This article was downloaded by: 10.3.98.104 On: 08 Mar 2021 Access details: subscription number Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG, UK

The Routledge Handbook of Studies

Jennifer Rowsell, Kate Pahl

The New Literacy Studies

Publication details https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315717647.ch2 Published online on: 26 May 2015

How to cite :- James Paul Gee. 26 May 2015, The New Literacy Studies from: The Routledge Handbook of Literacy Studies Routledge Accessed on: 08 Mar 2021 https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315717647.ch2

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR DOCUMENT

Full terms and conditions of use: https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/legal-notices/terms

This Document PDF may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproductions, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The publisher shall not be liable for an loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 09:20 08 Mar 2021; For: 9781315717647, chapter2, 10.4324/9781315717647.ch2 groups. Inthesepractices,written languageneversitsallbyitselfanditisrarelyifeverfully cut differently indifferentpractices andusedindifferentwaysbysocialcultural readers andwritersasprimarily engagedinsocialorculturalpractices.Writtenlanguageisused decoding, retrievinginformation, comprehension,inferencing,andsoforth.TheNLS saw institutional, aswell. full rangeofcontextsandpractices,notjustcognitive,but social,cultural,historical,and and culturalgroups.Thus,itwasargued,literacyshouldbe studied inanintegratedwayits centered in social and cultural practices. It was about distinctive ways of participating in social phenomenon, ratherthanamentalphenomenon.Literacywas asocialandculturalachievement inside theirheads,andshouldbestudiedassuch.Itsawliteracy asprimarilyasociocultural inside theirheads. of mentalstatesandprocessing.Readingwriting weretreatedasthingspeopledid approach viewedliteracyasa‘mental’or‘cognitive’phenomenon anddefinedliteracyinterms The NLSopposedthethentraditionalpsychologicalapproach toliteracy.Thistraditional work seemedtobeconvergingonasharedviewaboutliteracy. was written in different theoretical languages thatneverbecame unified. Nonetheless, such 1984, 1995;Wells1986;Wertsch1985).Theworknotonlycamefromdifferentdisciplinesbut 1983; Kress1985;Michaels1981;ScollonandScribnerColeStreet Cazden 1988;Cook-Gumperz1986;Gee1987;Graff1979;Gumperz1982a,1982b;Heath education, andotherareas(e.g.,Barton1994;Hamilton1998;Bazerman1989; , history,,rhetoricandcompositionstudies,culturalpsychology, Rowsell 2005,2006;PrinslooandBreier1996;Street1993,1997,2005).Thisworkcamefrom started inthe1980s(BrandtandClinton2002;Gee2000b;HullSchultz2001;Pahl ‘The NewLiteracyStudies’(sometimesjustreferredtoastheNLS)namesabodyofworkthat Psychology atthetimesawreaders andwritersasprimarilyengagedinmentalprocesseslike The NLSarguedthatliteracywassomethingpeopledidinthe worldandinsociety,notjust THE NEW LITERACY STUDIES Introduction: TheNewLiteracyStudies Historical perspectives Historical arizona stateuniversity James PaulGee 2 35 1 Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 09:20 08 Mar 2021; For: 9781315717647, chapter2, 10.4324/9781315717647.ch2 changing patternsofparticipationin‘communitiespractice’ (LaveandWenger1991). about learningasanindividualphenomenon.Learningwastreated –ifitwastreatedatallas individual’s ‘membership’invarioussocialandculturalgroups. It,thus,too,hadlittletosay and institutionalcontextsofliteracy.Ithadlittletosayabout theindividualapartfrom to sayaboutthemindorcognition.Itpaidattentionmostly tothesocial,cultural,historical, and . is takenupandusedintheseorganizations,alongwithaction, interaction,values,andtools and historicalorganizationsofpeople(whateveryoucallthem) firstandthenseehowliteracy to engageinactivities.ThemoraloftheNLSwas:follow thesocial,cultural,institutional, others – but they are all names for ways in which people socioculturally organize themselves 2004); ‘affinitygroups’orspaces’(Gee2004)–thenamesdifferedandthereare Wenger 1991;1998);‘actor-actantnetworks’(Latour2005);‘collectives’ communities’ (Bizzell1992);‘’(Street1995);‘communitiesofpractices’(Laveand ‘activity systems’(Engeström1987);‘Discourses’(Gee2011[1990],2014[1999]);‘discourse these waysaredeterminedbythevaluesandpracticesofdifferentsocialculturalgroups. just readandwriteingeneral.Theyspecificsortsof‘texts’ways.And gamer literacy,countrymusicacademicliteracyofmanydifferenttypes).Peopledonot practices whichincorporateliteracy,so,too,therearemanydifferent‘’(legal – makesthissamepointaboutlanguageandmeaningingeneral.) (By the way, Wittgenstein’s famous ‘beetle in the box’ argument – Wittgenstein 1953: par. 293 groups like(certaintypesof)NativeAmericans,African-Americans,or‘middleclass’people. groups: lawyers,gamers,historians,religiousgroups,andschools,forinstance,orlargercultural head, but,rather,theconventions,norms,values,andpracticesofdifferentsocialcultural not. gamers, or whatever. These people often makejudgmentsaboutwhoare ‘insiders’ and whoare a sociallysignificantidentity–peoplelikefundamentalists,lawyers,biologists,mangaotaku, more thanjustreadingandwriting.Theydothemwithotherpeople–oftenwhoshare as heroicmythology. can readacomicbookasentertainment,insiderdetailsforexpertfans,culturalcritique,or example, theycanreadtheBibleastheology,,history,oraself-helpguide.They fiction. And,too,peoplecanreadthesametextindifferentwaysforpurposes.For than theydobiologytextsorinpopularculturelikevideogamestrategyguidesfan and believing;and,too,often(4)ofusingvarioussortstoolstechnologies. different waysof(1)usingorallanguage;(2)actingandinteracting;(3)knowing,valuing, off from oral language and action. Rather, within different practices, it is integrated with Clark 1989,1993, 1997;Damasio1994;Gee 