Advertisement

Researching Academic Literacies

  • David Bloome
  • Gilcinei T. Carvalho
  • Sanghee Ryu

Abstract

This chapter discusses how three theoretical perspectives of learning to use written language in academic domains each frame a logic of inquiry for conducting research. The first perspective, academic literacy, focuses on identification and acquisition of underlying, autonomous, cognitive processes and strategies associated with expert use of written language in and across academic domains. The second perspective, academic literacies as academic socialization, asks how social practices involving the use of written language vary across social contexts and how literacy practices within an academic community are acquired. The third perspective, academic literacies as chronotopic, dialectical social practices, views academic literacy practices as continuously being refracted and recontextualized to address new and evolving situations, influencing meaning-making. Juxtaposing the three perspectives creates a series of tensions that researchers need to address in crafting a logic-of-inquiry on the use of written language in academic learning.

Keywords

Academic literacy Literacies Academic socialization Heteroglossia Power relations Personhood 

References

  1. Afflerbach, P. (2009). Verbal reports and protocol analysis. In M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, P. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research, volume III (pp. 163–179). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Alexander, P. (2003). The development of expertise: The journey from acclimation to proficiency. Educational Researcher, 32, 10–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bakhtin, M. (1935/1981). In M. Holquist (Ed.), The dialogic imagination: Four essays by M. M. Bakhtin. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  4. Baynham, M., & Prinsloo, M. (2009). Introduction. In M. Baynham & M. Prinsloo (Eds.), The future of literacy studies (pp. 1–20). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bloome, D., Carter, S., Christian, B., Otto, S., & Shuart-Faris, N. (2005). Discourse analysis and the study of classroom language and literacy events A Microethnographic approach. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  6. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Castanheira, M. L., Street, B., & Carvalho, G. T. (2015). Navigating across academic contexts: Campo and Angolan students in a Brazilian university. Pedagogies. An International Journal, 10, 70–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Duff, P. (2010). Language socialization into academic discourse communities. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 30, 169–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Egan-Robertson, A. (1998). Learning about culture, language, and power: Understanding relationships among personhood, literacy practices, and intertextuality. Journal of Literacy Research, 30, 449–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Geisler, C. (2013). Academic literacy and the nature of expertise: Reading, writing, and knowing in academic philosophy. Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Goldman, S. R., & Bloome, D. (1997). Learning to construct and integrate. In A. F. Healy (Ed.), Experimental cognitive psychology and its applications: Festshrift in honor of Lyle Bourne, Walter Kintsch, and Thomas Landauer (pp. 169–182). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  12. Goldman, S. R., Britt, A., Bown, W., Cribb, G., George, M., Greenleaf, C., et al. (2016). Disciplinary literacies and learning to read for understanding: A conceptual framework for disciplinary literacy. Educational Psychologist, 51, 219–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gutierrez, K. (2008). Developing a sociocritical literacy in third space. Reading Research Quarterly, 43, 148–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ivanic, R. (1998). Writing and identity. The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lea, M. A., & Street, B. (2006). The ‘academic literacies’ model: Theory and applications. Theory into Practice, 45, 368–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lea, M. R., & Street, B. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education, 23, 157–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lillis, T., Harrington, K., Lea, M., & Mitchell, S. (Eds.). (2015). Working with academic literacies. Case studies towards transformative practice. Fort Collins, CO: The WAC Clearinghouse.Google Scholar
  19. Lillis, T., & Scott, M. (2007). Defining academic literacies research: Issues of epistemologies, ideology and strategy. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 41, 5–32.Google Scholar
  20. Newell, G., Bloome, D., Hirvela, A., Van Der Heide, J., Wynhoff Olsen, A., & Lin, T.-J. (with Buescher, E., Goff, B., Kim, M., Ryu, S., & Weyand, L.). (2015). Teaching and learning argumentative writing in high school English language arts classrooms. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Prior, P., & Bilbro, R. (2012). Academic enculturation: Developing literate practices and disciplinary identities. In M. Castelló & C. Donahue (Eds.), University writing: Selves and texts in academic societies (pp. 19–31). Brill. Retrieved July 13, 2016, from http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/books/b9781780523873s003
  22. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Russel, D. R., Lea, M., Parker, J., Street, B., & Donahue, T. (2009). Exploring notions of genre in “academic literacies” and “writing across the curriculum”: Approaches across countries and contexts. In C. Bazerman, A. Bonini, & D. Figueiredo (Eds.), Genre in a changing world (pp. 395–423). Fort Collins, CO: The WAC Clearinghouse/Parlor Press.Google Scholar
  24. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1991). Literate expertise. In K. A. Ericsson & J. Smith (Eds.), Toward a general theory of expertise: Prospects and limits (pp. 172–194). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Schieffelin, B., & Ochs, E. (1986). Language socialization. Annual Review of Anthropology, 15, 163–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Shanahan, C., Shanahan, T., & Misischia, C. (2011). Analysis of expert readers in three disciplines. Journal of Literacy Research, 43(4), 393–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Street, B. (1995). Social literacies: Critical approaches to literacy in development, education and ethnography. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  28. Street, B. (2000). Literacy events and literacy practices: Theory and practice in the ‘New Literacy Studies’. In M. Martin-Jones & K. Jones (Eds.), Multilingual literacies: Reading and writing different worlds (pp. 17–30). Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  29. Street, B. (2015). Academic writing: Theory and practice. Journal of Educational Issues, 1, 110–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Williams, R. (1977). Marxism and literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Wingate, U. (2015). Academic literacy and student diversity: The case for inclusive practice. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Bloome
    • 1
  • Gilcinei T. Carvalho
    • 2
  • Sanghee Ryu
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Teaching and Learning, College of Education and Human EcologyThe Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA
  2. 2.Universidade Federal de Minas GeraisBelo Horizonte – MGBrazil
  3. 3.Research Center of Korean Language and Literature EducationKorea UniversitySeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations