Question

1. Question • ‘We learn to “do” Literacy as we learn to behave and belong in our families and communities’ (Breen, Louden, Barratt-Pugh, Rivalland, Rohl, Rhydwen, Lloyd & Carr, 1994). Discuss this statement in relation to the concept of ‘Discourse communities’ and the socio-cultural approaches to language and learning introduced in this subject. How can these theoretical understandings be applied to language development and learning in the context of schooling?

2. Introduction Literacy can be learned in different contexts and situations. Breen argues, ‘we learn to “do” literacy as we learn to behave and belong in our families and communities’ (Breen, Louden, Barratt-Pugh, Rivalland, Rohl, Rhydwen, Lloyd & Carr, 1994). In particular, this suggests that we learn literacy in both our socio-cultural contexts by the word ‘families’ and in our schooling by the word ‘communities’. That is, we learn literacy in our Discourse communities. The process of learning literacy is an extremely imperative process for children particularly at a young age where the human brain is most active as it allows children to develop the skills of communication and interaction allowing them to function appropriately in reality. Before we can discuss Breen’s statement we must first understand literacy and that it can have various applications. James Gee (1991) defines literacy as being ‘control of secondary uses of language’ (Gee 1991). Gee, adherent to Breen, does however, go on to explain that this literacy does have many different applications and similarly, can be acquired in different contexts, these being through our discourses. The acquisition of literacy is entry into a particular discourse. And it is in this discourse community that shares the same beliefs and values (Love, Pidgon, Baker & Hamston, 2002), and others that we learn to ‘do’ literacy. There are two types of Discourse communities; our Primary Discourses, being the influences of our socio-cultural contexts i.e. our families, and our Secondary Discourses, being the influences of our communities i.e. our schooling.

3. Primary Discourse Because most of our Primary Discourse Communities, being our families, use literacy to some degree, we as children and ‘outsiders’ to that discourse and discourse community must learn and develop that discourse so as to become an ‘insider’ to that community and function properly in the context of our families. However, it is in these discourses that we learn literacy, and so it is a complex procedure whereby children as outsiders learn literacy through the discourse of their families and as insiders continue to learn and develop literacy. It is important for the process of learning literacy not to occur naturally, but in social contexts, such as in our families (Droga and Humphrey, 2003). ‘Language also varies according to the different orientations or backgrounds of the groups within cultures’ (Droga & Humphrey, 2003). That is, the discourse of families is heavily influenced by the contexts in which they occur. And so it is important for this to be acknowledged and recognized in the child’s secondary discourse, schooling.

4. Secondary Discourse Schooling as a secondary discourse, presents a whole new set of values and linguistics that the child is an outsiders to when starting school, despite becoming insiders to the discourse of their family context. Schooling and learning will, according to Droga and Humphrey (2003), ‘involve developing the specialized knowledge and understandings which are considered important’. Within the schooling discourse, are many specialized discourses such as the literacy of Mathematics or HSIE. And so the development of the schooling discourses and penetrating the schooling discourse community, children learn how to function not only within that context, but also in its applications of everyday life including in their social contexts. Thus it is important for children to be subjected to the schooling discourse community. However, within schooling, there are also other discourses to be acquired, such as social discourses, which are dissimilar to both the discourses of schooling and family contexts. Therefore, teachers of both these discourses must adopt socio-cultural approaches to language and learning.

5. Every child comes from a unique socio-cultural background, and thus are all subjected to unique ideological literacy’s. Thus, the teachers of the literacy in all discourse communities, consequently have to adopt different approaches to language and learning so as to effectively ensure that the child can adapt their knowledge of literacy in all of it’s applications. This occurs in all discourse communities including schooling and family. One such approach to language and learning is Vygotsky’s theory of Zone of Proximal Development (Vygotsky 1962). This theory was founded upon the principle of challenging students to the next achievable level in the development of literacy or other topic areas. Commonly known as ZPD, the theory is often achieved with the aide of teaching techniques of scaffolding and modelling.

6. Scaffolding Scaffolding, a concept developed by Bruner (1985) identifies the influence of adult professional teachers on outsiders to the discourse, whose assistance is gradually toned down as the student begins to operate and function independently in the discourse community. This can be applied in both the classroom and in a social context. The roles of teachers in schools are concurrent with those explored by Bruner in his Scaffolding theory. The schooling discourse community encompasses an authoritative feature of a teacher to whom children are expected, by the ‘laws’ of that discourse community, to show respect and look to as a source of knowledge and guidance, which further enables and embodies this concept of Scaffolding. Applied in a social context, there are again certain figures to whom children look for guidance and knowledge. Such figures may include Police Officers, family members or perhaps even peers. Modelling is a very similar concept to Scaffolding and is highly relative. The term, describes the process of this adult professional teacher acting out or exampling the activity to be carried out, in this case the literacy of any certain application, in effect giving the student guidance so they can then do that task independently of teacher assistance. This process is effective in that it not only enables the student to reach their full potential and carry out the desired task, but it also gives them a sense of achievement promoting learning and engagement in further language and learning. Again, modeling can be applied in both schooling and socio-cultural contexts. Because it is in these contexts that we develop our language and meaning, we thus learn also to do literacy as Breen suggests.

