Tuesday, January 15, 2019

1. Disciplinary Literacy

Upon reading “What is Disciplinary Literacy and Why Does it Matter?” by Timothy Shanahan and Cynthia Shanahan, I have come to the realization that the term “literacy” does not just entail the ability to read. Rather, and more specifically, “literacy” describes the process in which people engage with, understand, and utilize a text or material provided for learning. In the article, the authors go further to describe the differences between “content area literacy” and “disciplinary literacy.” As the authors explain, content area literacy is a set of strategies used as study skills for comprehending learning materials which are universal throughout all disciplines (8). Disciplinary literacy, in contrast, are the skills, strategies, communication means, “knowledge, and abilities,” which are utilized in a certain discipline to make sense and understand learning materials (8). As a historian teaching social sciences at the middle school level, this brings forth a question: what does disciplinary literacy consist of in the social sciences, and how can disciplinary literacy for social sciences be understood by middle school students?

Disciplinary literacy in the field of history or the social sciences is very complex and is essential for understanding historical processes, effects, or arguments within learning materials for the discipline. Though there are many aspects of disciplinary literacy in history/social sciences, I propose three primary ones which provide a good starting point for disciplinary study: first is the process of determining whether a source is a primary or secondary source (be it text, video, graphics, etc.). Prior to using any source in the field of history/social sciences, the scholar must determine whether or not the source is primary or secondary, which allows the scholar to decide how the sources will be used in analysis. Second, scholars in the discipline must be able to discern the primary argument of a source (whether it is primary or secondary). Once scholars are enabled to understand the central idea or primary purpose of a learning material, they can then begin the process of analysis. The practice of analysis is the third step, wherein scholars identify the information embedded within the material that supports the author's arguments or points (whether that consists of opinions, citations, methods of persuasion, biases, judgements, supplementary information/facts, etc.). To summarize, I believe disciplinary literacy in the field of history/social sciences consists of familiarization with a basic three-step sequential process for recognizing the type of source (primary or secondary), identifying the author's/maker's primary argument, and carrying out supplementary analysis.

I believe these three steps in disciplinary literacy are most important to understanding history/social sciences because they are the starting point to being an expert in the field, the steps are relatively unique to the field itself, and they also consist of valuable skills that may guide students in understanding information for the rest of their lives. In other words, these three steps are the basic skills that anyone can learn as a gateway to both becoming an expert in the field or to use on a day-to-day basis while learning to understand and explore information. Regarding success specifically in the discipline of history/social sciences, these three steps are essential to undertake prior to engaging in historical discussion or presentation as they are necessary in order for students to build evidence for their reasoning and justify their position or understanding of learning materials.

Some questions that I would ask readers to consider:
  • Do you agree or disagree with my stance? Why?
  • Would you choose different aspects?
  • What am I missing from these thoughts?
Some additional resources: