Disciplinary Literacy in English

1.) The Discipline

1. Types of Questions: 
2. Description:
   1. “Students read a wide range of print and non-print texts to build an understanding of texts, of themselves, and of the cultures of the United States and the world; to acquire new information; to respond to the needs and demands of society and the workplace; and for personal fulfillment. Among these texts are fiction and nonfiction, classic and contemporary works.”
3. Examples:
   1. What is the purpose of the text?
   2. What are the themes?
   3. What is the setting?
   4. How is it relevant to the outside world?

Citations: NCTE & http://www.readwritethink.org/classroom-resources/lesson-plans/active-reading-through-self-30702.html

1. Methods of inquiry

Description of state standards:

1. Making evidence based claims
   1. Using sources to support claims
   2. “Students apply a wide range of strategies to comprehend, interpret, evaluate, and appreciate texts. They draw on their prior experience, their interactions with other readers and writers, their knowledge of word meaning and of other texts, their word identification strategies, and their understanding of textual features”

Example:

• How does this relate to the text?
  • How can you justify your reasoning?

Citation: NCTE

• Types of text
  • Different disciplines:
    • “Students read a wide range of print and non-print texts to build an understanding of texts, of themselves, and of the cultures of the United States and the world; to acquire new information; to respond to the needs and demands of society and the workplace; and for personal fulfillment. Among these texts are fiction and nonfiction, classic and contemporary works.”
  • Examples:
    • Novels, articles, poems, digital texts, newspapers, films
  • NCTE
  • Disciplinary literacy practices
    • What do they do
      • Analyze and connect to the outside world
      • Explain greater themes of life
    • Give examples
      • Catcher in the Rye’s teenage angst
      • John Locke’s theory of perception being based upon our experiences can be used in the real world

Citation: NCTE:

2) Ideas For Teaching a. Engaging Students in Cycles of Inquiry 

What specific ways can teachers engage students in authentic disciplinary cycles of inquiry (think back to the videos you’ve watched) 

What are the benefits and limitations of the specific examples your provide? 

Acting out plays  serves as an outlet to express themselves and play a role that they otherwise would not. There are many benefits of acting and role playing, such as an increase in self confidence and social skills (George 6). I personally do not consider myself a theater-person, but I want to open this door to my students, even if it not my first choice. George notes, “Drama can be a positive experience, which helps [students] feel as if they are part of a group,” (6). Maybe this topic will appear in a later blog post for me, but it is worth stating that inclusion of all students can eliminate bullying and oppression of students that don’t “fit in.”

Source: George, N. J. (2000). Beneficial use of dramatics in the classroom. New England Reading Association Journal, 36(2), 6. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/207969276?accountid=10610

• Benefits include that students can express their creativity while also allowing them to understand the play because they have to act it out for themselves. 
• Limitations are that some students may not be as social as others and could not get the full use out of acting out the play. Another limitation is that this could shy away from the point of english studies and just simply turn into acting. 

Specific ways that teachers can authentically engage in authentic disciplinary cycles of inquiry: 

• Having students engage in close readings of texts 
• Students may engage in grammar criticism by analyzing the grammatical content of a work. 

B. Engineering and scaffolding success 

1. What specific ways have you seen teachers engineer and scaffold students’ success as they invite them into disciplinary practices? (videos may have some, but I imagine the articles will be more helpful here)

• Nicholas saw a teacher have the kids play a game called “and then.” In this game, the students would play a “hot potato” style game wherein the students take turns recapping the synopsis of a recently read material.This teaching strategy teaches students learn to understand and recap the plot points of a recently read textual material. 

1. What are the benefits and limitations of the specific examples you provide? 
   • Benefits include forcing students to tackle the plot structure of a work
   • Limitations may include encouraging scanning of works over close readings

C. Examining words and ways with words 

1. What specific ways have you seen teachers invite students to examine disciplinary ways with words? (perhaps in the field, articles, or videos) 

• Jonah saw a placement teacher assign students a specific passage to read from The Outsiders that contained multiple oxymorons and waited to see if they would stand out to students. She would then ask the students what they thought of the specific sentences and see if any student notices patterns between them. Next, she would explain that these all were examples of oxymorons and ask students to point out more as the reading continued. (8th Grade English, Campus School at Carlow)This is related to the reading rockets video we watched as the teacher didn’t jump directly into the why but let the students play with the words until they started to see patterns developing and understood the concepts themselves. (Reading Rockets https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K731qicwYcY&feature=youtu.be&list=PLLxDwKxHx1yKC2UoFwgiUAoZyrqYiDsGB)
• Grammar rants are another example of ways words and ways of wording things affects the discipline. The rules and specifications of grammar dictate the ways in which teachers accept a “correct” or “incorrect” answer. However, grammar rants, that is angry rants about grammar, can be used to study these rules as well.(Lindblom and Dunn)