1992; Glenberg1997;Kolodner 1993,2006). records of actual experience (e.g., Barsalou 1999a, 1999b; Churchland and Sejnowski 1992; sciences’ begantoarguethatthe mindisfurnishednotprimarilybyabstractconcepts,but by In the 1980s psychology itself changed. New movements in ‘cognitive science’ and ‘the learning The NLS–thankstoitsoppositiontraditionalcognitivepsychology –hadlittleornothing That isthereasonNLStendedtostudynotliteracyitselfdirectly,butsuchthingsas So ‘literacy’isplural:‘literacies.’Therearemanydifferentsocial,historical,andcultural So whatdetermineshowone‘correctly’readsorwritesinagivencase?Notisone’s People donotjustreadandwritetexts;theythingswiththem,thatofteninvolve People readandwritereligioustextsdifferentlythantheydolegalonesagain Critical issuesandtopics J.P. Gee 36 Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 09:20 08 Mar 2021; For: 9781315717647, chapter2, 10.4324/9781315717647.ch2 Studies’ (see also Brown not identical viewpoints. For want of a better name, we might call the family ‘Situated Cognition (Churchland 1986,1989;ChurchlandandSejnowski1992;Gee2004). and usetheseexperiencestoreasonaboutsimilarornewonesinthefuture is nearlylimitlessandthatwecandostorealmostallouractualexperiencesinheads (Newell and Simon 1972). The newer work on situated cognition argued that human memory as like a digital computer – argued that memory (as in a digital computer) was severely limited between Situated Cognition Studies and the NLS. This affinity has, for the most part, not been grains. Comparealso:‘Thecoffee spilled,stackitagain’(Clark1993). but ifIsay‘Thecoffeespilled, gogetabroom’youbringtobearanassociationwithcoffee as If I say ‘The coffee spilled, go get a mop’ you bring to bear an association with coffee as a liquid, course, adynamicversionofschematheory;seeGee1992). help predictwhatmighthappeninthefuturewhentheyact toaccomplishgoals(thisis,of as theyhavemoreandexperiences,finddeeper subtlepatterns,patternsthat argument isthathumanslookforpatternsintheelementsoftheir experiencesintheworldand, experiences (sotheymusthavehadsome)asaguidetoprepare themselvesforaction.The to saythatcognitionissituatedinembodiedexperience: 1994; Gee1992).Thus,considerthefollowingquotes,whichgiveflavorofwhatitmeans of theworldandourownbodies,internalstates,feelings(Churchland1986;Damasio not intermsofabstractconcepts,butsomethinglikedynamicimagestiedtoperceptionboth action inthematerialandsocialworld.Furthermore,theseexperiencesarestoredmind/brain and isnotusuallyaprocessofapplyingabstractgeneralizations,definitions,orrules. These viewpointsallbelievethatthinkingisconnectedto,andchangesacross,actualsituations This newerworkcomesinmanydifferentvarietiesandconstitutesa‘family’ofrelatedbut Earlier workincognitivepsychology–oftenbasedonametaphorthatsawthehumanmind Despite thefactthatNLS hadlittleinterestinthemind,thereisanaturalaffinity You canseethe connectinglanguage to experienceinthe following simpleexample. On thisviewpoint,humansthink,understand,andlearnbest whentheyusetheirprior Situated CognitionStudiesarguesthatthinkingistiedtopeople’sexperiencesofgoal-oriented higher intelligenceisnotadifferentkindofprocessfromperceptual intelligence. comprehension. Increasing evidencesuggeststhatperceptualsimulationisindeedcentralto can dowiththeobject,event,orsentence. to aparticularperson,themeaningofanobject,event,orsentenceiswhatthatperson action. comprehension isgroundedinperceptualsimulationsthatprepareagentsforsituated et al.1989;Hawkins2005;Hutchins1995;LaveandWenger1991). The NewLiteracyStudies 37 (Barsalou 1999a:74) (Barsalou 1999a:77) (Hawkins 2005:96) (Glenberg 1997:3) Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 09:20 08 Mar 2021; For: 9781315717647, chapter2, 10.4324/9781315717647.ch2 the NLSandtolinkSituatedCognitionStudiesNLS. made inmybook,TheSocialMind(1992)atatimewhenIwastryingtointegratelearninginto is definedasgettingandgivingmeaningsusingwrittenlanguage).ThiswastheargumentI groups –asthecoreofhumanlearning,thinking,problemsolving,andliteracy(where to theworldofexperience–andthatisalmostalwayssharedinsocialcultural technologies. BothSituatedCognitionStudiesandtheNLSpointnotto‘privatemind’but gulls). otherwise exist(e.g.,debatingthedetailsoftinyaspectsfeathersonhard-to-tell-apart Furthermore, suchtechnologiesallowdistinctivesocialpracticestoarisethatcouldnot different waywhenlookingatitthroughapowerfulscopethanunaidedvision. bird books,scopes,andbinoculars.Obviouslyoneexperiencesawoodduckinvastly these experiencesaremediatedinimportantwaysbyvarioustoolsandtechnologiessuchas pay attentiontotheirexperienceofbirdsandenvironmentsinthefield(Gee1992).And just whattheNLSwantedtostudy. technologies whether thesebe literacy or digitalmedia or othertools.And, of course,this was various socialandculturalgroups.Andthesepracticesaremediatedbytools pay attentiontotheelementsoftheseexperiencesistheirparticipationinpractices answer tothisquestionisthis:Whatdetermineswhatexperiencesapersonhasandhowthey (i.e., howtheyfindpatternsintheirexperiencesorwhatpayattentionto)?’The ‘What determineswhatexperiencesapersonhasandhowtheypayattentiontothose attention toelementsofourexperiences.Whilethisisaclaimaboutthemind,wecanask much built on from either side. Situated Cognition Studies argues that we think through paying discourse patterns usedbytheAthabaskans.As aresult,theacquisitionofthis sortofliteracyis This realitysetisconsonantwith particulardiscoursepatterns,onesquitedifferentfrom the phrase) isconnectedtoareality setorworldviewtheScollonsterm“modernconsciousness.” Anglo-American society(seealso WiederandPratt1990). and contrast these withthe discourse patterns and world view in much of Anglo-Canadian and study ofthediscoursepracticesandworldviewAthabaskans inAlaskaandnorthernCanada, in acquiringanewformofliteracy–mayinvolvechange