PL EN


2019 | 43 | 3 |
Article title

Diverse nature of literacy: The sociocultural perspective

Content
Title variants
Languages of publication
EN
Abstracts
EN
Considering the pace of the contemporary changes in the world, largely due to global trends and rapid development of media technology, it is commonly accepted that literacy cannot connote reading and writing any more as it did until several years ago. Much broader conceptualisations of what literary practices stand for are needed as people actually use literacy in diverse contexts and for different purposes. These are offered by sociocultural theories and approaches, which, despite being dissimilar with one another, do not undermine the traditional views on literacy and its practices but forward newcomplex and inclusive ways of understanding the phenomenon
DE
Der Band enthält die Abstracts ausschließlich in englischer Sprache.
FR
L'article contient uniquement les résumés en anglais.
Year
Volume
43
Issue
3
Physical description
Dates
published
2019
online
2019-11-14
Contributors
References
  • Bakhtin, M. (1986). The problem of speech genres. In C. Emerson, & M. Holquist (Eds.), Speech genres and other late essays (pp. 60-101). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
  • Barton, D., & Hamilton, M. (2000). Literacy Practices. In: D.Barton, M. Hamilton, & R. Ivanič (Eds.), Situated Literacies. Reading and Writing in Context (pp. 7-15). London and New York: Routledge.
  • Bawden, D. (2008). Origins and concepts of digital literacy. In C. Lankshear, & M. Knobel (Eds.), Digital Literacies. Concepts, Policies and Practices (pp. 17-32). New York, NY: Peter Lang Verlag.
  • Brandt, D. (2001). Sponsors of literacy. In E. Cushman, E. R. Kintgen, B. M. Kroll, & M. Rose (Eds.), Literacy: A critical sourcebook (pp. 555-571). New York, NY: Bedford/St. Martins.
  • Chouliarki, L., & Faircough, N. (1999). Discourse in late modernity. Rethinking critical discourse analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  • Collins, J., & Blot, R. K. (2003). Literacy and literacies. Texts, power and identity. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
  • Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2000). Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures. London: Routledge.
  • Davies, J. (2012). Facework on Facebook as a new literacy practice. Computers & Education 59, 19-29.
  • Fairclough, N. (2003). Analyzing Discourse and Text: Textual Analysis for social research. London: Routledge.
  • Freire, P. (2001). Education and Conscientizacao. In A. Freire, & D. Macedo (Eds.) The Paulo Freire reader (pp. 80-110). New York, NY: Continuum.
  • Gee, J. P. (1996/2008). Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses. London: Falmer.
  • Gee, J. P. (1999/2011). An introduction to Discourse analysis. Theory and method. New York and London: Routledge.
  • Gee, J. P. (2004). Nurturing Affinity Spaces and Game-based Learning. Retrieved March 27, 2019, from http://jamespaulgee.com/pdfs/Affinity%20Spaces.pdf.
  • Gee, J. P. (2011/2014). How to do Discourse Analysis. A Toolkit. London and New York: Routledge.
  • Gee, J. P. (2013). Reading as Situated Language: A Sociocognitive Perspective. In D. E. Alvermann, J. Norman, N. J. Unrau, & R. B. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading (pp. 136-151). Newark: International Reading.
  • Gee, J. P. (2015). The new literacy studies. In J. Rowsell, & K. Pahl (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Literacy Studies (pp. 35-48). London and New York: Routledge.
  • Gee, J. P., Hull, G., & Lanshear, C. (1996). The New Work Order: Behind the Language of the New Capitalism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
  • Godhe, A. L., & Magnusson, P. (2017). Multimodality in Language Education – Exploring the Boundaries of Digital Texts. Retrieved March 18, 2019, from http://hkr.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1163921/FULLTEXT02.pdf.
  • Halliday, M. (1973). Explorations in the functions of language. London: Edward Arnold.
  • Halliday, M. (1978). Language as Social Semiotic. London: Edward Arnold.
  • Heath, S. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life, and work in communities and classrooms. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
  • Hymes, D. (1994). Toward ethnographies of communication. In J. Maybin (Ed.), Language and literacy in social practice: A reader (pp. 11-22). Avon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
  • Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality. A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. London and New York: Routledge.
  • Lanshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2003). New literacies. Changing knowledge and classroom learning. Buckingham and Philadelphia: Open University Press.
  • Lanshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2007a). Sampling ‘the New’ in New literacies. In M. Knobel, & C. Lanshear (Eds.), A New Literacies Sampler (pp. 1-24). New York: Peter Lang Verlag.
  • Lanshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2007b). The “Stuff” of New Literacies. Retrieved April 25, 2019, from http://everydayliteracies.net/files/stuff.pdf.
  • Lanshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2011). New literacies. Everyday practices and social learning. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
  • Leu, D. J., Zawilinski, L., Castek, J., Banerjee, M., Housand, B. C., Liu, Y., & O’Neil, M. (2007). What is new about the new literacies of online reading comprehension? Retrieved March 18, 2019, from https://www. researchgate.net /publication/285909294_What_is_new_about_the_new_literacies_of_online_ reading_comprehension.
  • Leu, D., Everett-Cacopardo, H., Zawilinski, L., Mcverry G., & O’Byrne, I. (2012). New Literacies of Online Reading Comprehension, Wiley Online Library. Retrieved March 30, 2019, from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/978140 5198431.wbeal0865.
  • Lewis, C. (2007). New literacies. In M. Knobel, & C. Lanshear (Eds.), A New Literacies Sampler (pp. 229-238). New York, NY: Peter Lang Verlag.
  • Lewis, C., Enciso, P., & Moje, E. B. (2007). Reframing sociocultural research on literacy: Identity, agency, and power. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Luke, A. (2004). On the material consequences of literacy. Language and Education, 18, 331-335.
  • Martin, A. (2008). Digital literacy and the "digital society". In C. Lankshear, & M. Knobel (Eds.), Digital literacies - Concepts, policies and practice (pp. 151-176). New York, NY: Peter Lang Verlag.
  • Morell, E. (2004). Becoming critical researchers. Literacy and empowerment for urban youth. New York, NY: Peter Lang Verlag.
  • Perry, K. H. (2012). What is Literacy? – A Critical Overview of Sociocultural Perspectives. Journal of language & Literacy Education, 8(1), 50-71.
  • Purcell-Gates, V., Duke, N. K., & Martineau, J. A. (2007). Learning to read and write genre-specific text: Roles of authentic experience and explicit teaching. Reading Research Quarterly, 42, 8-45.
  • Rogers, R. (2004). An Introduction to Critical Discourse Analysis in Education. In R. Roger (Ed.), An Introduction to Critical Discourse Analysis in Education (pp. 1-18). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Street, B. (1984). Literacy in theory and practice. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
  • Street, B. (2001). Introduction. In B. Street (Ed.), Literacy and Development: Ethnographic Perspectives (pp. 1-18). London: Routledge.
  • Wallace, C. (2003). Critical Reading in Language Education. Houndmills, Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Document Type
Publication order reference
YADDA identifier
bwmeta1.element.ojs-doi-10_17951_lsmll_2019_43_3_33-43
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.