Conceptualization of Literacy from Iranian Language Learners' Perspective

مطالعات زبان و ترجمه

Article 1, Volume 53, Issue 2, July 2020, Pages 1-28   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/lts.v53i2.74038

Authors

Narjes Amel Sadeghi; Mohammad Davoudi^* ; Seyyed Mohammad Reza Adel; Gholamreza Zareian

Department of English Language and Literature, Hakim Sabzevari University, Sabzevar, Iran

Abstract

The concept of literacy is inherently debatable and the definition of literacy has changed in the course of history with the concomitant change of philosophical orientations. The content and the method used by educational programs are dependent on the various definitions of literacy and the different viewpoints on literacy determine the chances of learning. English as a foreign language enjoys a significant status in our curriculum. It seems that an understanding of the multiple meanings of literacy could enhance the language learning of our language learners greatly. Owing to the fact that we strive for a more effective learning in our educational system, it seems necessary to look into the conceptualization of literacy on the part of the language learners. The present study intends to look into the conceptualization of literacy by language learners using a grounded theory approach. This could help us explain and enhance the language behavior of our learners. Taking into account saturation, 24 English language learners were interviewed. The collected data were analyzed using axial and selective coding and finally a theory emerged. The emerging theory illustrated that literacy is a scientific and original issue which is transferred through discourse and the expression of agency.

Keywords

Literacy; Agency; Grounded Theory; Original Teaching; Multiple Literacy

References

پیش قدم، ر.، طباطبائیان، م. و ناوری، ص. (2011). تحلیل انتقادی و کاربردی نظریه‌های فراگیری زبان اول: از پیدایش تا تکوین. مشهد: انتشارات دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد.

حاج باقری، م. ا. پرویزی، و س. صلصالی، م. (1392). روش‌های تحقیق کیفی. تهران: نشر و تبلیغ بشری.

طباطبایی فارانی، س.، پیش قدم، ر.، و مقیمی، س. (1398). معرفی الگوی "هیجامد" به‌عنوان شیوه‌ای کارآمد برای کاهش اضطراب خواندن در زبان خارجی. مطالعات زبان و ترجمه، 52(2)، 35-63.

فلیک، اووه. (1387). درآمدی بر تحقیق کیفی، ترجمۀ هادی جلیلی، تهران: نشرنی.

کیهان پناه، ش.، مهابادی، س. (1397). بررسی مقایسه‌ای هویت و عاملیت نو معلمان انگلیسی زبان و فارسی زبان انگلیسی به‌عنوان زبان دوم در کانادا. مطالعات زبان و ترجمه، 1، 117-164.

 

Al Azri, R. H., & Al-Rashdi, M. H. (2014). The effect of using authentic materials in teaching. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, 3(10), 249-254.

Babbie, E., & Mouton, J. (2010). The practice of social research. Cape Town, England: Oxford University Press.

Bada, D., & Olusegun, S. (2015). Constructivism learning theory: A paradigm for teaching and learning. Journal of Research and Method in Education, 5(6), 66-70

Bailin, S., Case, R., Coombs, J. R., & Daniels, L. B. (1999). Conceptualizing critical thinking. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31(3), 285–302.

Bakhtin, M. (1981). Discourse in the novel (M. Holquist, & C. Emerson, Trans.). In M. Holquist (Ed.), The dialogic imagination (pp. 259-422). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

Bakhtin, M. (1986). The problem of speech genres (V. McGee, Trans.). In C. Emerson & M. Holquist (Eds.), Speech genres and other late essays (pp. 60-102). Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press.

Baklazhenko, Y. V., & Savchuk, T. L. (2018). English language learning needs analysis in radio engineering sphere. Information Technologies and Learning Tools, 64(2), 88-97.

Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. (2007). Qualitative research in education: An introduction to theory and practice (5th Ed.). Boston, MA: Ally and Bacon.

Bowers, J. S., & Bowers, P. N. (2017). Beyond phonics: The case for teaching children the logic of the English spelling system. Educational Psychologist, 52(2), 124–141.

Brandt, D., & Clinton, K. (2002). Limits of the local: Expanding perspectives on literacy as a social practice. Journal of Literacy Research, 34(2), 337-356.

Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London, England: Sage.

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Cydis, S. (2015). Authentic instruction and technology literacy. Journal of Learning Design, 8(1), 68-78.

Ewing, R. Hristofsk, H., Gibson, R., Campbell, V. & Roberston, A. (2011). Using drama to enhance literacy: The school drama initiative. Literacy learning: The Middle Years, 19(3), 33-39.

Gee, J. P. (1991). Social linguistics and literacies. London, England: Taylor & Francis.