identity.Theyprovideadetailed cultural identity.TheScollonsarguethatchangesinaperson’s discoursepatterns–forexample, by thesecultures.Discoursepatterns are among thestrongestexpressionsofpersonaland in speechorwriting–differentculturesreflectparticularreality setsorworldviewsadopted The Scollons believe that discourse patterns – ways of using language to communicate, whether discourse, language,literacy,andoftenhistorypolitics. now ‘old’ – isthewaysinwhichfrom the outsetworkinNLS melded thestudy of , (1984). WhatIwanttomakeclearinmydiscussionbelowofthesethreefoundingworks–all Shirley BriceHeath’sWayswithWords(1983);andBrianStreet’sLiteracyinTheoryPractice Ronald andSuzanneScollon’sNarrative,LiteracyFaceinInterethnicCommunication(1981); Several foundingworkshelpedinitiatetheNLS.Iwillbrieflydiscussthreeofthesehere: Thus, asituatedviewofthemindleadsustosocialandculturalgroupstheirtools For example,birdwatchingclubsandexpertwatchersshapehownew Literacy as it is practiced in European-based education (“essay-text literacy” in the Scollons’ Founding worksinthe Scollon and J.P. Gee 38 NLS Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 09:20 08 Mar 2021; For: 9781315717647, chapter2, 10.4324/9781315717647.ch2 becomes decontextualized. Thismeansthata contextualized,socialrelationship ofdominance audience. Buttheaudience, and theauthor,arefictionalizedinessayistprose text be appropriateonlyiftheAthabaskan wasinapositionofdominancerelationto the To produceanessaywouldrequire theAthabaskantoproduceamajordisplay,whichwould of thedefiningproperties modernconsciousnessasgivenbyBergeretal.(1973). relation oftheseessayistvaluestomodernconsciousnessbydemonstrating thattheyarevariants texts leadstoaneffacementofindividualandidiosyncratic identity.TheScollonsshowthe part. Bythesametokenauthorisafiction,sinceprocess ofwritingandeditingessayist idealization, arationalmindformedbythebodyof knowledge ofwhichtheessayisa and theauthor.The‘reader’ofanessayisttextisnot ordinaryhumanbeing,butan explicit aboutlogicalimplications. emphasis ontruthvalueratherthansocialorrhetoricalconditions comesthenecessitytobe this requiresaconstantmonitoringofgrammaticalandlexical information.Withtheheightened sentence, notthosebetweenspeakers,nor sentence andspeaker.Forareader In essayistprose,theimportantrelationshipstobesignaled arethosebetweensentenceand the valuesofessayistprosestyle,amodelthatishighlycompatiblewithmodernconsciousness. orientations towardtheeverydayworldincludinglearninginthatworld. consciousness. Theseformsofconsciousnessare‘realitysets’inthesensethattheycognitive consciousness”: bush consciousness(connectedwithsurvivalvaluesinthebush)andmodern Athabaskans andEnglishspeakersintermsoftwodifferentworldviewsor“forms sure theycanpredictthefuture,carelesswithluck,andfartootalkative. incompetent, andwithdrawn.AthabaskanscometobelievethatEnglishspeakersareboastful, stereotypes the other.EnglishspeakerscometobelievethatAthabaskansareunsure,aimless, encounters. Thenetresultofthesecommunicationproblemsisthateachgroupethnically ensure that English speakers select most of the topics and do most of the talking in interethnic to predictthefuture,orspeakbadlyofanother’sluck. considered inappropriateandbadlucktoanticipategoodluck,displayoneselfinalight, planning. ThisEnglishsystemisverydifferentfromtheAthabaskaninwhichit highly of the future, as well. It is normal to present a career or life trajectory of success and relations, foranEnglishspeaker,todisplayoneselfinthebestlightpossible.Onewillspeak forward’ conflicts directly with an Athabaskan taboo. It is normal in situations of unequal status their abilitiesforteachersandotheradults.(3)TheEnglishideaof‘puttingyourbestfoot child tolearn.However,inmainstreamAmericansociety,childrenaresupposedshowoff instance, adultsaseitherparentsorteachersaresupposedtodisplayabilitiesandqualitiesforthe positions donotdisplay,rathertheyobservethepersoninsuperordinateposition.For of view of peopleisthroughconversationwith them. (2)ForAthabaskans,peoplein subordinate known. Ontheotherhand,Englishspeakersfeelthatmainwaytogetknowpoint they prefertoavoidconversationexceptwhenthepointofviewallparticipantsiswell of respectfortheindividualityothersandacarefulguardingtheirownindividuality.Thus, speakers inhowtheyengagediscourse.Afewexamples:(1)Athabaskanshaveahighdegree practices, andwaysofknowingthatconflictwiththosetheAthabaskans. not simply a matteroflearningnewtechnology;itinvolvescomplicitywithvalues,social For the Athabaskan, in this essayist mode can constitute a crisis in ethnic identity. A further significant aspect of essayist prosestyleisthe fictionalization of both the audience Anglo-Canadian andAmericanmainstreamculturehasadoptedamodelofliteracy,basedon The Scollons,asImentionedabove,characterizethedifferentdiscoursepracticesof The Scollonslistmanyotherdifferences,includingdifferencesinsystemsofpausingthat Athabaskans differatvariouspointsfrommainstreamCanadianandAmericanEnglish The NewLiteracyStudies 39 Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 09:20 08 Mar 2021; For: 9781315717647, chapter2, 10.4324/9781315717647.ch2 prose. discourse patternsaretoalargeextentmutuallyexclusiveoftheessayist becomes uncharacteristic of Athabaskanstoseek to communicate. The Athabaskanset of essayist prose.Totheextentthatitbecomesdecontextualizedandthusgoodprose, author and audienceit is contextualized and compatible with Athabaskanvalues,but not good silence. is obscured.Wheretherelationshipofcommunicantsunknown,Athabaskanprefers repeatedly practice routineswhichparallelthose ofclassroominteraction:“Thus, thereisadeep children learnnotonlyhowto takemeaningfrombooks,butalsohowtotalkaboutit,children answer standardizedtests.Through thebedtimestoryroutine,andsimilarpractices,inwhich are replayedintheschoolsetting inlearningtopickouttopic-sentences,writeoutlines, and