Abstract
This chapter discusses the centrality of texts in literacy events and their embedded literacy practices. Addressing this centrality, Barton and Hamilton (2000) assert that “Texts are a crucial part of literacy events” (p. 9). They perceive texts of any kind—be they a piece of written text or texts that are pivotal to the activity or talk around a text—as embedded parts of literacy events. However, literacy events are not limited to these because they can refer to “situations where one or more people engage in an activity in which print texts are central for language interactions” (Comber and Cormack 1997, p. 24). Small group discussions in this study are also literacy events because there is “a written text or texts, central to the activity” (Barton and Hamilton 2000, p. 8). Texts are the motivation for discussions, and talk about texts is embedded in literacy practices. The immediate contribution of talk about texts in the classroom is engagement in verbal interaction, which provides participants with opportunities (a) to practise and promote their speaking and listening skills and (b) to develop the literacy and the culture of discussion about the issue(s) embedded in the texts.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Alexander, L. G. (1973). For and against: An oral practice book for advanced students of English. London: Longman Group Ltd.
Barnitz, J. G. (1994). Discourse diversity: Principles for authentic talk and literacy instruction. Journal of Reading, 37(7), 586–591.
Barton, D., & Hamilton, M. (2000). Literacy practices. In D. Barton, M. Hamilton, & R. Ivanic (Eds.), Situated literacies: reading & writing in context (pp. 7–15). London: Routledge.
Bayliss, A. (1996). The influence of candidate behaviour on verbal proficiency ratings in live versus audiotaped interviews. Unpublished Master’s thesis in Applied Linguistics, Bond University, Queensland.
Beach, R., & Phinnery, M. (1998). Framing literacy text worlds through real-world social negotiations. Linguistics and Education, 9(2), 159–198.
Bellingham, L. (1993). The relationship of language proficiency to academic success for international students. New Zealand Journal of Education Studies, 30(2), 229–232.
Brown, D. H. (1998). Does IELTS preparation work? An application of the context-adaptive model of language program evaluation. EA Journal, 1, 20–37.
Brown, A., & Hill, K. (1998). Interviewer style and candidate performance in the IELTS verbal interview. IELTS Research Reports, 1, 1–19.
Candlin, C. N., & Mercer, N. (2001). English language teaching in its social context. In M. P. Breen (Ed.), Navigating the discourse on what is learned in the language classroom (pp. 306–322). London: Routedge.
Chi, F. M. (2001). Intertextual talk as collaborative shared inquiry in learning English as a foreign language. Proceedings of the National Science Council, Republic of China, 11(3), 247–255.
Coffin, C. (2004). Arguing about how the world is or how the world should be: The role of argument in IELTS tests. English for Academic Purposes, 3(3), 229–246.
Comber, B., & Cormack, P. (1997). Looking beyond ‘Skills’ and ‘Processes’: Literacy as social and cultural practices in classroom. UKRA Reading, 31(3), 22–29.
Cotton, F., & Conrow, F. (1998). An Investigation of the Predictive Validity of IELTS amongst a Group of International Students studying at the University of Tasmania. English Language Testing System Research Reports, 1, 72–115.
Dooey, P. (1999). An investigation into the predictive validity of the IELTS Test as an indicator of future academic success. Paper presented at the Teaching in the Disciplines/Learning in Context University of Western Australia.
Dysthe, O. (1996). The multivoiced classroom: Interactions of writing and classroom discourse. Written Communication, 13, 385–425.
Eco, U. (1990). The limits of interpretation. Blomington: Indiana University Press.
Elder, C., & O’Loughlin, K. (2003). Investigating the relationship between Intensive English Language Study and band score gain on IELTS. IELTS Research Reports, 3, 207–254.
Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (1995). Writing ethnographic field notes. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Feast, V. (2002). The impact of IELTS scores on performance at university. International Educational Journal, 3(4), 70–85.
Galbraith, B., Van Tassell, M. A., & Wells, G. (1999). On learning with and from our students. In G. Wells (Ed.), Dialogic inquiry: Toward a sociocultural practice and theory of education (pp. 293–312). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gaskins, I. W. (1994). Classroom applications of cognitive science: Teaching poor readers how to learn, think, and problem solve. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom lessons (pp. 129–154). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Gillham, B. (2000). Case study research methods. London: Continuum.
Hall, J. K. (1993). The role of oral practices in the accomplishment of our everyday lives: The sociocultural dimension of interaction with implications for the learning of another language. Applied Linguistics, 14(2), 145–166.
Halliday, M. A. K. (2003). On language and linguistics. New York: Continuum.
Iddings, A. C. D. (2005). Linguistic access and participation: English language learners in an English-dominant community of practice. Bilingual Research Journal, 29(1), 165–183.
IELTS. (2007). IELTS handbook 2007. Cambridge: UCLES.