Gilles, C., Wang, Y., & Johnson, D. (2015). Drawing on what we do as readers. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 59(6), 675-684.

Glaser, B. G. (2002). Constructivist grounded theory? Forum. Qualitative Social Research, 3(3), 32-37.

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine.

Hagood, C. (2002). Critical literacy for whom? Reading Research and Instruction, 41(3), 247–266.

Hall, G. (2016). Language arts and disciplines. London, England: Routledge.

Hamer, J. (2005). Exploring literacy with infants from a sociocultural perspective. New Zealand Journal of Teachers’ Work, 2(2), 70-75.

Hui, F. & Koplin, M. (2011). The implementation of authentic activities for learning: A case study in finance education. E-Journal of Business Education and Scholarship of Teaching, 5(1), 59-72.

Hull, G. A., & Moje, E. B. (2012). What’s the development of literacy the development of? Commissioned papers on language and literacy issues in the Common Core State Standards and Next Generation Science Standards, 94, 52.

Hunt, D. P. (2003). The concept of knowledge and how to measure it. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 4(1), 100-113

Keefe, E. B., & Copeland, S. R. (2011). What is literacy? The power of a definition. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 36(3-4), 92-99

Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. London, England: Routledge. Language, Literacy, and Learning in the Content Areas, 62(3), 1-12

Larsen-Freeman, D. (2013). Transfer of learning transformed. A Journal of Research in Language Studies, 63(1), 107-129.

Lee, C. (2016). Multiple literacies and critical literacy. Journal of Language and Literacy Education, 12(1), 40-54.

Levy, M. (1997). Computer-assisted language learning: Context and conceptualization. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

Liu, X. (2013). Home literacy environment’ influence on language and reading development, (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Michigan, Michigan.

Major, T., & Mulvihill, T. M. (2018). Problem-based learning pedagogies in teacher education: The case of Botswana. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 12(1), 1-11.

McMaster, J. C. (1998). Doing literature: Using drama to build literacy. The Reading Teacher, 51(7), 574-584.

McPeck, J. E. (1990). Critical thinking and subject specificity: A reply to Ennis. Educational Researcher, 19, 10-12.

Nergis, A. (2013). Exploring the factors that affect reading comprehension of EAP learners. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12, 1-9.

Newmann, R., & Wehlage, G. (1993). Five standards of authentic instruction. Educational Leadership, 50(7), 8-12.

Oswell, D. (2013). The agency of children. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Ozverir, I., Osam, U., & Herrington, J. (2017). Investigating the effects of authentic activities on foreign language learning: A design-based research approach. Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 20(4), 261-274.

Pecore, J. L. (2012). Beyond beliefs: Teachers adapting problem-based learning to preexisting systems of practice. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 7(2), 6–33.

Quine, W. V. 1987. Quiddities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Russell, B. (1984). Human knowledge. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.

Sangster, P. Stone, K. & Anderson, C. (2013). Transformative professional learning: embedding critical literacies in the classroom. Professional Development in Education, 39(5), 615-637.

Shah, S. K., Tabassum, R., Mahmood, R., & Hussain, Q. (2012). Implications of critical literacy for language classroom. Journal of Education and Practice. 3(5), 31-40.

Street, B. & Lefstein, A. (2007). Literacy: An advanced resource book. Routledge applied linguistics: New York.

Street, B. (2013). Applying earlier literacy research in Iran to current literacy theory and policy. Iranian Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 1(1), 2-9.

Street, B. V. & Street, J. (1991). The schooling of literacy. In D. Barton and R. Ivanic (Eds), Writing in the community (pp. 143-166). London: Sage Publications.

Street, B. V. (1984). Literacy in theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Street, B. V. (1988). Literacy Practices and Literacy Myths. In R. Saljo (Ed), The written word: Studies in literate thought and action, vol. 23 of Language and Communication Series (pp. 59-72). Heidelberg: Springer –Verlag.

Swain, J. M., & Cara, O. (2017). Changing the home literacy environment through participation in family literacy programs. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 2(1), 1–28.

Tam, M. (2000). Constructivism, instructional design, and technology: Implications for transforming distance learning. Educational Technology and Society, 3(2), 50-60.

Vega-Encabo, J. (2016). The concept of knowledge: What is it for? Disputatio, 8(43), 187-202.

Wertsch, J.V., Tulviste, P., & Hagstrom, F. (1993). Contexts for learning: Sociocultural dynamics in children’s development. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Willingham, D. T. (2007). Critical thinking: Why is it so hard to teach? American Educator, 109(4), 8-19.

Yankelovich, D. (1999). The magic of dialogue: Transforming conflict into cooperation. New York: Simon & Schuster.