questions adultsaskchildrenof bedtimestories.Further,‘WhatisX?’questionsandexplanations ‘initiation-reply-evaluation’ sequencessotypicalofclassroom lessons(Mehan1979). given a pre-schoolresponse.Before the age of two,the child isthus socialized into the ‘What isX?’andthensupplyingverbalfeedbackalabel afterthechildhasvocalizedor the parentsetsupa‘scaffolding’dialogue(Cazden1979)with thechildbyaskingquestionslike mainstream childrenandadultsatschoolinotherinstitutions. Inthebedtimestoryroutine, homes (Heath1982,allpagereferencesbelowaretothisarticle). this point,Heathanalyzesthebedtimestoryasanexampleofa majorliteracyeventinmainstream institutional settingssuchasbanks,postoffices,businesses,or government offices.Toexemplify and oftakingknowledgefrombookswhichseemnatural in schoolandnumerousother adults givetheirchildren,throughmodelingandspecificinstruction, waysofusinglanguage of theircommunities. acquire languageandliteracyintheprocessofbecomingsocializedintonormsvalues same coin(SchieffelinandOchs1986),Heathconcentratesonhowchildrenineachcommunity and sexsegregation,soforth.Sincelanguagelearningsocializationaretwosidesofthe they may exemplify orreflect, such as patterns of care-giving roles, uses of space and time, age to interpretationinaninteraction. Bible, anddozensofothertypesoccasionswhenbooksorwrittenmaterialsareintegral (e.g., anad),individuals‘lookingthingsup’inreferencebooks,writingfamilyrecordsthe events are anyeventinvolvingprint,suchasgroupnegotiationofmeaninginwritten texts with particular concern for how ‘types of literacy events’ are involved in this taking. Literacy also Heath1994). light industry;andmainstreammiddle-classurban-orientedAfrican-Americanswhites(see generation werebroughtupontheland,butwhichnowisalsoconnectedtomilllifeandother life forfourgenerations;Trackton,aworking-classAfrican-Americancommunitywhoseolder Carolinas in the U.S.: Roadville, a white working-class community that has been part of mill which literacyisembeddedintheculturalcontextofthreecommunitiesPiedmont Shirley BriceHeath’sclassicWayswithWords(1983)isanethnographicstudyofthewaysin The paradoxofprosefortheAthabaskanthenisthatifitcommunicationbetweenknown In addition,readingwithcomprehension involvesaninternalreplayingofthesametypes The bedtimestorysetspatternsofbehaviorthatrecurrepeatedly throughthelifeof As school-oriented,middle-classparentsandtheirchildreninteractinthepre-schoolyears, Heath interpretstheseliteracyeventsinrelationtothelargersocioculturalpatternswhich Heath analyzesthewaysthesedifferentsocialgroups‘take’knowledgefromenvironment, Shirley BriceHeath J.P. Gee 40 Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 09:20 08 Mar 2021; For: 9781315717647, chapter2, 10.4324/9781315717647.ch2 example, what-explanations). Thechildren’s abilitiestometaphoricallylink twoeventsor authority intheirworldandthe kindsofquestionsaskedreadingbooksareunfamiliar (for not adoptthesocialinteractional rulesforschoolliteracyevents.Printinisolationbearslittle discourse toconstructameaning forthebrochure. expressing opinions. The group asawhole synthesizes thewrittentextand associated oral on anewcarwhilelistenersrelatethetext’smeaningtotheir experiences,askingquestionsand whole. Adultsreadnotalonebutinagroup.Forexample,someone mayreadfromabrochure ongoing streamofdiscourse.Imaginationandverbaldexterity areencouraged. imaginative talkandverbalplay,theymustbeaggressive in insertingtheirstoriesintoan participation to joinin the imaginative creation of thestory. In anenvironmentrichwith contextualize nonverbalandverballanguage. and discretefeaturesinthesituation.Theydonotdecontextualize, rathertheyheavily items bygestaltpatterns,analogs,orgeneralconfigurationlinks, notbyspecificationoflabels Heath claimsthatchildreninTracktonseemtodevelopconnections betweensituationsor experiences fromwhichtheycandrawglobal,ratherthananalyticallyspecificknowledge. or theenvironmentatlarge.Theybelievechildrenlearnwhentheyareprovidedwith children, asmainstreamparentsdo,nordotheylabelitemsorfeaturesofobjectsineitherbooks features whichmaketwoitemsoreventsalike. like?’). Thoughchildrencananswersuchquestions,theyrarelynamethespecificfeatureor for non-specific comparisons of one item, event, or person with another (e.g., ‘What’s that and readtochildren.Childrendo,however,constantlyinteractverballywithpeersadults. School materials,therearenoreadingmaterialsinthehomejustforchildren;adultsdonotsit stream ofverbalandnonverbalcommunicationthatgoesonaroundthem.AsidefromSunday who arealmostalwaysheldduringtheirwakinghours,constantlyinthemidstofarich compare twoitemsoreventsandpointoutsimilaritiesdifferences. rarely abletotakeknowledgelearnedinonecontextandshiftitanother;theydonot fictionalizing eventsknowntothem,shiftingthemaboutintootherframes.Inschool,theyare of transgressionwhichmakethepointreiteratingexpectednormsbehavior. are groundedintheactual.Thesourcesofthesestoriespersonalexperience.Theytales simplified Biblestories.EventheoralstoriesthatRoadvilleadultstell,andchildrenmodel, abstraction. They tend to choose books that emphasize nursery rhymes, alphabet learning, and encourage theshiftingofcontextitemsandeventscharacteristicfictionalization fictionalized accountofarealeventaslie;realityisbetterthanfictionandtheydonot in abook,orcommentonsuchsimilaritiesanddifferencesbetweenbookrealevents. instance, theydonot,uponseeinganeventintherealworld,remindchildrenofsimilarevents their children,buttheydonotextendthehabitsofliteracyeventsbeyondbookreading.For both communitiesplaceahighvalueonsuccessinschool.Roadvilleadultsdoreadbooksto what goesonatschool”(56). continuity betweenpatternsofsocializationandlanguagelearninginthehomeculture At school,mostTracktonchildren notonlyfailtolearnthecontentoflessons,theyalsodo Indeed, groupnegotiationandparticipationisaprevalentfeature ofthesocialgroupasa