1. What are the benefits and limitations of the specific examples you provide?

• The benefits of Jonah’s example are that it’s not just a boring definition of a term, but rather letting the students figure out what oxymorons were by themselves, making it easier to acknowledge these in future readings. The limitations are that you can’t make sure every student is paying attention, and can’t ensure students will look for the oxymorons in the future.
• Grammar rant studies may encourage an overly obsessive focus on grammar over literary content(not seeing the forest for the trees)

D. Evaluating claims and ways with words 

1. How can teachers help students evaluate the quality of claims according to the real standards of the discipline? 

• Rainey and Storm wrote an article about involving digital literacies in a literary classroom. One activity they did involved bringing in digital artifacts and examining the words in things such as music videos.  There was one instance where the students analyzed a music video so much that the student who brought it in never wanted to watch it again. They pointed out that it was actually racially driven and offensive in some parts, and this was only made possible through analyzing the words through an English lens. (Rainey and Storm)

1. What are the benefits and limitations of the specific examples you provide?

• Benefits are getting a student to actually want to engage with English disciplines by involving things they are passionate about. 
• Limitations are that because of the repetition of the music video, students then remove themselves from the activity, or the students could be too interested in the music video that they forget the importance of the activity 

Citation: Lindblom, Kenneth, and Patricia A. Dunn. “Analyzing Grammar Rants: An Alternative to Traditional Grammar Instruction.” English Journal, vol. 95, no. 5, Jan. 2006, p. 71., doi:10.2307/30046592.                                      

Throughout our discussions of disciplinary literacy, we have observed how various groups engage in various literacies depending on the group involved.  Each of these literacies possesses individual worldviews, specific terms and phrases, and a particular terminology that defines how to improve one’s understanding of the discipline.  We’ve repeatedly touched on different ways to introduce this concept to students.  A multiplicity of education videos, scholarly articles and education conferences have all pointed toward the importance of introducing disciplinary literacy to students.  However, there is one question that I feel as though we should be asking: what about the teacher? If it is true that the students should be brought into the worldview and sociocultural perspective of students, then shouldn’t teachers be brought into the sociocultural perspective of students.

The last twenty years of language teacher education(or LTE for short) has focused on the emergence of sociocultural perspectives on teacher learning.(Editorial) However, I would argue that teacher learning should not just be restricted to pedagogical theories. Rather, it should also focus on student and teacher relationships and interactions.  As Gee points out in his example of the father and son learning to read, both the son and the father occupy pivotal roles in the discourse of reading. (Gee) The discourse relies on the active participation of both parties in-order to achieve its intended effect. If this is true for as simple an activity as reading, then how much more vital must the relationship be between students and teachers in a public(or private/charter) school setting.

If disciplinary literacy can exist for something like skateboarding, then it would therefore manifest in nearly every peer-group.(Olshefski) Since that is the case, we must naturally assume that it exists in the student body.  But, then again, we really don’t need to look to scholarly articles to uncover this fact.  Everybody who’s ever been in a school knows this.  There are always cliques: “preps” “jocks” “nerds” ect. And each one of these groups possesses a distinctive literacy.  “Preps” have certain styles of dress. “Jocks” have certain body language and distinctive vocabulary. And “nerds” have very specific interests that probably differ from other peer groups. I will leave the specific interpretations of these habits to reader interpretation. 

Furthermore, these literacies, these languages that students use, help to define their view of the world.  This is shown in Kirkland and Jackson’s study of black masculine literacy.  For their subjects, the world was defined by “a tapestry of traits, blacknesses and masculinities as to decode and encode texts.” (Kirkland and Jackson). While their study focuses on a particular set of test subjects, their findings on general worldview can be interpreted to apply for a variety of student literacies. 

The fact is teachers teach people…not students…people. This is something that should never be forgotten.  But those people occupy a variety of roles, one of which is student.  And when you are a student, you have a particular worldview and set of concerns and problems.

I argue it is the obligation of the teacher to understand and recognize their role in the student’s life experiences. For students, concerns, either social or educational, effect how they operate and interact with education.  Per example, there might be a teacher who wants to give their students a brand new and unique learning experience. However, this might not fit into the sociocultural perspective of the students, being something foreign and therefore stress inducing.  A teacher may unintentionally make themselves into a enemy of their students due to an inability to recognize the sociocultural values of the student’s perspectives. A teacher might unintentionally give a particular set of students an over-inflated sense of ego due to mis-reading the values of that group.

Teachers need be develop the skills necessary to properly interpret the views and values of a student. That way, the teacher gains access to the mind of the students and can construct an education more fitting for their needs.

WORKS CITED:

Gee, J. P. (2001). Reading as situated language: A sociocognitive perspective. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 44(8), 714-725.

Kirkland, D. E., & Jackson, A. (2009). “We real cool”: Toward a theory of black masculine literacies. Reading Research Quarterly, 44(3), 278-297.

Olshefski, Christopher. (2019) “Skateboarding as a discipline” Duquesne University

Barkhuizen, Gary; Borg, Simon.Language Teaching Research; London Vol. 14, Iss. 3,  (Jul 2010): 237-240.

Friedrich Nietzsche(1844-1900): the German Philosopher declared “God is Dead.”

Sōsuke Aizen: The main antagonist of Tite Kubo’s popular manga/anime series Bleach. The man who surpassed both Soul Reapers and Hollows.

Education: the process of giving and receiving systematic knowledge through a formal setting

What, you may be wondering, do these three things have in common with each other? I don’t know but that is for the students to find out.

Overview regarding this topic

The definition that I have above of education is a slightly modified version of the dictionary definition of education. I believe it is a highly insufficient model of education. Education is not just transmitting knowledge. In fact, that definition is probably the farthest thing from education. Rather, education is the constructing of the moral, intellectual and critical minds of the next generations of humans. Too often, we think of education through the mindset of grades, papers, tests and statistics. We forget the fact that teachers are forming an entire generation of human beings, who will in turn forge a new generation after them. As such, this limited mindset of tests and papers must be supplemented with critical thinking skills that will help students to determine right from wrong in the world.

Specifically in English Language Arts, the moral side is often either over moralized, as Juzwik mentions in her article, or generally ignored. Often, teachers are too occupied asking what is the conflict in the story and forget the ask the students: “what do you think of this conflict? Who is right and who is wrong?”

This general over moralization of texts runs the risk of actually decreasing the critical thinking skills of students. They are not forced to answer the big questions about the text.

Just to be clear, I am not simply talking about reader-response. What I am talking about is a deeper reading and application of the events, characters and ideas presented to the texts into our real world literacy. How can what students read in the text influence how they read the world.

Now, let us look at a hypothetical example of this kind of deep-thinking literary study.

An brief overview of Nietzsche

This is not a philosophy blog so I will keep the discussion on Nietzsche as focused as possible. Friedrich Nietzsche revolutionized modern philosophy. He is most well know for his ideals of the Übermensch, existentialism, anti-nihlism/nihilism, and the “death of God.” For the sake of this discussion, we will be focusing on the former and the latter.

His famous “God is dead” quote steamed from his belief that the development of European society had effectively “killed” the Jeudo-Christian God. With that death, Nietzsche believed that Christian morality, which he despised, and all forms of morality and reality had perished. However, Nietzsche believed heavily in the power and ability of mankind. He constructed the Übermensch, which roughly translates as the “super-man” or “overman” to fill that role.

The Übermensch was a philisophical goal which Nietzsche set for humanity. This “overman” would create a brand new world order and a new worldly morality that would replace the now “dead” Jeudo-Christian God.

Aizen: Tite Kubo’s Übermensch

Again, this is not an anime/manga blog so I will keep everything on Aizen to the basics.

Sōsuke Aizen, originally introduced in chapter 79 of Tite Kubo’s hit manga series Bleach, seemingly an answer to Nietzsche’s desires. Sōsuke Aizen is a member of the Shinigami(lit. Death Gods) or Soul Reapers and works under the Soul Society. However, as the series progresses, it is revealed that Aizen is actually a Machiavellian super villain who becomes the main antagonist of the series.

However, it is Aizen’s personal motivations and philosophy that make him note worthy. Aizen despises the Soul King, the Bleach series’ version of God, and wishes to eradicate the established, and in his view, corrupt social order.

Importantly, Aizen is presented as seemingly perfect. He is stronger and smarter(and better looking) than every other character in the entire series.

Thus, we see a very clear connection to Nietzsche’s Übermensch. Aizen, the “superior being” will kill “God” and establish a superior order.

Using student’s interests to further educaiton.

Bringing this back to education, we will set up a hypothetical situation. Let’s say that Bleach is super popular with students right now. Thus, we, the teacher, have decided to teach capitalize on it for educational purposes.

Here, we are presented with an incredible opportunity. Kubo has clearly drawn on Nietzsche to create Aizen, then we will use that to teach our students as well.

Rather than just having students answer questions about: what is Aizen’s motivation and how does this impact the conflict, we will instead ask students to apply this to the real world.

We will have students compare Nietzsche’s philosophies to Aizen’s character.

“Would Nietzsche approve of this kind of person? Is Aizen right or wrong? Is Nietzsche right or wrong? Is the society I live in corrupt? If so, is Aizen’s path the right way? Is Nietzsche right about morality? And what bad things can happen if people do follow Nietzsche?”

An important point about Nietzsche is that many of his philosophies were adopted by Nazism. So students should also be informed of this.

From here, with Aizen as a base, students should ask:

“Would Nietzsche approve of Nazism? Is the Nietzschen philosophy dangerous? Do these philosophies encourage dangerous political parties? And is this philosophies inherently biased against religions and minorities? And should I adopt a life philosophy like this?”

Juzwik points out that students that are left unattended can be misled into dangerous mindsets. As such the teacher should be present guiding these discussions. However, these are the kinds of discussions that should be engaging students.

Students, with a familiar subject matter, are encouraged and challenged to think deeper about how they process the world.

Concluding Thoughts

Obviously this example is unrealistic. However, I think it provides a good model. Students should be challenged in their thinking and literacy has the means to do that.

Kids are not stupid and teachers should not dumb-down their learning. Literature, of any kind, opens a student’s mind to the various life-philosophies that they can encounter in the world. If left unguided, they may be lost and confused.

It is the responsibility of teachers to teach students to interact responsibly and critically with the world, and literary studies are the gate-way to that deeper learning.

Works Cited:

Juzwik, M. M. (2013). The ethics of teaching disturbing pasts: Reader response, historical contextualization, and rhetorical (con) textualization of Holocaust texts in English. English Education, 45(3), 284-308

Tite Kubo’s Aizen and the Depth’s of Themes. From Reddit, by user SkiScotch

What stands out to me as the most interesting part of this article as relating to education is the multiple references and descriptions to a leader or idol figure that the ‘cool kids’ identify with.  Often the article refers to various figures within pop culture that the ‘cool kids’ value as imitation worthy such as Jay-Z and Tupac Shakur. Now, one may be quick to dismiss this as merely a child’s idolization of celebrities.  However, this is not the case. To quote the article, Kirkland and Jackson specifically refer to Tupac Shakur as Etherin’s “Hip-Hop hero.”  Now, if the children in this study are engaging in the disciplinary literacy of “cool.”  Then, we must view re-phrase and re-contextualize this relationship. 

The ‘cool kids’ through their various means of symbolic self-expression have mastered their discipline.  They produce and control the rule of what is ‘cool,’ ‘fresh’ or ‘phat.’ However, they still draw inspiration from and are influenced by these celebrity personalities.  These celebrities are not experts in the discipline.  They are not directly part of the peer group nor do they ever directly interact with the disciplinary group.  However, the discipline is influence by them.

For the majority of our class’ discussion of disciplinary literacy, we have focused on two major groups: the disciplines’ experts and novices.  However, I would propose a third category be added to this discussion: disciplinary heroes.

A disciplinary hero supersedes or even exists outside of a mere disciplinary expert.  However, they also inform the discipline in very dramatic ways.  They radically change and influence how they experts operate and even the general rules of the discipline. They change and impact the discipline and its experts while not necessarily being a part of it.

Allow me to give some examples.  F. Scot Fitzgerald has, through his various literary works, dramatically influenced the fields of literary criticism and American literary thought.  He also never really wrote much on the topic of writing and literature.  Unlike Henry James, who wrote multiple extensive essays on the discipline of writing, Fitzgerald just wrote for a living.  In the world of science, the big bang theory was initially proposed by Georges Lemaître, a Catholic Priest.  While I dare not deny his integrity as a scientist, his disciplinary mindset likely operated more on the worldview of the Catholic religion.

There are even examples in education. Howard Gardner, a psychologist by trade, proposed the theory of multiple intelligences, which has significantly influenced the discipline of education.  His work dramatically influenced teaching but his disciplinary mindset, the literacy with which he categorized the world, fell on the psychological mindset.  Likewise, many would consider Anne Sullivan, the instructor and companion of Helen Keller, an icon of teaching.  However, she only ever taught Helen Keller, which in the discipline of teaching may be considered insufficient expertise.

So why should you, that’s right you the reader, care about this? What is the point of bringing up disciplinary heroes in regards to education?

Here’s the point: every school has multiple different subcultures within it, each of those subcultures have a disciplinary literacy to it, and you, the teacher, will both never be and always strive to be the disciplinary hero of those subcultures.

On the one hand, we, teachers, have to face the fact the students often just don’t like us.  It may be for perfectly legitimate or completely unreasonable reasons.  If they don’t hate us, then we may simply be teachers, no more and no less. I know for myself and many other teachers, we fantasize about being that mythical teacher who breaks down a student’s walls and changes their lives.  That won’t always be the case when you know them. Those students will often be far too occupied with their own personal disciplinary hero to really pay attention to you.  When we were students, we were likely much the same. But that’s okay, your job isn’t for the students to idolize you but to just learn from you.

This brings me to my second point. It is very important that teachers do become disciplinary heroes.  A major advantage to teaching is finding ways to make the learning fit into the disciplinary literacy of the students.  Per example, when I was a child, one of my teachers introduced the concept of multiplication and division through comparing it to a Star Wars-esque battle for control. Now, that is very cheesy and corny but it worked.  This is because it fit into my disciplinary literacy of nerd/geek culture. In much the same way, teachers must find ways to fit their teaching into the literacies of their students.

Students view and interpret the world through the disciplinary literacies they inhabit: whether it be ‘coolness’ ‘nerd culture’ or whatever. However, in order for learning to be effective, teachers have to tap into their disciplinary literacies. 

Works cited:

Kirkland, D. E., & Jackson, A. (2009). “We real cool”: Toward a theory of black masculine literacies. Reading Research Quarterly, 44(3), 278-297.

After reading Juzwik’s article: “The Ethics of Teaching Disturbin Past: Reader Response, Historical Contextualization, and Rhetorical (Con)Textualization of Holocaust Texts in English,” I found myself feeling lost. I think this may be one of the first times that the moral implications, the moral factors, of teaching English Language Arts really strikes me.  Then again, I feel like I should have seen this coming.  I myself have learned a lot about myself and my morality from reading. 

Juzwik says that she wants to avoid simple moralizing.  And she is correct that often teacher use simple moralization to tackle difficult subjects. However, I do have to push back against this. I believe that there is right and there is wrong.  A teacher’s duty is to help students wade through the grey and see that right and wrong.  I don’t think Juzwik would disagree.

But what about other difficult moral situations? What about Andrew Jackson? He is the seventh president of the United States of America.  His face greets you on the twenty-dollar bill.  He also attempted to perpetrate racially drive crimes as well.  He institutionalized the “Indian Removal Acts” which almost whipped out a significant portion of the Native American population.  He also seriously opposed the Abolitionist movement. But, he’s also one of America’s presidents, a leader of the country and a symbol of the nation.

I’ve chatted with a lot of fellow students who are incoming history teachers. When I ask them about how to talk about these things with students, they respond: “you should just tell them like it is.”  And that’s a very valid response and absolutely true.  History teachers should be fearless in telling their students the unabridged facts whenever appropriate.  But I feel like it’s missing something. 

It reminds me of the Onion’s piece “Man Always Gets Little Rush Out of Telling People John Lennon Beat Wife.”  Just telling students about dark or difficult history, it simply not sufficient to give them the information and then go home for the day.  As Juzwik points out in her article, students can find themselves sympathizing with Nazi propaganda if left to their own devices. (Juzwik) And there’s no want of evidence to back her up.  We live in a society where in certain circles; it is hilarious to try to make the Mountain Dew corporation name a soda drink: “Hitler did nothing wrong.”  

I remember during my school days, whenever Hitler and the Nazi party even remotely came up, my one teacher became incredibly serious and solemn.  She repeatedly hammered into us students that we should never, ever, make light of the Nazi party.  She hammered into us that we had a moral responsibility to not make jokes about it.  At the time, I thought she was being overly protective.  Now, I am so incredibly grateful to her. She wasn’t protecting me. She was teaching me moral responsibility and maturity.

Teachers should give students the unabridged facts; but they should also remember that they have a moral responsibility to the future world.  That is why, as an English teacher, I think it is so important that teachers present students with morally difficult texts.  There are a variety of texts, both fiction and non-fiction, that present serious moral dilemmas.  As teachers, rather than run from them and protecting our students, we should face this head-on and prepare our students to find the morally right and wrong in our society. 

Works cited;

https://local.theonion.com/man-always-gets-little-rush-out-of-telling-people-john-1819578998

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/dub-the-dew  {Author’s note: due to the content of the controversy, reader discretion is advised.)  

Juzwik, M. M. (2013). The ethics of teaching disturbing pasts: Reader response, historical contextualization, and rhetorical (con) textualization of Holocaust texts in English. English Education, 45(3), 284-308

In Sarah Levine’s article “Making Interpretation Visible With an Affect-Based Strategy,” Ms. Levine outlines the differences between how experts and novices derive meaning from various texts.  She gives the example of a college freshman and college graduate both react to the symbol of a wedding ring rising from the bottom of a dirty pool. (Levine)  As Levine explains, the expert sees the symbolism of purity in conflict with corruption in the passage.  The novice merely sees a dirty pool. (Levine) Levine then goes onto share how novice readers can become expert readers through specific instruction.

However, this is not intriguing to me.

What is intriguing to me is the Levine’s statements on the deriving of meaning.  Levine explains that the novice reader derives meaning from the symbols of the ring and the dirty pool from cultural associations.  We naturally view the wedding ring as good and the dirty pool as bad because of our cultural and moral associations. (Levine)  We view the dirty pool as symbolic of corruption because we associate dirt with filth and from there with corruption.  Thus, meaning is obtained from a moralistic reading of the work.  We use the “morally good” and contrast it with the “morally bad.”  But what about the morally grey?  There are things in the world that are empirically evil. There are things in the world that are empirically good.  But why do we think so?  Many students and novice readers are not ever taught to think about it.  Many times they are just taught to accept whatever common interpretation exists from a given text.  We read the text and don’t really think about the greater ramifications of why we like or dislike a character. 

A few weeks ago, I spoke with a professor and discussed Shakespeare’s Macbeth. The professor stated that Macbeth is a tragic hero.  However, I countered with the argument that he is a sympathetic villain. But, I now wonder what exactly the difference between these two interpretations is.  How do our moral associations make us distinguish these two things as different? Why do two different people, looking at the exact same set of actions see a hero or a villain?  Is either term really accurate?

I believe that these are the kinds of questions that teachers should make their students ask themselves.  Importantly, teachers should not try and turn students against their beliefs.  It is very important that teachers respect the moral and religious beliefs of their students.  However, they should inspire their students to really think about those beliefs…to think about why they would choose to view actions as good or evil. And I believe that English Language Arts is the key to this question.

Let’s take a look at a classroom and 8^th grade high school students who are studying Hamlet.  Novice readers might see a boring play about a whiney prince trying to take revenge.  But now let’s introduce a wild card.  Alongside Hamlet, the class will also be studying The Lion King, Batman and Final Fantasy XV.  Why are we studying comic books, movies and video games alongside this classical play.  It’s not because they are ‘cool’ and ‘hip’ and will ‘make the kids love learning.’  No, it’s because they all find their origin in the same idea. 

Boil all four down to their basic elements and you get the story of a crestfallen prince, Hamlet in Hamlet, Bruce Wayne in Batman, Simba in The Lion King, and Noctis Lucis Caelum in Final Fantasy XV, who must avenge their father and restore the order of their ‘kingdom.’ Now, we must ask the students to look at these four and their stories, Do they think revenge is wrong? If so, why is it wrong? Do we like Noctis and Simba more than Hamlet and Batman and if so why? Do we think that Batman is better than Hamlet because he doesn’t kill people? Is killing people always wrong? If so, why is it always wrong? Why do all four of these characters share similar sorrows and burdens? In what ways are they different? Is it an appropriate response to the situation? Do we think Simba is more upright than Hamlet because Simba’s throne was also taken? Is Hamlet’s revenge justified or moral? Why do we think it is?  

An important part of this exercise is ensuring that the teacher does not offer any correct answer of their own.  If one watches the teacher in the TedEd video on ‘True/False Equations’ (which will be linked below) the teacher offers no correct answer.  She only guides the thought process of the students.  They debate and decide for themselves what they think is correct.  It is the other students who instruct and teacher each other.  In this, it must be the students not the teacher who debate and decide what the ‘correct’ answers are. That way we transform novices into masters. 

Works cited:

Levine, S. (2014). Making interpretation visible with an affect-based strategy. Reading Research Quarterly, 49(3), 283-303.

https://tedd.org/?tedd_activity=truefalse-equations

Teaching disciplinary literacy to elementary students presents a variety of controversial prospects and outcomes for teachers.  On the one hand, teaching disciplinary literacy to elementary students provides a solid foundation for future learning. Firstly, it helps students to fully embrace themselves into the mindset of a professional scholar.(Shanahan and Shanahan, 2014)  Students are taught to be cognizant of and appreciate the different technical word uses and definitions, mindsets for study, and methodology for learning.  This in turn prepares students to easily assimilate themselves into the literacies, as they already possess the necessary skills and knowledge. The teaching of disciplinary literacy also helps students to develop metadiscursivity, the ability of students to consciously switch which disciplinary mindset they use based on the discipline. (Moje, 2008) However, there can be problems with this approach.

On the one hand, the problem of intimidating the students stands as a clear problem.  Diving deep into the interior philosophies and mindsets of the professional world may seem frightening to a typical elementary student, particularly one who has been accustomed to the traditional system of primary school education. Furthermore, the problem of confusing the student appears equally concerning.  As some discipline use similar terminology, many students may confuse one discipline for another. They may also find the entire practice very frustrating and intimidating.  The likely response of an elementary student to disciplinary literacy would be: “Well, what do I need any of this stuff for anyways?”  Shanahan and Shanahan suggest having students read and compare multiple different textbooks in order to understand disciplinary literacy.  However, this may prove antithetical to inspiring a love of learning.  Many elementary students would simply despair over having more books to read and work to do.

This is not to say that teaching disciplinary literacy is bad or harmful.  In fact, presenting students at the elementary level with disciplinary literacy serves as an excellent safeguard of their futures.  However, teachers must be cognizant of the student’s feelings toward the prospect.  No matter what bright-eyed ideals professionals want to hold the idea of children actually wanting to go to school is something of a myth.  Most students would much prefer to stay at home.  Even college students would much rather spend their days at home, gather all essential life knowledge from whatever flashy YouTube video catches their eyes.  This is doubly true for elementary students. Dislike for school and disrespect for the education system is something baked into the American populous’ culture through various media.  

