education Research, 23(10), 1476-1488.
Fischer, S. (2017b). Reading with a crayon: Pre-conventional marginalia as reader response in early childhood.
Children’s Literature in Education, 48(2), 134-151.
Gilbert, C. (2014). A call for subterfuge: Shielding the ELA classroom from the restrictive sway of the common
core. The English Journal, 104(2), 27-33.
Goodenough, E. (Ed.). (2006). Secret spaces of childhood. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
Green, C. (2013). A sense of autonomy in young children’s special places. International Journal of Early Childhood
Environmental Education, 1(1), 8–31.
Grenby, M. O. (2011). The child reader, 1700-1840. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Gruenewald, D. (2003). Foundations of place: A multidisciplinary framework for place-conscious education.

American Educational Research Journal, 40(3), 619–654.
Grossberg, L. (2013). Theorizing context. In D. Featherstone & J. Painter (Eds.), Spatial politics: Essays for Doreen
Massey (pp. 32-43). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Hall, K., Cremin, T., Comber, B., & Moll, L. (Eds.) (2013). International handbook of research on children's literacy,
learning and culture. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
Handler Spitz, E. H. (2006). The brightening glance. New York, NY: Pantheon Books.
Harju, M. L. (2006). Anthropomorphism and the necessity of animal fantasy. In J. Deszcz-Tryhubczak & M.
Oziewicz (Eds.), Towards or back to human values: Spiritual and moral dimensions of contemporary
fantasy (pp. 173–184). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Scholars Press.
Hart, R. (1979). Children’s experience of place. New York, NY: Irvington Publishers, Inc.
Heard, G., & McDonough, J. (2009). A place for wonder: Reading and writing nonfiction in the primary grades.
Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.
Hille, R. T. (2011). Modern schools: A century of design for education. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Holdaway, D. (1982). Shared book experience: Teaching reading using favorite books. Theory into Practice, 21(4),
293–300.
Holloway, S. & Valentine, G. (2000). Spatiality and the new social studies of childhood. Sociology, 34(4), 763-783.
21
Holton, T. & Rogers, T. (2004). “The world around them.” The changing depiction of nature in Owl Magazine. In
S. I. Dobrin & K. B. Kidd (Eds.), Wild things: Children’s culture and ecocriticism (pp. 149-167). Detroit, MI:
Wayne State University Press.
Hsieh, H.F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health
Research, 15(9), 1277–1288.
Hudson, A. (2018). Children’s literature and imaginative geography. Ontario, Canada: Wilfrid Laurier University
Press.
Jackson, H. J. (2001). Marginalia: Readers writing in books. Harrisonburg, VA: R.R. Donnelley & Sons.
Jones, R. (1996) Emerging patterns of literacy. London, UK: Routledge.
Kajder, S. (2006). Meeting readers: Using visual literacy narratives in the classroom. Voices from the Middle, 14(1),
13–19.
Kendall, A. (2008). Playing and resisting: Rethinking young people’s reading cultures. Literacy, 42, 123–130.
Kiefer, B. & Tyson, C. (2018). Charlotte Huck’s children’s literature: A brief guide. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill
Education.
Lane-Zucker, L. (2005). Foreword. In D. Sobel (Ed.) Place-based education: Connecting classrooms and
communities (pp. i-iv). Great Barrington, MA: The Orion Society.
Langhout, R.D. (2003). Reconceptualizing quantitative and qualitative methods: A case study dealing with place
as an exemplar. American Journal of Community Psychology, 32(3-4), 229-244.
Leander, K. (2011). Reading the spatial histories of positioning in a classroom literacy event. In K. Leander & M.
Sheehy (Eds.), Spatializing literacy research and practice (Vol. 15). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
Leander, K., & Boldt, G. (2012). Rereading “A pedagogy of multiliteracies”: Bodies, texts, and emergence. Journal
of Literacy Research, 45(1), 22-46.
Lerer, S. (2012). Devotion and defacement: Reading children’s marginalia. Representations, 118(1), 126–153.
Mackey, M. (2003). At play on the borders of the diegetic: Story boundaries and narrative interpretation. Journal
of Literacy Research, 35(1), 591-632.
Magnusson, K. (2012). Lemony Snicket’s A Series of Unfortunate Events: Daniel Handler and marketing the
author. Children’s Literature Association Quarterly, 37(1), 86–107.
McLaughlin, M. & DeVoogd, G. (2004). Critical literacy as comprehension: Expanding reader response. Journal of
Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 48(1), 52-62.
Morgan, P. (2010). Towards a developmental theory of place attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology,
30(1), 11–22.
Murphey, C. (2002). Places in the heart: Geography through children’s literature. Social Studies Review, 41(2), 84-
86.
Murray G., Fujishima N., & Uzuka M. (2014). The semiotics of place: Autonomy and space. In G. Murray (Ed.),
Social Dimensions of Autonomy in Language Learning (pp. 81-99). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
22
National Assessment Governing Board. (1992). Reading framework for the National Assessment of Educational
Progress. U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from
https://www.nagb.gov/assets/documents/publications/frameworks/reading/2000-reading-
framework/toc.html.
National Association for the Education of Young Children. (2020). About us. Retrieved March 1, 2020, from
https://www.naeyc.org/about-us
Nelson, C. (2006). Writing the reader: The literary child in and beyond the book. Children’s Literature
Association Quarterly, 31(3), 222–236.
Nichols, S. (2011). Young children’s literacy in the activity space of the library: A geosemiotic investigation.
Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 11(2), 164-189.
Nichols, S., Nixon, H., & Rowsell, J. (2011). Researching early childhood literacy in place: A geosemiotic
investigation. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 11(2), 107-113.
Nilsson, M. (2009). Creative pedagogy of play: The work of Gunilla Lindqvist. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 17(1),
14–22.
Nixon, H. (2011). ‘From bricks to clicks’: Hybrid commercial spaces in the landscape of early literacy and learning.
Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 11(2), 114-140.
Noda, A. (2018). Reconstructing the wilderness: Finding identity, culture and values in Filipino children’s
literature. The Journal of Ecocriticism, 8(1), 1-8.
Noddings, N. (1992). The Challenge to care in schools: An alternative approach to education. New York, NY:
Teachers College Press.
Nodelman, P., & Reimer, M. (2003). The pleasures of children’s literature (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
O’Donnell, Wicklund, Pigozzi, & Peterson, A. I., V.S. Furniture, & Bruce Mau Design. (2010). The third teacher: 79
ways you can use design to transform teaching and learning. New York, NY: Abrams.
Orr, D. (2004). Earth in mind: On education, environment, and the human prospect. Washington D.C.: Island
Press.
Pahl, K. & Allan, C. (2011). ‘I don’t know what literacy is:’ Uncovering hidden literacies in a community library
using ecological and participatory research methodologies with children. Journal of Early Childhood
Literacy, 11(2), 190-213.
Pahl, K., & Rowsell, J. (2010). Artifactual literacies: Every object tells a story. New York, NY: Teachers College
Press.
Paris, D. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and practice.
Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93-97.
Pavlik, A., & Bird, H. (2017). Introduction: Maps and mapping in children’s and young adult literature. Children’s
Literature in Education, 48(1), 1-5.
Payne, P. (2010). Remarkable-tracking, experiential education of the ecological imagination. Environmental