Trackton childrenlearntotellstoriesbyrenderingacontext andcallingontheaudience’s Parents donotbelievetheyhaveatutoringrole,andsimplifytheirlanguagefor Adults donotaskchildren‘WhatisX?’questions,butratheranalogicalquestionswhichcall Trackton presentsaquitedifferentlanguageandsocialenvironment.BabiesinTrackton, Thus, Roadvillechildrenarenotpracticedindecontextualizingtheirknowledgeor The strongreligiousFundamentalistbentofRoadvilletendstomakeparentsviewany Children in both Roadville and Trackton are unsuccessful in school despite the fact that The NewLiteracyStudies 41 Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 09:20 08 Mar 2021; For: 9781315717647, chapter2, 10.4324/9781315717647.ch2 our hierarchicalsocialstructure andtheschoolsystemsthatbylargeperpetuateit. points. Thereisadeepparadox hereandthereisnofacilewayofremovingit,shortchanging well meanachangeofidentity andtheadoptionofarealitysetatoddswiththeirownvarious time we must remember theScollons’warningthatformany social groupsthispracticemay which iswhatmostnon-mainstreamchildrenareexpected to doinschool.Butatthesame has notbeenexposedto,cannotengageinasocialpractice onehasnotbeensocializedinto, component skills of this formof literacy must bepracticed,and one cannotpracticeaskill based literacymusteventuallybesocializedintothemifthey areevertoacquirethem.The who havenotbeensocializedintothediscoursepracticesthat constitutemainstreamschool- And, inlinewithStreet’sideologicalapproachtoliteracy(see below),itclaimsthatindividuals with feedback,oftenfromnon-presentreaders. taking, discussion of variouspoints ofview,as well as writingdiscursiveproseand revising it a meaningfulcontextthevarioussub-skillsofessay-textliteracy, e.g.,askingquestions,note- , in their own communities. This serves as one way for students to learn and practice in with teachers,studying,forinstance,theusesoflanguageorlanguages,writingand expanded role.Heathhashadstudents,atavarietyofages,engageinethnographicresearch by apprenticingtheindividualtoaschool-basedliterateperson,e.g.,teacher,innewand homes). example, toengageinthesortsofemergentliteracypracticescommonmanymiddle-class have itsfoundations,buttheyareoftennotgoodplacestoacquirethosefoundations(for schools ascurrentlyconstitutedtendtobegoodplacespracticeMainstreamliteracyonceyou of course, the sorts of literacy experiences the Mainstream child has had at home. Unfortunately, individuals, whether children or adults, must ‘recapitulate,’ at an appropriate level for theirage, school-based literacypractices,withalltheoralandwrittenlanguageskillsthisimplies, get morecomplexcross-classifications. storage ofknowledge,butdifferfromtheminthedegreeself-displaytheyallow)wewould comparison, e.g.,theAthabaskans(whichsharewithTracktonaregardforgestaltlearningand having theprocessbrokendownintoitssmallestparts).Asweaddedmoregroupsto experiential, non-analyticviewoflearning(childrenlearnbydoingandwatching,not ask questionsthatrequirelabels),butRoadvilleshareswithTrackton,nottheMainstream,an parents haveatutoringroleinlanguageandliteracyacquisition(theyreadtotheirchildren not sharedbyMainstreamers.BothMainstreamersandRoadville,butTrackton,believe while Roadvilledoesnot; Roadville andTracktonbothshareadisregardfordecontextualization other regards. The Mainstreamgroup and Tracktonboth value imaginationand fictionalization, ways. Thegroupssharevariousfeatureswitheachothergroup,anddifferfromtheminyet binary (oral–literate)contrast,butasetoffeaturesthatcross-classifiesthethreegroupsinvarious to translatetheiranalogicalskillsintoachannelteacherscouldaccept. really payoff,theyhavefailedtogainthenecessarywrittencompositionskillswouldneed elementary yearsforthemostpart,whentheirimaginativeskillsandverbaldexteritycould may notrecognizeuntilthechildrenpointthemout.Bytimeintheireducation,after difficulties, becausetheyenablechildrentoseeparallelsteachersdidnotintend,andindeed, situations andtorecreatescenesarenottappedintheschool.Infact,theseabilitiesoftencause This approachfitsperfectlywithScribnerandCole’s(1981) practiceaccountofliteracy. Heath alsosuggeststhatthisfoundation,whenithasnotbeensetathome,canbeacquired Heath suggests that in order for a non-Mainstream social group to acquire Mainstream, Heath’s characterization of Trackton, Roadville, and Mainstreamers leadsus to see not a J.P. Gee 42 Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 09:20 08 Mar 2021; For: 9781315717647, chapter2, 10.4324/9781315717647.ch2 ‘illiterate’ that you finished up in the worst jobs but becauseof your background (e.g., being not inrelationtojobopportunities dependedonethnicity.Itwasnotbecauseyouwere groups intermsofeitherincome orpower.Theextenttowhichliteracywasanadvantage or produces statistics that show that in reality this literacy was not advantageous to the poorer being purveyed. forms of control of the pedagogic process and specific ideological associations of the literacy framework fortheteachingofliteracyhadtobeseverelycontrolled, andthisinvolvedspecific of reading and writing foran underclass could well be radical and inflammatory. So the considered dangeroustothesocialorder,thustheymustbemade literate;yetthepotentialities working class,butinfactwithcontinuingsocialstratification. did notcorrelatewithincreasedequalityanddemocracynor withbetterconditionsforthe ethnic groupsasawholewere,ifanything,furtheroppressed throughliteracy.Greaterliteracy Graff demonstratesthatthiswasnotastatisticallysignificanteffect andthatdeprivedclasses nineteenth-century Canada.Whilesomeindividualsdidgain through theacquisitionofliteracy, cultures hashadthiseffecteither. this argument may be true, there is precious little evidence that literacy in history or across if nottogeneralcognitiveconsequences,socialmobilityandsuccessinthesociety.While force. Onecouldclaimthatessay-textliteracyandtheusesoflanguageconnectedwithit,lead, cultural