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:
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?
Thanks, Kevin, for your thoughtful response! I appreciate how the three skills that you identified relate to and build upon each other. Viewing these skills in this way may be useful in scaffolding lessons related to teaching these skills.
ReplyDeleteDuring the Week 2 PowerPoint, you will have an opportunity to review the Common Core State Standards for literacy in the history classroom. I encourage you to explore these standards with your three identified skills in mind. How well do your thoughts align with these standards? What is similar? Different?
Thanks for sharing the resources and for engaging in reflection on the Week 1 reading!
Hey Kevin!
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your post on disciplinary literacy in the social science classroom! You provided an effective yet concise summary of this topic from a scholarly perspective as well as explaining how this educational strategy can be utilized in secondary school. I especially appreciate that you focused your discussion on how disciplinary literacy can be understood by middle school students. Since I also work with this age group, I know how their academic skills and foci can vary in many ways from high school students, and how important it is for educators to help them to develop foundational academic skills. I also like how you broke down your three important elements into sequential steps that build off one another. As Shanahan and Shanahan detail in their article, it is essential for educators to teach students how to understand, interpret, and apply academic data as if they were experts in the field. This is particularly valuable primarily because, as you astutely mentioned, these skills “guide students in understanding information for the rest of their lives,” both in a historical and more generalized context.
In response to your specific questions, I definitely agree with your stance and would not choose different aspects. Your three essential elements of disciplinary literacy are almost exactly parallel with what I wrote in my own post. Although there are a myriad of important skills in social science, I also identified source analysis and the ability to make and support arguments as some of the most vital aspects. This is mainly because I think these skills are essential to viewing history from an expert lens while remaining attainable at a secondary school level. They are also transferable to other educational contexts as well as life experiences. I don’t think you are missing anything from these thoughts, although I would be curious to hear the specific strategies that you would use to teach these skills in your own classroom. Here is a resource that I found helpful with some ideas for lesson planning: https://www.activelylearn.com/post/primary-sources-disciplinary-literacy-social-studies.
-- Solange