Kerstjens, M., & Nery, C. (2000). Predictive validity in the IELTS test: A study of the relationship between IELTS scores and students subsequent academic performance. English Language Testing System Research Reports, 3, 85–108.
Lantolf, J. P. (2000). Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Love, K. (2001). The construction of verbal subjectivities of talk around text in secondary English. Linguistics and Education, 11(3), 213–249.
Martin, J. R. (1989). Factual writing: Exploring and challenging social reality. London: Oxford University Press.
Mckay, S. L. (2006). Researching second language classrooms. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Merrylees, B., & McDowell, C. (1999). An investigation of speaking test reliability with particular reference to examiner attitude to the speaking test format and candidate/examiner discourse produced. IELTS Research Reports, 2, 1–35.
Mickan, P., & Slater, S. (2003). Text analysis and the assessment of Academic writing. IELTS Research Reports, Canberra ACT: Australia, 5, 59–88.
Mickan, P. (2004). Teaching Strategies. In C. Conlan (Ed.), Teaching English language in Australia: Theoretical perspectives and practical issues (pp. 193–214). Perth: APUI Network.
Mickan, P. (2007). Doing science and home economics: Curriculum socialization of new arrivals to Australia. Language and Education, 1(21), 1–17.
Moghaddam, S., & Mickan, P. (2014a). Iranian students’ preparation for IELTS: Development of verbal argumentative texts. The International Journal of Teaching and Teacher Education, 2(2), 161–182.
Moghaddam, S., & Mickan, P. (2014b). An investigation of IELTS preparation courses for university study: Development of written and verbal argumentative texts. Saarbrucken: Scholars’ Press.
Morse, J. M., & Richards, L. (2002). Readme first: For a user’s guide to qualitative methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Myers, J. (1988) Literacy paradigms and language research methodology: Eric reproduction document ED 300768.
Ochs, E. (1999). Transcription as theory. In A. Jaworski & A. Candela (Eds.), The discourse reader (pp. 167–182). London/New York: Routledge.
O’Loughlin, K. (2000). The impact of gender in the IELTS Verbal Interview. IELTS Research Reports, 3, 1–28.
RALTEC. (2007). Welcome to RALTEC (Rahrovan Advanced Language Teaching Centre). Accessed 28 Jan 2007.
Read, J., & Hayes, B. (2003). The impact of IELTS on preparation for academic study in New Zealand. IELTS Research Reports, 4, 153–205.
Saville-Troike, M. (2003). The ethnography of communication (3rd ed.). Oxford, USA: Blackwell Publishing.
Schieffelin, B. B., & Ochs, E. (1986). Language socialization. Annual Review of Anthropology, 15, 163–191.
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational researcher, 27, 4–13.
Street, B. V. (2003). What’s new in new literacy studies? Current Issues in Comparative Education, 5(2), 1–14.
Unrau, N. J., & Moss, G. (1996). Negotiated literacies: How children enact what counts as reading in different social settings. Open University: Milton Keynes.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1991). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Wells, G. (1990). Talk about text: Where literacy is learned and taught. Curriculum Inquiry, 20(4), 369–405.
Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind as action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix
Appendix
An Explanation of Transcript Preparation
In order to prepare the collected data for transcription, firstly, the author transferred the recorded materials (audio and or video) from a digital audio recorder and video recorder into a “Pentium 3 Computer” on the same day. Then, using a computer, he converted the transferred materials into compatible versions to be recordable on raw audio and video CDs. Next, he transferred the data from the computer to the raw CDs. This process was necessary to prepare the collected data for the purpose of transcription and to keep an electronic copy for future references and for the validity and credibility of the research project. After, he began transcribing the collected data of each session off -site. This process firstly involved developing a manuscript of events that had occurred in the classroom—for instance, the candidates’ engagement in classroom literacy practices through the use of texts. He did not transcribe every detail because, as Ochs (1999) has stated, a perfect transcription is unlikely to emerge. However, for some unreadable parts, he sometimes had to replay that part several times for the sake of not missing any significant pattern or information.
For the study focus, he tried to be selective in the transcription (Ochs 1999) and attempted to transcribe significant data by reviewing and re-reviewing the data while having an eye to the research questions. This deliberation was important because “a transcript that is too detailed is difficult to follow and assess.” Next, he typed and retyped the manuscripts so that the first draft of the transcription of the raw data was ready in time for the next part of the process. This provided the author with an opportunity to obtain further insights into the data.
Finally, he categorised classroom literacy practices, field notes, and interviews. He followed the steps in the process of data analysis one by one seeking to identify the significant patterns.
Copyright information
© 2017 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Moghaddam, S. (2017). Text: A Means for Language Socialisation in Communities of Practice. In: Mickan, P., Lopez, E. (eds) Text-Based Research and Teaching. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59849-3_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59849-3_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-137-59848-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-59849-3
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)