contextsandvaryacrossthosecontexts. simply leads to adeadend.Thisissobecause literacy’s effectsalwaysflowfrom its socialand order tomakeclaimsforliteracyasanautonomousforceinshapingthemindoraculture embedded inGreeceexplainwhathappenedthere.Abstractingliteracyfromitssocialsetting political, economic,andideologicalcircumstancesinwhichliteracy(ofaparticularsort)was it nowappearsthattheGreeksituationhasrarelyifeverbeenreplicated.Theparticularsocial, brilliant characterizationofthetransitionfromoralitytoliteracyinancientGreece,forexample, influence dependuponpriorpoliticalandideologicalfactors.DespiteEricHavelock’s(1976) ideologies. other socialfactors,includingpoliticalandeconomicconditions,structure,local Literacy –ofwhatevertypeonlyhasconsequencesasitactstogetherwithalargenumber practices andtotheorizeitintermsoftheideologieswhichdifferentliteraciesareembedded. model.” Theideologicalmodelattemptstounderstandliteracyintermsofconcretesocial by somecultures,thankseithertotheirintelligenceortechnology). universal, or,attheleast,endpointofanormaldevelopmentalprogression(achievedonly concepts, conventions, and practices that privilege one socialformation as if it werenatural, values, whetherinspeechorwriting,arethus‘ideological.’Theypartofanarmory sometimes called‘theliteracymyth.’Claimsforliteracy,inparticularessay-text context inwhichitexistsandtheusestoisputagivenculture.Thisalso literacy: theclaimthatliteracy(orschoolingformatter)hascognitiveeffectsapartfrom ,inhisbookLiteracyTheoryandPractice(1984),calls“theautonomousmodel”of The workofScribnerandCole–anotherfoundingintheNLScallsintoquestionwhat While theworkerswereled to believethatacquiringliteracywasintheirbenefit,Graff Graff arguesthattheteachingofliteracyinfactinvolveda contradiction:illiterateswere Street discusses,inthisregard,HarveyGraff’s(1979)studyoftheroleliteracy There is,however,alastrefugeforsomeonewhowantstoseeliteracyasanautonomous Any , including writing, is a cultural form, a social product whose shape and Street proposes,inoppositiontothe“autonomousmodel”ofliteracy,an“ideological The NewLiteracyStudies Brian Street 43 Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 09:20 08 Mar 2021; For: 9781315717647, chapter2, 10.4324/9781315717647.ch2 society withequalopportunities. despite the nation’s high literacy rates and the mainstream acceptance of Japan as an egalitarian talks aboutaparallelsituationinJapan,wheresocialclassstronglydictates‘success’society, selection ofmembersoneclassforthebestpositionsinsociety.YoshioSugimoto(2003) oppression andtomakedemandsforpower),servedasatechnologythecontinued tool forthepoor,wasseenasapossiblethreatifmisusedbypoor(forananalysisoftheir United States(Donald1983;Levine1986).Inallthesesocietiesliteracyservedasasocializing Protestants). black or an Irish Catholic rendered literacy much less efficacious than it was for English social andcultural whicharethefoundations of theNLS. now dated,thoughitstillincorporates thecoreargumentsforandapproachestoliteracy as important piecesofearlywork Icouldhavesurveyed.And,too,theworksurveyed is feel forthebasicideasandapproaches thatformedtheNLS.Thereare,ofcourse,otherequally I haveconcentratedinthischapter onthreefoundingdocumentsintheNLStogivereaders a which itpartlystems. people byanymeans. Studies isanaturaloffshootoftheNLS,thoughtwofields donotcontainjustthesame digital toolswithindifferentsortsofsocioculturalpractices. Inthissense,theNewLiteracies Literacies Studieswantstotalkaboutdifferent‘digitalliteracies’ –thatis,differentwaysofusing of usingwrittenlanguagewithindifferentsortssociocultural practices–so,too,theNew language. as welloftenusingothersortsoftoolsandtechnologies,includingveryoralwritten digital tool–theyinvolve,aswell,waysofacting,interacting,valuing,believing,andknowing, of people.And,aswiththeNLS,thesepracticesalmostalwaysinvolvemorethanjustusinga are determinedbythesocial,cultural,historical,andinstitutionalpracticesofdifferentgroups the NewLiteraciesStudiesalsoarguesthatmeaningstowhichthesetechnologiesgiverise 2003; Lankshear1997;andKnobel2006;NewLondonGroup1996).LiketheNLS, Gee 2004,2013;Hobbs1997;Jenkins2006;Kist2004;KnobelandLankshear2007;Kress meaning, justlikelanguage(Alvermannetal.1999;Buckingham2003,2007;Coiro2008; and literacypracticesembeddedinpopularculture. Studies’ isaboutstudyingnewtypesofliteracybeyondprintliteracy,especially‘digitalliteracies’ Literacy Studies.’TheNLSwasaboutstudyingliteracyinanewway.‘TheNewLiteracies the way,‘TheNewLiteraciesStudies’isparsedgrammaticallydifferentlythan‘the simply carries over the NLS argument about written language to new digital technologies. By and institutionalpracticesofdifferentgroupspeople. turn, whatwrittenlanguagemeantwasamatterdeterminedbythesocial,cultural,historical, The NLSarguedthatwrittenlanguagewasatechnologyforgivingandgettingmeaning.In The storyGrafftellscanberepeatedformanyothersocieties,includingBritainandthe The NewLiteraciesStudieshashadanimportanthistoricalrelationship withtheNLS,from Just astheNLSwantedtotalkaboutdifferentliteraciesin plural–thatis,differentways The NewLiteraciesStudiesviewsdifferentdigitaltoolsastechnologiesforgivingandgetting A related and slightly later movement,which we cancall‘TheNewLiteracies Studies,’ The NewLiteraciesStudies The Future directions J.P. Gee 44 Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 09:20 08 Mar 2021; For: 9781315717647, chapter2, 10.4324/9781315717647.ch2 of theearlierrigiditiesinNLSwork. Jenkins positioning and notjust‘groups’withclearborders(Gee 2000a; Gee and Hayes 2010, 2011; has focusedmoreonchanging,negotiated,contested,andhybridsocialidentities contemporary workonsituatedandembodiedcognition.WorkintheNewLiteraciesStudies around learninginschoolthatarosethepost-NCLB(NoChildLeftBehind)eraand practice, thattheNLSsometimeshadahardtimeinterveninginsomeofcorecontroversies groups thattodaysoundliketheyarevergingonstereotypes.Theselimitationsmeant,in mind beyond ‘communities of practice.’ Early work sometimes verged on generalizations about digital media(e.g.,Gee2004;KnobelandLankshear2007). new formsofliteracy,whichoftenusenotjust(oreven)thetechnologyprintbut though todayNLSworkiscommonlycombinedwiththeNewLiteraciesStudiestoincorporate work Ihavesurveyed(e.g.,Gee2011;LarsonandMarsh2005;PahlRowsell2005,2006), see HullandSchultz(2001).Currentworkhascontinuedalongthelinesoffoundational Bizzell, P.(1992)AcademicDiscourseandCriticalConsciousness , Pittsburgh,PA:UniversityofPittsburgh Berger, P.,B.andKellner, H.(1973)TheHomelessMind:Modernization,New andConsciousness Bazerman, C.(1989)ShapingWrittenKnowledge , Madison,WI:UniversityofWisconsin Press. Barton, D.andHamilton,M.(1998)LocalLiteracies:ReadingWritinginOneCommunity , London: Barton, D.(1994)Literacy:AnIntroductiontotheEcologyofWrittenLanguage , Oxford:Blackwell. Barsalou, L.W.(1999b)Perceptualsymbolsystems,BehavioralandBrainSciences , 22(4):577–660. Barsalou, L.W.(1999a)Languagecomprehension:Archivalmemory orpreparationforsituatedaction, Alvermann, D.E.,Moon,J.S.andHagood,M.C.(1999)PopularCultureintheClassroom:Teaching Street, B.(2005)Atlast:RecentapplicationsofNewLiteracyStudies ineducationalcontexts,Research Street, B. (2003) What’s ‘new’ in New Literacy Studies? Critical approaches to literacy in theory and Knobel, M.andLankshear,C.(eds.)(2007)ANewLiteraciesSampler,York,NY:PeterLang. Gee, J.P.(2011[1990])SocialLinguisticsandLiteracies:IdeologyinDiscourses,4thedition,London:Taylor Gee, J.P.(2004)SituatedLanguageandLearning:ACritiqueofTraditionalSchooling,London:Routledge. Literacy, Learning,Technology,Sociolinguistics. 1

Press. York, NY:RandomHouse. Routledge. Discourse Processes,28(1):61–80. Researching CriticalMediaLiteracy,Mahwah,NJ:Erlbaum. the TeachingofEnglish,39(4):417–423. practice, CurrentIssuesinComparativeEducation,5(2):77–91. & Francis. I havealsopointedoutthefailuresofNLStodealmorebroadlywithlearningand For anotherdiscussionofthefoundationsNLSandsomemorecurrentapplications This paperdiscussesideasmorefullydevelopedinGee(2010,2011[1990],and2012). et al.2006;Lankshear1997;Shirky2008).Thishas,insomerespects,mitigated The NewLiteracyStudies Further reading Related topics References Note 45 Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 09:20 08 Mar 2021; For: 9781315717647, chapter2, 10.4324/9781315717647.ch2 Churchland, P. M. (1989) A Neurocomputational Perspective: The Nature of Mind and the Structure of Science, Cazden, C.(1988)ClassroomDiscourse:TheLanguageofTeachingandLearning,Portsmouth,NH:Heinemann. Cazden, C.(1979)Peekabooasaninstructionalmodel:Discoursedevelopmentathomeandschool, Buckingham, D. (ed.) (2007) Buckingham, D.(2003)MediaEducation:Literacy,LearningandContemporaryCulture,Cambridge:Polity Brown, J.S.,Collins,A.andDuguid,P.(1989)Situatedcognitionthecultureoflearning,Educational Brandt, D.andClinton,K.(2002)Limitsofthelocal:Expandingperspectivesonliteracyasasocial Clark, A. (1993) Clark, A.(1989)Microcognition:Philosophy,CognitiveScience,andParallelDistributedProcessing,Cambridge, Churchland, P.S.andSejnowski,T.J.(1992)TheComputationalBrain,Cambridge,MA:Bradford/MIT Churchland, P.S.(1986)Neurophilosophy:TowardaUnifiedScienceoftheMind/Brain,Cambridge,MA: Gee, J. P. (2013) Good Video Games and Good Learning: Collected Essays on Video Games, Learning, and Gee, J.P.(2012)Discourseand‘theNewLiteracyStudies,’in P. GeeandM.Handford(eds.),The Gee, J.P.(2011[1990])SocialLinguisticsandLiteracies:IdeologyinDiscourses , 4thedition,London:Taylor Gee, J.P.(2010)Asituated-socioculturalapproachtoliteracyandtechnology, inElizabethA.Baker(ed.), Gee, J.P.(2004)SituatedLanguageandLearning:ACritiqueofTraditionalSchooling , London:Routledge. Gee, J.P.(2000b)TheNewLiteracyStudies:From‘sociallysituated’totheworkofsocial,inD. Gee, J.P.(2000a)Identityasananalyticlensforresearchineducation,ReviewofResearchEducation, Gee, J.P.(1992)TheSocialMind:Language,Ideology,andPractice,NewYork,NY:Bergin&Garvey. Gee, J.P.(1987)Whatisliteracy?TeachingandLearning,2(1):1–11. Engeström, Y.(1987)LearningbyExpanding:AnActivityTheoreticalApproachtoDevelopmentalResearch, Donald, J.(1983)Howilliteracybecameaproblem(andliteracystoppedbeingone),JournalofEducation, Damasio, A.R.(1994)Descartes’Error:Emotion,Reason,andtheHumanBrain,NewYork,NY:Avon. Cook-Gumperz, J.(ed.)(1986)TheSocialConstructionofLiteracy,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress. Coiro, J.,Knobel,M.,Lankshear,C.andLeu,D.J.(eds.)(2008)HandbookofResearchonNewLiteracies, Clark, A.(1997)BeingThere:PuttingBrain,Body,andWorldTogetherAgain,Cambridge,MA:MITPress. Gumperz, J.(1982a)DiscourseStrategies , Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity Press. Graff, H.J.(1979)TheLiteracyMyth:andSocial Structureinthe19thCenturyCity,NewYork,NY: Glenberg, A.M.(1997)Whatismemory for?BehavioralandBrainSciences,20(1):1–55. Gee, J.P.andHayes,E.R.(2011) LanguageandLearningintheDigital,Abingdon,UK:Routledge. Age Gee, J.P.andHayes,E.R.(2010) WomenasGamers:TheSimsand21st,NewYork,NY: CenturyLearning Gee, J.P.(2014[1999])AnIntroductiontoDiscourseAnalysis:TheoryandMethod , 4thedition,Abingdon, Stanford University. Papers andReportsinChildLanguageDevelopment,17:1–29.Stanford,CA:DepartmentofLinguistics, Foundation SeriesonDigitalMediaandLearning,Cambridge,MA:MITPress. Press. Researcher, 18(1):32–42. practice, JournalofLiteracyResearch,34(3):337–356. MA: MITPress. Press. MIT Press. Cambridge, MA:MITPress. Routledge HandbookofDiscourseAnalysis,Abingdon,UK:Routledge,pp.371–382. & Francis. 165–193. The NewLiteracies:MultiplePerspectivesonResearchandPractice,York,NY:GuilfordPress,pp. Routledge, pp.180–196. Barton, M.Hamilton,andR.Ivanic(eds.),SituatedLiteracies:ReadingWritinginContext,London: 25(1): 99–125. Helsinki, Finland:OrientaKonsultit. 