Dear JAAL Readers,

The word confluence is often used to refer to the gathering at a single point of several flowing bodies of water. We chose Confluence as the theme for this issue because it offers a collection of articles that merge streams of ideas to address adolescent and adult literacies. The ideas in this issue flow from various kinds of educator and student collaborations. These collaborations result in innovative, concrete, and asset‐focused recommendations for supporting and advancing adolescents’ and adults’ lifelong literacies.

The commentary, “Calling for a Global Turn to Inform Digital Literacies Education,” is by Jayne C. Lammers and Puji Astuti, collaborators who had previously worked together in a U.S. context before embarking on an Indonesian‐based exploration of secondary students’ digital literacies. Their findings illustrate how perspectives from contexts that have been less frequently studied by literacy researchers can disrupt and expand conventional wisdom about online literacy. The authors argue that current conceptualizations have much to gain by the melding of global perspectives on today’s rapidly evolving digital literacies.

In the United States, one of the most storied confluences is the meeting of the Missouri and Mississippi rivers in St. Louis, Missouri, in the heart of the U.S. Midwest. The first two feature articles for this issue both originated in that same Midwest region, although they reflect a different meaning for confluence, one that focuses on the coming together of people from different backgrounds and perspectives. In “‘I Learned the Rules’: Using a Critical Disciplinary Literacy Model to Foster Disciplinary Apprenticeship,” literacy professor Jeanne Dyches and district court judge Mary Pat Gunderson describe how they codesigned and implemented a secondary curriculum applying a critical literacy perspective to the reading of legal opinions. “Tapping Teen Power: (Re)Positioning Students for Civic Action,” by Cindi M. Koudelka, documents how high school students used youth participatory action research methods to investigate the problem of bullying in their community. Both articles also make interesting connections between social studies content and literacy.

The next two articles speak to the confluence of educators’ perspectives when they work productively in professional learning communities. In “Facilitation Literacy: Circulating Power in Professional Learning Conversations With Teacher Colleagues,” Danielle Lillge describes the benefits for school‐based literacy leaders of analyzing their language use in transcripts from professional interactions with classroom teachers. Heather M. Meston, Emily Phillips Galloway, and Janna Brown McClain explore points of intersection—and divergence—around discussion expectations for middle school students and their teachers in “‘They’re the Ones Who Hold the Answers’: Exploring Educators’ and Students’ Conceptions of Academic Conversation.” Both contributions demonstrate the value for practitioners of being in collectives that explore issues of common concern without trying to achieve consensus too quickly.

Another meaning of confluence refers to a place of junction. One potential junction for the remaining three articles in this issue is their common focus on reconsidering durable but shallow and unhelpful narratives about particular populations of learners. In “Using Culturally Relevant Pedagogy to Influence Literacy Achievement for Middle School Black Male Students,” Shontoria Walker and Laveria Hutchison share an action research study intended to “overcome societal statistics and stereotypes” of young Black men by framing them as—and supporting them in being—“thoughtful, engaged, and competent readers.” Lee Gunderson reviews and reframes findings from the body of research on literacy for English learners, including his own contributions across several decades, in “The Consequences of English Learner as a Category in Teaching, Learning, and Research.” Finally, in “‘As We Talk About This More, a Box Opens Up’: Family Literacy Programs for Fathers in Treatment for Substance Use Disorder,” Angela M. Wiseman, Ashley A. Atkinson, and Qiana R. Cryer‐Coupet offer a nuanced perspective on family literacy from individuals in a residential treatment program for substance abuse—a group of parents whom teachers rarely hear from in their own voices.