Education Research, 16(3-4), 295-310.
23
Probst, R. (1994). Reader-response theory and the English curriculum. The English Journal, 83(3), 37-44.
Rainbird, S. & Rowsell, J. (2011). ‘Literacy nooks’: Geosemiotics and domains of literacy in home spaces. Journal of
Early Childhood Literacy, 11(2), 214-231.
Reid-Walsh, J. (2013). Artifactual memory: Fragmentary ‘memoirs’ of three eighteenth and nineteenth-century
moveable books about their child owners In T. Strong-Wilson, C. Mitchell, A. Susann, & K. Pithouse-
Morgan (Eds.), Productive remembering and social agency transgressions (pp. 197-212)Rotterdam, NL:
Sense Publishers.
Robison, C. M. (2011). Re-reading readership: Phenomenology in literacy research. Paper presented at the Annual
conference of the National Council of Teachers of English Assembly for Research, Madison, WI.
Rosenblatt, L. (1938). Literature as exploration. New York, NY: Appleton-Century.
Rosenblatt, L. (1978). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the literary work. Carbondale, IL:
Southern Illinois University Press.
Roskos, K., & Neuman, S. (2011). The classroom environment: First, last, and always. The Reading Teacher, 65(2),
110-114.
Ryan, M.L. (2001). Narrative as virtual reality: Immersion and interactivity in literature and electronic media.
Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Ryden, K. (1993). Mapping the invisible landscape: Folklore, writing and the sense of place. Iowa City, IA:
University of Iowa Press.
Sanden, S. (2012). Independent reading: Perspectives and practices of highly effective teachers. The Reading
Teacher, 66(3), 222-231.
Seamon, D. (2014). Place attachment and phenomenology: The synergistic dynamism of place. In L. Manzo & P.
Devine-Wright (Eds.), Place attachment: Advances in theory, methods and applications (pp.11-22). London,
UK: Routledge.
Sharon, T., & Woolley, J. (2004). Do monsters dream? Young children's understanding of the fantasy/reality
distinction. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 22(2), 293-310.
Sipe, L. (1999). Children’s response to literature: Author, text, reader, context. Theory into Practice, 38 (3), 120-
129.
Slater, K. (2015). Putting down routes: Translocal place in The Secret Garden. Children’s Literature Association
Quarterly, 40(1), 3–23.
Smagorinsky, P., & Coppock, J. (1995). The reader, the text, the context: An exploration of a choreographed
response to literature. Journal of Literacy Research, 27 (3), 271-298.
Sobel, D. (1993). Children’s special places; Exploring the role of forts, dens, and bush houses in middle childhood.
Tucson, AZ: Zephyr Press.
Sobel, D. (1998). Mapmaking with children: Sense of place education for the elementary years. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
24
Sobel, D. (2005). Place-based education; Connecting classrooms and communities. Great Barrington, MA: The
Orion Society.
Soja, E. (2011). Preface. In K. Leander & M. Sheehy (Eds.), Spatializing literacy research and practice (pp. ix-xiii).
New York, NY: Peter Lang.
Spencer, M. M. (2003). What more needs saying about imagination? Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 47(1),
106–112.
Street, B. (2003). What's "new" in New Literacy Studies? Critical approaches to literacy in theory and practice.
Current Issues in Comparative Education, 5(2), 77-91.
Tarr, P. (2004). Consider the walls. Young Children, 59(3), 88–92.
Tatar, M. (2009). Enchanted hunters: The power of stories in childhood. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company,
Inc.
Torraco, R. J. (2005). Writing integrative literature reviews: Guidelines and examples. Human Resource
Development Review, 4(3), 356-367.
Tuan, Y. F. (2002). Space and place: The perspective of experience. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota
Press.
Tunnell, M., & Jacobs, J. (1989). Using “real” books: Research findings on literature-based reading instruction. The
Reading Teacher, 42(7), 470–477.
Unt, L. (2009). Playing with places: The aesthetic experience of place in a play situation. Phenomenology and
Existentialism in the Twentieth Century, 104, 381-391.
Vanclay, F. (2008). Place matters. In F. Vanclay, M. Higgins, & A. Blackshaw (Eds.), Making sense of place:
Exploring concepts and expressions of place through different senses and lenses (pp. 3-11). Canberra,
Australia: National Museum of Australia Press.
Wake, L. O. (2004). E.B. White’s paean to life: The environmental imagination of Charlotte’s Web. In S. I. Dobrin
& K. B. Kidd (Eds.), Wild things: Children’s culture and ecocriticism (pp. 101-114). Detroit, MI: Wayne State
University Press.
Wason-Ellam, L. (2010). Children’s literature as a springboard to place-based embodied learning. Environmental