165(1): 35–52. Philadelphia, PA:LawrenceErlbaum. Cambridge UniversityPress. Academic Press. Palgrave Macmillan. UK: Routledge. Literacy, 2ndedition,NewYork,NY:PeterLang. Associative Engines: Connectionism, Concepts, and Representational Change, Cambridge: Youth, Identity, and Digital Media, John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur J.P. Gee 46 Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 09:20 08 Mar 2021; For: 9781315717647, chapter2, 10.4324/9781315717647.ch2 Heath, S. B. (1982) What no bedtime storymeans:Narrativeskillsathome and at school, Hawkins, J.(2005)OnIntelligence,NewYork,NY:HenryHolt. Havelock, E.(1976)PrefacetoPlato,Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress. Gumperz, J.(ed.)(1982b)LanguageandSocialIdentity,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress. Scribner, S.andCole,M.(1981) The PsychologyofLiteracy,Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversity Press. Scollon, R.andS.W.(1981) Narrative,Literacy,andFaceinInterethnic,Norwood, Communication Schieffelin, B.andOchs,E.(eds.) (1986)LanguageSocializationAcrossCultures,Cambridge:Cambridge Prinsloo, M.andBreier,(eds.) (1996)TheSocialUsesofLiteracy:Theory andPracticeinContemporary Pahl, K.andRowsell,J.(eds.)(2006)TravelNotesfromtheNewLiteracyStudies:InstancesofPractice , Pahl, K.andRowsell,J.(2005)LiteracyEducation:UnderstandingtheNewStudiesinClassroom , Newell, A.andSimon,H.(1972)HumanProblemSolving,EnglewoodCliffs,NJ:Prentice-Hall. New London Group(1996) A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures,HarvardEducation Michaels, S.(1981)‘Sharingtime’:Children’snarrativestylesanddifferential accesstoliteracy,Languagein Mehan, H.(1979)LearningLessons,Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress. Levine, K.(1986)TheSocialContextofLiteracy,London:Routledge. Lave, J.andWenger,E.(1991)SituatedLearning:LegitimatePeripheralParticipation , NewYork,NY: Latour, B. (2005) Latour, B.(2004)PoliticsofNature:HowtoBringtheSciencesintoDemocracy,Cambridge,MA:Harvard Larson, J. andMarsh,(2005)MakingLiteracyReal:TheoriesforLearning and Teaching,ThousandOaks,CA: Lankshear, C.andKnobel,M.(2006)NewLiteracies,2ndedition,Maidenhead,UK:OpenUniversity Lankshear, C.(1997)ChangingLiteracies,Maidenhead,UK:OpenUniversityPress. Kress, G.(2003)LiteracyintheNewMediaAge,London:Routledge. Kress, G.(1985)LinguisticProcessesinSocioculturalPractice,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress. Kolodner, J.L.(2006)Case-basedreasoning,inR.K.Sawyer(ed.)TheCambridgeHandbookoftheLearning Kolodner, J.L.(1993)Case-BasedReasoning,SanMateo,CA:MorganKaufmannPublishers. Knobel, M.andLankshear,C.(eds.)(2007)ANewLiteraciesSampler,York,NY:PeterLang. Kist, W.(2004)NewLiteraciesinAction:TeachingandLearningMultipleMedia,York,NY:Teachers Jenkins, H.,Clinton,K.,Purushotma,R.,Robison,A.andWeigel,M.(2006)ConfrontingtheChallenges Jenkins, H.(2006)ConvergenceCulture:WhereOldandNewMediaCollide,York,NY:York Hutchins, E.(1995)CognitionintheWild,Cambridge,MA:MITPress. Hull, G.A.andSchultz,K.(2001)School’sOut:BridgingOut-of-SchoolLiteracieswithClassroomPractice, Hobbs, R.(1997)Expandingtheconceptofliteracy,inKuby(ed.)MediaLiteracyInformationAge: Heath, S.B.(1994)ThechildrenofTrackton’schildren:Spokenandwrittenlanguageinsocialchange, Heath, S.B.(1983)Wayswithwords:Language,Life,andWorkinCommunitiesClassrooms,Cambridge: NJ: Ablex. University Press. South Africa,Philadelphia,PA:JohnBenjamins. Clevedon, UK:MultilingualMatters. London: PaulChapman. Review, 66(1):60–92. Society, 10(3):423–442. Cambridge UniversityPress. University Press. University Press. Sage. Press. Sciences, Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,pp.225–242. College Press. Catherine T.MacArthurFoundation. of ParticipatoryCulture:MediaEducationforthe21stCentury,Washington,DC:TheJohnD.and University Press. New York,NY:TeachersCollegePress. Current Perspectives,NewBrunswick,NJ:TransactionPublishers,pp.163–183. edition, Newark,DE:InternationalReadingAssociation,pp.208–230. in. R.B.Ruddell,M.RuddellandH.Singer(eds.),TheoreticalModelsProcessesofReading,4th Cambridge UniversityPress. Society, 11(1):49–76. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory,Oxford: Oxford The NewLiteracyStudies 47 Language in Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 09:20 08 Mar 2021; For: 9781315717647, chapter2, 10.4324/9781315717647.ch2 Street, B. V. (1995) Social Literacies: Critical Approaches to Literacy in Development, Ethnography, and Education, Street, B.V.(ed.)(1993)Cross-CulturalApproachestoLiteracy,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress. Street, B.V.(1984)LiteracyinTheoryandPractice,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress. Shirky, C.(2008)HereComesEverybody:ThePowerofOrganizingWithoutOrganizations,NewYork,NY: Wenger, E. (1998) Wells, G.(1986)TheMeaningMakers:ChildrenLearningLanguageandUsingtoLearn,Portsmouth, Sugimoto, Y.(2003)AnIntroductiontoJapaneseSociety,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress. Street, B.V.(2005)Atlast:RecentapplicationsofNewLiteracyStudiesineducationalcontexts,Research Street, B.V.(1997)Theimplicationsofthe‘NewLiteracyStudies’forliteracyeducation,Englishin Wittgenstein, L.(1953)PhilosophicalInvestigations,Oxford:BlackwellPublishing. Wieder, D.L.andPratt,S.(1990)OnbeingarecognizableIndianamongIndians,inCarbaugh(ed.), Wertsch, J.V.(1985)VygotskyandtheSocialFormationofMind,Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress. Penguin. NH: Heinemann. in theTeachingofEnglish,39(4):417–423. Education, 31(3):45–59. London: Longman. Cultural CommunicationandInterculturalContact,Hillsdale,NJ:LawrenceErlbaum,pp.45–64. University Press. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity, Cambridge: Cambridge J.P. Gee 48