Our invited departments each similarly reflect a confluence of perspectives yielding a larger river of ideas about adolescent and adult literacy practice. The Culturally Sustaining Disciplinary Literacies department edited by Chauncey Monte‐Sano offers ideas about commingling classroom languages, in Mina Hernandez Garcia and Mary J. Schleppegrell’s “Culturally Sustaining Disciplinary Literacy for Bi/Multilingual Learners: Creating a Translanguaging Social Studies Classroom.” This issue’s contribution to Kimberly N. Parker’s department, Students and Teachers: Inquiring Together, illustrates the development of shared classroom perspectives, in “Students and Teachers Inquiring Together: Ethnic Studies in the English Classroom” by LaMar Timmons‐Long. Innovative tools for adult literacy education are presented in “Background Knowledge: The Neglected Component in Adult Literacy” by Daphne Greenberg, this issue’s contribution to the We’re All Adults Here department edited by Kristen H. Perry. Cassie J. Brownell and David M. Sheridan highlight new insights garnered from “Orienting Our Ears to Community: Examining Adult‐Produced Field Recordings of a Living‐Learning Community,” for Jon M. Wargo and Gabrielle Oliveira’s Community Literacies: Anthropological Perspectives in Practice department. In “What’s Your Theory of Action? Making Good Trouble With Literacy Assessment,” David Slomp and Norbert Elliot describe how to use literacy data in pursuit of social justice, in the department Slomp edits, Literacy Assessment for Learning.

This issue’s Text & Resource Review Forum adds a final set of insights into the rich flow of ideas in this issue. E. Sybil Durand’s latest contribution to her Global Texts and Contexts forum is “Remembering Global Childhoods.” Cynthia H. Brock and Vassiliki (Vicky) I. Zygouris‐Coe’s Professional Resources review forum features “Language Is a Verb: A Review of Teaching Language as Action in the ELA Classroom” by Georgina McFarlane Barton and Narelle Daffurn.

The confluence of ideas in this issue may be a happy coincidence because people’s actual physical boundary crossing is so limited as we write because of COVID‐19. Yet, we think this issue’s merging of perspectives may not be such a coincidence, arisen, at least in part, from the realities of inequity and literacy that are more starkly revealed by current circumstances. This issue’s contributions suggest new and productive ways forward that can result when varied ideas originating in classrooms and communities across the globe merge in the service of more equity‐focused literacy instruction.

Best,

Kathy and Kelly

Note. © Suttipong Sutiratanachai/Getty Images. The color figure can be viewed in the online version of this article at https://ila.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/.

尊敬的JAAL读者，

这个词汇合通常用来指聚集在水流动的几个机构的一个点。我们选择Confluence作为本期的主题，因为它提供了一系列文章，这些文章融合了各种思路，以解决青少年和成人识字问题。本期中的想法来自各种教育者和学生的合作。这些合作产生了创新，具体和以资产为重点的建议，以支持和推进青少年和成年人的终生识字。

评论员“呼吁全球转向数字素养教育”是Jayne C. Lammers和Puji Astuti的合作者，他们曾在美国进行过合作，然后着手对中学生的数字素养进行印尼考察。 。他们的发现表明，扫盲研究人员很少研究的情境中的观点如何破坏和扩展关于在线扫盲的传统观念。作者认为，通过将全球观点融合到当今迅速发展的数字文学中，当前的概念化将大有裨益。

在美国，最有名的汇合点之一是在美国中西部心脏地带的密苏里州圣路易斯的密苏里河和密西西比河的交汇处。此问题的前两篇专题文章都起源于同一中西部地区，尽管它们反映了合流的不同含义，但重点是不同背景和不同观点的人们的聚在一起。扫盲教授Jeanne Dyches和地方法院法官Mary Pat Gunderson在“'我学到了规则'：使用批判性学科素养模型来培养学科学徒制”中，描述了他们如何进行代码签名并实施了将批判性文化观点应用于阅读的中学课程。法律意见。Cindi M. Koudelka撰写的“挖掘青少年的力量：重新定位学生的公民行动”，记录了高中生如何使用青少年参与式行动研究方法来调查社区中的欺凌问题。这两篇文章还在社会研究内容和读写能力之间建立了有趣的联系。

接下来的两篇文章讲述了教育工作者在专业学习社区中富有成效地工作时观点的融合。Danielle Lillge在“便利素养：与老师同事进行的专业学习对话中的循环力量”中，描述了学校扫盲领导者在与课堂老师进行专业互动时记录的笔录中分析其语言使用对受益者的好处。希瑟·梅斯顿（Heather M. Meston），艾米丽·菲利普斯·加洛韦（Emily Phillips Galloway）和詹娜·布朗·麦克莱恩（Janna Brown McClain）在“他们是掌握答案的人：探索教育者和学生”中探讨中学生及其老师的讨论期望的交叉点和分歧'学术对话的概念。