As such, presenting students with disciplinary literacy requires breaking the mold. I propose rather than teaching students disciplinary literacy; teachers should show students disciplinary literacy.  I propose that teachers should give students, especially elementary students access to disciplinary literacy.  I believe that the best medium for this can be found in various education materials focused on adults, such as the History Channel and National Geographic.  And when I refer to these specific mediums, I am explicitly referring to the content made with older audiences in mind.  I believe that through these resources one can begin the process of exposing students to Disciplinary Literacy.  Students will see interviews with and discussions by professionals who actively engage with disciplinary literacy.  What’s more, the students will be more accepting of this because of the break in format from traditional educational norms.  Obviously, teachers should avoid going carte-blanche with this approach. However, the potential advantages deserve investigation.  

Work Cited:

Moje, E.B. (2008) Foregrounding the Disciplines in Secondary Literacy Teaching and Learning: A Call for Change. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 52(4) 371-379.

Shanahan, C., & Shanahan, T. (2014). Does disciplinary literacy have a place in elementary school? The Reading Teacher, 67(8), 636-639.

When teachers embark on the teaching of disciplinary literacy to students in primary and secondary school settings, they must be cautious about their methods of teaching disciplinary literacy.  Disciplinary literacy manifests in a variety of different ways throughout the various disciplines.  However, each literacy is fundamentally different from the other, with completely different mindsets and ideological purposes.  As such, teachers need to exercise caution and tact when instructing students in disciplinary literacies.  Per example, in Mr. Franchi’s lesson, he encouraged the students to engage in historic empathy, an important part of the historical discipline wherein the historian identifies and understands the actions of past people. (Rainey, Maher, Coupland, Franchi and Moje, 2017) This tactic, while very important for historians, clashes ideologically with social studies scientist mindset, wherein one must take into account current situation rather than past actions. In the example given within the paper, the students are encouraged to identify with both the European settlers and the Native American inhabitants of America. (Rainey, Maher, Coupland, Franchi and Moje, 2017) While this is very important for historians, it presents some problems for a social studies scientist.  While historians must identify with the decision made, the social scientist must analyze the repercussions of the action in the modern day.  In the example provided within the text, a historian looks at why the settlers viewed the indigenous people as dangerous and came to the decision to remove them.  A social scientist, on the other hand, must look at the modern state of the people and empathize with the current situation of the native American population.  This literacy would rely more on analyzing current political and social ideals of right and wrong then looking to the past versions of those problems. 

This is not to say that each discipline is mutually exclusive in perspectives and insights.  However, it is to say that each disciplinary literacy requires increased focus on a particular mindset.   As such, metadiscursivity becomes very important.  Students who are preparing to become scholars must be made aware of the different discourses pertinent to each subject matter. (Moje, 2008) Teachers in the various fields must ensure students are actively switching between the mindsets and not confusing them together. When teachers embark on the teaching of disciplinary literacy to students in primary and secondary school settings, they must be cautious about their methods of teaching disciplinary literacy. 

Another note of potential concern appears in connection to the application of content area literacy.  In Mr. Coupland’s lesson, he exposed his students to the disciplinary literacy of mathematics. (Rainey, Maher, Coupland, Franchi and Moje, 2017) Rather than simply using question and response tactics, Coupland forces the students out of their mathematic comfort zone by using class discussion and explanation.  He also offers papers as possible acceptable answers.  In one way, this is very good.  It forces the students to explore alternate learning tactics and develop independent understandings of the subject and its disciplines.  However, from a content area standpoint, it presents some problems.  For myself and many others, the subject of math almost entirely consisted of calculations, written equations and question-answer interactions.  As such, presenting the deeper side of the disciplinary literacy of math may cause panic or confusion in students. 

The onus lies on the teacher to carefully introduce and guide the student through these fields.  As the authors say, the school-reliant students most need exposure to disciplinary literary.(Rainey, Maher, Coupland, Franchi, and Moje, 2017)  This is not something that should wait until college level education.  However, teachers should not simply throw their students into disciplinary literacy.  Rather, through the use of familiar content area literacy, teachers should slowly but surely make students view their subject through the lens of disciplinary literacy.  Mr. Coupland succeeded by drawing upon familiar school-setting tactics to engage his students.  By using tactics like the whiteboard discussion and group work, Coupland draws on familiar tactics and settings to ease school-reliant student into a more disciplinary literacy focused learning experience.  

Words cited:  

Moje, E.B. (2008) Foregrounding the Disciplines in Secondary Literacy Teaching and Learning: A Call for Change. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 52(4) 371-379.

Rainey, E. C., Maher, B. L., Coupland, D., Franchi, R., & Moje, E. B. (2018).  But what does it look like?  Illustrations of disciplinary literacy teaching in two content areas.  Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 61(4), 371-379.

