Scholarlink

<p>Various literacy standards, assessments, and position statements call for increased exposure and access to high-quality nonfiction for young people. This content analysis involved in-depth examinations of 40 nonfiction children’s books that were winners or honors from 2001 to 2024 of at least two of three awards: (1) the NCTE Orbis Pictus Award for Outstanding Nonfiction for Children, (2) the Boston Globe-Horn Book Award for Nonfiction, and (3) the ALSC Robert F. Sibert Informational Book Medal. The purpose was to provide an overview of the nature of these award-winning nonfiction books, including patterns found within and across the texts. Findings indicate a positive shift toward more visually appealing texts that feature high levels of literary merit. However, findings also indicate possible committee biases and preferences that privilege particular writing styles, with only four of the 40 books featuring expository writing styles instead of narrative. Additionally, our analysis revealed a privileging of texts for older readers and a disproportionate emphasis on social studies topics and concepts.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Patterns, Problems, and Possibilities: A Content Analysis of Award-Winning Children’s Nonfiction

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月27日

查看全文
  • Lynne M. Watanabe Kganetso,
  • Paul H. Ricks,
  • Terrell A. Young

摘要

Various literacy standards, assessments, and position statements call for increased exposure and access to high-quality nonfiction for young people. This content analysis involved in-depth examinations of 40 nonfiction children’s books that were winners or honors from 2001 to 2024 of at least two of three awards: (1) the NCTE Orbis Pictus Award for Outstanding Nonfiction for Children, (2) the Boston Globe-Horn Book Award for Nonfiction, and (3) the ALSC Robert F. Sibert Informational Book Medal. The purpose was to provide an overview of the nature of these award-winning nonfiction books, including patterns found within and across the texts. Findings indicate a positive shift toward more visually appealing texts that feature high levels of literary merit. However, findings also indicate possible committee biases and preferences that privilege particular writing styles, with only four of the 40 books featuring expository writing styles instead of narrative. Additionally, our analysis revealed a privileging of texts for older readers and a disproportionate emphasis on social studies topics and concepts.