Revisioning Student Learning: Applying Disciplinary Literacy to Curricula Design
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23918/ijsses.v10i2p160Keywords:
Disciplinary Literacy, Curricula Design, STEM Education, Student Success, MultimodalityAbstract
Why do students succeed? More poignantly, why do students fail? This article offers a series of scaffolded models to render disciplinary literacy overt, explicit and clear. We show how ‘disciplinary literacy’ is a phrase, trope, and concept that underpins theoretical models to enable student success, while respecting the diversity of student backgrounds and pathways into formal learning. Most importantly, this article reveals the value of reconciling the relationship between the research and teaching functions of academic life. We present models that operate in the spaces between research and teaching, success and failure, form and content, content and context. Our goal is to transcend the labelling of learners, such as ‘at risk’ or ‘high achievers.’ Instead, our models occupy the spaces of learning, rendering them granular, customised and transformative, and ready for deployment in curricula design.
References
Bailey, C. (2022). ‘Connected to the Soul’: Autoethnography, Neurodiversity and Literacies in Times of Ongoing Change. In Unsettling Literacies (pp. 83-97). Springer, Singapore.
Baird, N., & Dilger, B. (2018). Dispositions in natural science laboratories: The roles of individuals and contexts in writing transfer. Across the Disciplines, 15(4), 21-40.
Barton, S. Hamilton, M. & Ivanic, R. (2000), Situated literacies. London: Routledge.
Brabazon, T. (2018). The Deficit Doctorate: Multimodal Solutions to Enable Differentiated Learning. International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies, 52.
Brabazon, T., Hunter, N., Quinton, J. (2023). Learning to write. Writing to learn: Anchoring student writing cultures with disciplinary literacies. Journal of Languages and Translation, 3.1, 1-26: https://asjp.cerist.dz/en/downArticle/710/3/1/210368
Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE bulletin, 3, 7.
Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2015). The things you do to know: An introduction to the pedagogy of multiliteracies. In A pedagogy of multiliteracies (pp. 1-36). Springer.
Efklides, A. (2006). Metacognition and affect: What can metacognitive experiences tell us about the learning process? Educational Research Review, 1(1), 3-14.
Facione, P. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction (The Delphi Report).
Gansemer-Topf, A., Webb, A., Kensington-Miller, B., Maheux-Pelletier, G., Lewis, H., Luu, J., & Hofmann, A. (2021). Navigating the Chaos: The Value of SoTL During Times of Uncertainty. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching and Learning Journal, 14(2).
Groccia, J. E. (2018). What is student engagement? New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2018(154), 11-20.
Hamilton, M. (2000). Expanding the new literacy studies. in D. Barton, M. Hamilton, & R. Ivanic (eds.), Situated literacies. London: Routledge, 22-38
Hand, B. (2017). Exploring the role of writing in science: a 25-year journey. (Report). Literacy Learning: The Middle Years, 25(3), 16.
Herrando-Pérez, S., Bradshaw, C. J., Lewandowsky, S., & Vieites, D. R. (2019). Statistical language backs conservatism in climate-change assessments. BioScience, 69(3), 209-219.
Hogsette, D. S. (2019). Writing that makes sense: Critical thinking in college composition. Wipf and Stock Publishers.
House, E., Glass, G., McLean, L., & Walker, D. (1978). No simple answer: Critique of the Follow Through evaluation. Harvard educational review, 48(2), 128-160.
Howes, D. (Ed.). (2021). Empire of the senses: The sensual culture reader. Routledge.
Hunter, N. (2022). Assessment Practices to Support Communication in Science: Understanding Student Behaviour. Under Review.
Hunter, N., Brabazon, T., & Quinton, J. (2022). Beyond the STEM Comfort Zone: Activating Disciplinary Literacy to Enable Student Success Through Diversity. International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies, 9(4), 211-224.
Kearsley, G., & Shneiderman, B. (1998). Engagement theory: A framework for technology-based teaching and learning. Educational technology, 38(5), 20-23.
Kincaid, H. (2012). Introduction: Doing Philosophy of Social Science. In The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Social Science.
Kinchin, I. M., & Howson, C. B. K. (2019). Student Voice (s) on the Enactment of the Research-Teaching Nexus. In Engaging Student Voices in Higher Education (pp. 279-295). Springer.
Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. Routledge.
Kress, G. (2009). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. Routledge.
Kuh, G. D. (2001). The National Survey of Student Engagement: Conceptual framework and overview of psychometric properties.
Main, D., Weeks, C., Buller, H., MacAllister, L., & van Dijk, L. (2017). Learning from the experts: innovation within practice-led collaborative networks in the laying hen sector. Xth European Symposium on Poultry Welfare,
Maurer, T. W. (2022). Leveraging SoTL to Improve Teaching and Learning during the COVID-19 Pandemic. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 16(1), 3.
Manokore, V., & Kuntz, J. (2022). TPACK” Tried and Tested”: Experiences of Post-Secondary Educators during the COVID-19 Pandemic. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 16(2), 14.
Simpson, Z. (2020). Reimagining higher education in the wake of COVID-19. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in the South, 4(1), 1-3.
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Harvard educational review, 78(1), 40-59.
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2012). What is disciplinary literacy and why does it matter? Topics in language disorders, 32(1), 7-18.
Tett, G. (2015). The silo effect: The peril of expertise and the promise of breaking down barriers. Simon and Schuster.
van Dijk, L., Buller, H., MacAllister, L., & Main, D. (2017). Facilitating practice-led co-innovation for the improvement in animal welfare. Outlook on agriculture, 46(2), 131-137.
Weinberg, A., Wiesner, E., & Fulmer, E. F. (2022). Didactical Disciplinary Literacy in Mathematics: Making Meaning from Textbooks. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 1-33.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies
International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies applies the
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic Licence (CC BY-NC 2.0)
