(Get Answer)

Disciplinary Literacy Each discipline differs from others in what counts as knowledge and in the way new knowledge is created. Disciplinary literacy seeks to answer questions such as the following: • What counts as knowledge in this discipline? • How is new knowledge created in this discipline? • What kinds of evidence are appropriate in this discipline? Disciplines also differ in the way language is used, that is, in the linguistic structures disciplinary experts use to convey knowledge to each other. One characteristic of academic writing is the frequent use of nominalization, which is the transformation of grammatical constructions like complex phrases or verbs into a noun (Harmon, Hedrick, & Wood, 2005; Moje, 2008). In science texts, nominalization is used to create technical vocabulary, resulting in a telescoping effect in which students must remember an increasing information load as they read a textbook (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2008; Unsworth, 1999). For example, in history texts, nominalization occurs with general vocabulary terms and serves to make cause-effect relationships implicit, a process Martin (1993) termed buried reasoning. Whereas in English classrooms, students must comprehend a wide range of genres with unique strategic requirements, mathematics and science use a relatively stable, narrow set of genres but employ multiple systems that convey meaning including prose, symbols, numbers, and abbreviations. The linguistic and epistemological differences among the disciplinary communities of practice result in salient content-specific literacy demands. Scaffolding Through Inquiry Engaging in literacy starts with an active stance; in other words, students must be positioned to understand the larger context of how and why classroom activities matter (Schaefer, 2017). Just as we prepare students to read and write for particular purposes, we prepare students for what to do when they are confronted with specific difficulties experienced as a result of background knowledge, readability, or disinterest. Contextualizing literacy learning sets the stage for success that is realized through the use of evidence-based strategies specific to the language of the discipline. Just as we use different lenses in photography for particular purposes, we communicate using language in various ways depending upon the task at hand. Teachers should expose their students to a variety of tools that can contribute to their discipline-specific learning linked to specific instructional purposes (e.g., capturing, collecting, altering, presenting, dissecting, communicating, or generating information) and are more available than ever through apps on technological devices (Smith & Shen, 2017). Scaffolding students to be resilient readers leads them to choose to engage in literacy in their own time outside of school (Kazembe, 2017). Our impactful words of encouragement and constructive feedback can and should be delivered through multiple modes as well as synchronously and asynchronously (Zheng & Warschauer, 2017). Adolescent literacy is at the heart of supporting adolescent students, which requires the following: • Deep understanding of the variety of text types both digital and traditional that adolescents are asked to negotiate daily. • Awareness of the principles of motivation and engagement. Mediated choice that is connected to adolescents' lived experiences is central to ensuring that adolescents participate meaningfully in literacy events and activities. • Recognition of the connections among disciplines and the need for focused and appropriate disciplinary literacy instruction to support the varied text types and reasoning within the content areas. • Knowledge of pedagogy that supports the development of thoughtful readers and writers who develop a metacognitive stance in their work with texts across the curriculum. • Recognition that this work needs to include support at the preservice level and continued professional development once teachers enter the classroom. create a summary of the reading, then respond to them using the 4A's approach. Try not to list your responses, rather synthesise them. 1. What assumptions does the author of the text hold? 2. What do you agree with in the text? 3. What do you want to argue with in the text? 4. What parts of the text do you want to aspire to (or act upon)?