When looking at education, literacy stands as arguably the most important ability to possess in both obtaining and providing education.  Literacy here means not just the ability to read, but also the ability to engage in discourse.  Discourse, as Gee defines it, means ways of combining and coordinating words, deeds, thoughts and other people to enact and engage specific socially-situated identities and activities.  As such, one must be literate in the discourses of education, being able to play the part of the student or teacher in the pursuit of knowledge.  However, a problem emerges in identifying exactly what kind of literacy should be used to engage in the discourse we call ‘education.’ Wolsey and Lapp bring to light a potential problem for literacy in the education system in the form of disciplinary literacy.  Disciplinary literacy is a particular discourse and cultural model of mindset, terminology and self-identity that is specific to that discipline. For each branch of knowledge found in education, there is a distinct form disciplinary literacy.  Natural Scientists do not think in the same manner as fiction writers and literary critics nor do historians use the same terminology and vocabulary as a physical education instructor.  Each of these branches of education possess entirely distinct discourses.  However, in school settings, students are instructed to engage with all of these various modes of discourse.   When looking at education, literacy stands as arguably the most important ability to possess in both obtaining and providing education.  Literacy here means not just the ability to read, but also the ability to engage in discourse.  Discourse, as Gee defines it, means ways of combining and coordinating words, deeds, thoughts and other people to enact and engage specific socially-situated identities and activities.  As such, one must be literate in the discourses of education, being able to play the part of the student or teacher in the pursuit of knowledge.  However, a problem emerges in identifying exactly what kind of literacy should be used to engage in the discourse we call ‘education.’

However, one should not make the mistake of discouraging the use of disciplinary literacy.  Here, content-area literacy comes into use.  Content-area literacy differs from discourse literacy in that content-area literacy focuses on imparting the disciplinary literacy of that discipline rather than just the discourse of the discipline.  The content of the subject is the subject of the learning itself, whether it be math or social studies, which the student must learn.  Content-area, as the name implies, moves and organizes the subject and its discourses into areas, thus making it more accessible to the learner. Through content-area literacy, students are exposed to the language of the disciplines while each is kept separate from the other by the specific areas.  Through content area literacy, educators teach students to access the separate disciplinary literacies of each subject.  Over time, the teacher of the subject familiarizes the student not just with the content but the way that experts in the field think and reason, their disciplinary literacy.    However, one should not make the mistake of discouraging the use of disciplinary literacy.  Here, content-area literacy comes into use.  Content-area literacy differs from discourse literacy in that content-area literacy focuses on imparting the disciplinary literacy of that discipline rather than just the discourse of the discipline.  The content of the subject is the subject of the learning itself, whether it be math or social studies, which the student must learn.  Content-area, as the name implies, moves and organizes the subject and its discourses into areas, thus making it more accessible to the learner. Through content-area literacy, students are exposed to the language of the disciplines while each is kept separate from the other by the specific areas. 

From here, metadiscursity becomes very important.  As Moje defines it, a metadiscursive student is aware of how and why they are engaging in different discourse communities.  As both Gee and Woje express, people, particularly students, already engage in active metadiscursive literacy throughout their lives.  Changing one’s behavioral mind-set from “student at school” to “child at home” is an example of metadiscursivity.  Therefore, if students can alter their behavioral discourses from setting to setting, it should be possible for them to engage with the discourses of different disciplines. Both Woje and Gee identify the ability to switch into different identities depending on the setting.  However, Woje specifies that the teacher must help the student to engage in this discourse.  While Gee holds that both parties will quickly adapt to the discourse as seen in the example of the child reading, Woje holds that the teacher must help create the identity best suited for the learning discourse.  Thus, teachers have the responsibility of teaching students to be literate in the disciplines that they are taught. From here, metadiscursity becomes very important.  As Moje defines it, a metadiscursive student is aware of how and why they are engaging in different discourse communities.  As both Gee and Woje express, people, particularly students, already engage in active metadiscursive literacy throughout their lives.  Changing one’s behavioral mind-set from “student at school” to “child at home” is an example of metadiscursivity.  Therefore, if students can alter their behavioral discourses from setting to setting, it should be possible for them to engage with the discourses of different disciplines. Both Woje and Gee identify the ability to switch into different identities depending on the setting. 

works cited

Gee, J.P. (2001). Reading as situated language: A sociocognitive perspective. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 59(4), 377-384

Moje, E.B. (2008) Foregrounding the Disciplines in secondary literacy teaching and learning: A call for change. Journal of Adolescent & Adult literacy 52(4), 371-379

Wolsey, T.D. & Lapp,D. (2017) Literacy in the disciplines: A teacher’s guide for grades 5-12. Chapter 1. New York, NY: Guilford.

Welcome all. This is news from the round: wherein you shall find all various discourses on education, educational matters and the duties of the knights of the 21st century: teachers.

However, before all that, allow me to introduce the newest knight to sit at the table round: Sir Luckypaw DeLorelac