7. Teacher Learning Cycle Used particularly in Schooling, an approach to language and learning that helps to achieve ZPD is the Teaching Learning Cycle, involving five separate stages of development. The cycle begins with engagement to get the student actively participating in the task, followed by the building knowledge stage where the information needed to perform the task is acquired. Proceeding is the transformation stage where the student makes the jump to being able to successfully complete the task followed by the presentation stage involving demonstration of the task. Finally, the Teaching Learning Cycle is completed with a reflection of the performed task to identify any need for improvement and acknowledge success. Because of the diverse range of socio-cultural contexts that students possess, this Teaching Learning Cycle is effective in enabling the teacher to format it in a way such that it is applicable to that particular context, and so it becomes an approach to teaching that enhances the capacity for the individual to learn language and meaning, and therefore literacy.

8. The context in which we are using language can affect the type of language that we use (Droga & Humphrey, 2003). Thus, the scenario that we are placed in can determine the approach that we may take to language and learning. For example, Droga and Humphrey (2003) claim ‘we use a particular text type depending on our social purpose’. That is, in different contexts and discourses, we may choose to adopt a text type, genre and language that is appropriate to that very scenario. For example, in a schooling context, a mathematics student may adopt the technical terms and numerical system to conform to the expectations of the Mathematical Discourse. Different texts and structures are then indicative of the social context in which they occurred. Also, in these different contexts, different methods of learning can be adopted to correspond with the social purpose of the language and literacy. Likewise, our cultural context, ranging from ethnicity to institutional practices within our ethnic group, (Droga and Humphrey, 2003) will determine the type of language we may use and the approaches we adopt to learning, in addition to the differing levels of learning that could be enforced. The contexts from which we are derived determine the socio-cultural approaches that we adopt towards language and learning, and more specifically language and literacy.

9. Our secondary discourse, schooling, also encompasses a social purpose as well as an academic purpose. As the contexts from which we originate can affect the levels and approaches that we possess toward language and learning teachers must account for that in their approach to teaching language and meaning. Droga & Humphrey (2003) claim, ‘factors such as socio-economic status, gender, ethnic background and age have a great influence on language choices’. Again, the Teaching Learning Cycle is an effective means of allowing different leveled children to function together and interact. There is also a strong social discourse within the schooling discourse, due to the interactions between students which context can again allow easier penetration into the discourse for some. To become insiders to this particular discourse, teachers can formulate activities that promote interaction between different students allowing entry into the social discourse community of schooling for all members of the schooling discourse. In reference to the academic schooling discourse, a way for teachers to allow students to become part of the discourse is farmiliarising the students with the ‘uncommonsense or’ technical knowledge of the Key Learning Area’s. Schooling promotes students development of language and literacy in both the technical academic discourses and social discourses of school and thus, Breen is correct in stating that we learn to do literacy as be learn to behave and belong in our communities.

10. Conclusion Breen’s statement that ‘we learn to “do” literacy as we learn to behave and belong in our families and communities’ is quite valid, as has been presented in this essay. We do learn and acquire literacy in our different contexts, these being our discourse communities. Our socio-cultural approaches to language and learning, as well as our schooling discourses, enable us to learn literacy which in turn allows us to function more effectively as a member of that particular discourse community, and hence, Breen is accurate in his claims.

11. References • Barratt-Pugh, C & Rohl, M (eds) 2000, Literacy and Learning in the early years. Allen & Unwin, Sydney. • Droga, L & Humphries, S 2003, Grammer and Meaning: an Introduction for primary teachers. Target Texts, Berry, NSW. • Gee J 1991, in Mitchell. C & Weiler. K (eds) Rewriting Literacy, Beingn & Gayney. New York • Hammond, J (ed) 2001, Scaffolding: teaching and learning in language and literacy education. Primary English Teaching Association, Sydney. • Love, K, Pigdon, K, Baker, G & Hamstom, J 2002, Bulit: Building Understandings in Literacy and Teaching. 2nd edn. University of Melbourne, Melbourne. • Vygotsky, L.S 1962, Thought and Language, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.