汇合的另一含义指交界处。本期其余三篇文章的一个潜在结点是，他们共同关注重新考虑关于特定学习者群体的持久但肤浅而无助的叙述。Shontoria Walker和Laveria Hutchison在“使用与文化相关的教学法来影响中学黑人男生的素养成就”中分享了一项行动研究，旨在通过将年轻人定为并支持他们来“克服社会统计和定型观念”。成为“有思想，有敬业精神和有能力的读者”。李·贡德森（Lee Gunderson）在“英语学习者作为教学，学习和研究类别的后果”一书中对英语学习者扫盲研究体系的发现进行了重新整理，包括他数十年来的贡献。最后，

我们邀请的各个部门同样反映出观点的融合，从而产生了关于青少年和成人识字实践的更大思路。由昌西·蒙特·萨诺（Chauncey Monte-Sano）编辑的文化可持续纪律部门，在Mina Hernandez Garcia和Mary J. Schleppegrell的“为双/多语言学习者培养持续的学科素养：创建跨语言的社会研究课堂”中提出了有关混合课堂语言的想法。本期对金伯利·帕克（Kimberly N. Parker）系“学生和教师：一起探究”的贡献在LaMar Timmons-Long的“学生和教师一起探究：英语课堂中的民族研究”中说明了共享课堂观点的发展。“背景知识：达芙妮·格林伯格（Daphne Greenberg）的《成人识字率被忽视的组成部分》，这是克里斯汀·H·佩里（Kristen H. Perry）编辑的《我们都是成年人在这里》部的贡献。Cassie J. Brownell和David M. Sheridan为Jon M. Wargo和Gabrielle Oliveira的《社区素养：实践中的人类学视角》重点介绍了“将耳朵对准社区：检查成人学习的生活学习社区的现场记录”中获得的新见解。部。在“您的行动理论是什么？David Slomp和Norbert Elliot在Slomp编辑部《学习扫盲评估》中描述了如何使用扫盲数据追求社会正义。Brownell和David M. Sheridan重点介绍了Jon M. Wargo和Gabrielle Oliveira的《社区素养：实践中的人类学观点》，题为“让我们的耳朵适应社区：检查生活学习社区的成人制作现场​​记录”。在“您的行动理论是什么？David Slomp和Norbert Elliot在Slomp编辑的“学习扫盲评估”部门描述了如何使用扫盲数据追求社会正义。Brownell和David M. Sheridan重点介绍了Jon M. Wargo和Gabrielle Oliveira的《社区素养：实践中的人类学观点》，题为“让我们的耳朵适应社区：检查生活学习社区的成人制作现场​​记录”。在“您的行动理论是什么？David Slomp和Norbert Elliot在Slomp编辑的“学习扫盲评估”部门描述了如何使用扫盲数据追求社会正义。在“您的行动理论是什么？David Slomp和Norbert Elliot在Slomp编辑的“学习扫盲评估”部门描述了如何使用扫盲数据追求社会正义。在“您的行动理论是什么？David Slomp和Norbert Elliot在Slomp编辑的“学习扫盲评估”部门描述了如何使用扫盲数据追求社会正义。

本期的“文本与资源评论论坛”为本期丰富的思想流添加了最终的见解。E. Sybil Durand对她的“全球文本和背景”论坛的最新贡献是“记住全球童年”。Cynthia H. Brock和Vassiliki（Vicky）I. Zygouris-Coe的专业资源评论论坛的主题是Georgina McFarlane Barton和Narelle Daffurn撰写的“语言是动词：ELA课堂上的语言作为行动的回顾”。

由于COVID‐19，人们实际的物理边界越过局限，正如我们所写的那样，这个问题上的思想汇合可能是一个快乐的巧合。但是，我们认为，这个问题的观点融合可能并非如此巧合，至少部分是由于当前情况更加明显地体现了不平等和识字的现实。这个问题的贡献表明，当源自全球教室和社区的各种想法融合在一起，以更注重公平的扫盲教育为宗旨时，就会产生新的，富有成效的前进方式。

最好，

凯西和凯利

注意。©Suttipong Sutiratanachai /盖蒂图片社。可以在本文的在线版本中通过以下网址查看颜色图形：https：//ila.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/。