Education Research, 16, 279–294.
Wells, R., & Zeece, P. (2007). My place in my world: Literature for place-based environmental education. Early
Childhood Education Journal, 35(3), 285–291.
West, A. (1994). Reading against the text: Developing critical literacy. Changing English: Studies in Culture and
Education, 1(1), 82–101.
Wilkie-Stibbs, C. (2005). Intertextuality and the child reader. In P. Hunt (Ed.), Understanding children’s
literature. New York, NY: Routledge.
Wohlwend, K. (2011). Playing their way into literacies: Reading, writing, belonging, in the early childhood
classroom. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
25

EJ1253934

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

EJ1253934

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Language and Literacy Education Vol.

16 Issue 1—Spring 2020

Placemaking and the Child Reader: Toward a Place-

Keywords: placemaking, place-based education, readers as placemakers, reader response

Introduction1 foundational assumptions of reader response theory

methods of personally responding to texts (Probst, with environmental education, place-conscious

not only legitimate, but central to the classroom Literature Identification

responding to texts. These behaviors are epistemological assumptions it represents as an

influence meaning-making within a reading Exploring a sense of place in children’s in-

our own assumptions and limitations regarding

The primary goal of this literature review was to aid

A secondary goal that emerged from my synthesis

First, it confines reading educators to the

Carroll, J. S. (2011). Landscape in children’s literature. New York, NY: Routledge.

Cresswell, T. (2004). Place: A short introduction. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Gruenewald, D. (2003). Foundations of place: A multidisciplinary framework for place-conscious education.

Jones, R. (1996) Emerging patterns of literacy. London, UK: Routledge.

Payne, P. (2010). Remarkable-tracking, experiential education of the ecological imagination. Environmental

Rosenblatt, L. (1938). Literature as exploration. New York, NY: Appleton-Century.

Tarr, P. (2004). Consider the walls. Young Children, 59(3), 88–92.

Wason-Ellam, L. (2010). Children’s literature as a springboard to place-based embodied learning. Environmental

You might also like