- 1. Comparison of the two transcripts
The first transcript is an example of pedagogy of literacy learning. Lessons given in this style focus on learning about literacy and the usefulness of literacy skills and processes in real life situations. The emphasis is not on “doing school” or “doing the task”. So in Transcript 1, Sarah’s mother by making her to count eggs is implicitly trying to show her daughter the usefulness of literacy and literacy skills in real life situations. Sarah by doing the task of counting eggs is expected to realize the usefulness of literacy skills in real life situations.
The learning environment in the first transcript is structured around home and shopping. Sarah’s grandparents and her uncle and aunt are due to arrive and Sarah’s mother has to prepare dinner for them. Such an environment is ideal for pedagogy of literacy learning.
The questions and hints put forward by Sarah’s mother also encourage learning of cognitive process by which the young girl arrives at her answers.
When Aunt Jane brings the story book – The Gingerbread Man along with Gingerbread Man brand biscuits she too is doing pedagogy of literacy learning. So Sara by seeing the image of Gingerbread man on the packaging of the biscuits can relate to real life situation when reading the book.
On the other hand the transcript in the second case is an example of pedagogy of literacy lessons. In this style of learning the focus is on doing the task or doing literacy rather than on learning about how to do literacy and its usefulness in real life situations.
So Mr Hammond, the teacher in Transcript Two, is conducting a literacy lesson task where he conducts the task along with his students, but doesn’t explain to them the utility of the learning extracted from the task in real life situations.
Mr Hammond’s task style also encourages learning of cognitive processes. There are also elements of pedagogy of school in Transcript 2. So when Mr Hammond asks his students to explain what a drought is, he is indulging in pedagogy of school. He is not making any conscious effort to relate the definition of drought with a real life situation.
Both the transcripts use scaffolding interactional cycle. The three steps in scaffolding interactional cycle are : Prepare, identify and Elaborate. The learning in this style follows a sequence in which the teacher prepares the learner for the task in the first stage; in the second stage the learner performs the learning task; and in the third stage the teacher elaborates on what has been learnt (Anstey, M., & Bull, G.,1996).
So Sarah’s mother while asking her to count the eggs prepares her for the task. In the second stage, Sarah by counting the eggs performs the task and Sarah’s mother identifies and affirms it. In the third stage Sarah’s mother elaborates on the learning task by asking Sarah questions on how she reached to her answers.
Mr Hammonds in Transcript 2 prepares his students for the learning task by reading and dramatizing aspects of the fairytale : Jack and the Beanstalk. After reading a few lines, Mr Hammonds asks questions from his students about the information and insights presented by those lines. When his students answer those questions they are performing the learning task. And then Mr Hammonds elaborates on the learning task by asking further questions or by telling the students whether their replies are right or not.
The two transcripts combine scaffolding interactional styles with pedagogy of literacy learning (Transcript 1) and pedagogy of literacy lessons (Transcript 2).
2 .Comparison of effectiveness of literacy pedagogy
Literacy pedagogy aims at increasing functional literacy of learners. Instead of following a pedantic approach to learning, literacy pedagogy follows a much more creative and liberal approach to learning (Campbell, R., & Green, D. (Eds.).,2006)..
In pedagogy of literacy lessons, the student-teacher exchanges are focused on doing the task or doing the literacy rather than on the cognitive processes through which literacy has been accomplished. So, pedagogy of literacy lessons focuses more on the techniques. It does not elaborate on the usefulness of literacy in real life. This style is advantageous for those who already know how to do the literacy task. It is disadvantageous for those who do not know the literacy task. So pedagogy of literacy lessons is not as effective with new learners as is pedagogy of literacy learning. Techniques like skimming are encouraged in pedagogy of literacy lessons. Skimming is the technique of extracting information without going through the whole text (Harker, R., Mahaar, C. & Wilkes, C. eds ,1990).
In pedagogy of literary learning the focus is on understanding the utility of literacy. The teacher carefully explains the utility of the literacy skills to the students. Such an understanding enables students to understand better the literacy process. Students are also motivated to learn more. Pedagogy of literacy learning emphasizes on careful modeling of the cognitive process. This increases the effectiveness of pedagogy of literacy learning with new learners and beginners (O’Neill, S. ,2011).
The focus of pedagogy of school is on learning how to do school tasks rather than on learning about literacy itself. In this style, the teacher expects the students to model themselves on predetermined behavioral patterns. The teacher has a particular answer in mind to a particular question and he or she expects the students to answer that particular answer only. Pedagogy of school is least effective in accomplish the task of providing functional literacy to students coming from diverse backgrounds and cultures. This style of pedagogy encourages rote learning and students find it hard to relate literacy to real life situations (O’Neill, S. & Gish, A,2009)..
Knowledge has a strong relation to pedagogy style and practice. Literacy learning is most suitable for imparting such capabilities to learners which enable them to use literacy skills powerfully and using the most appropriate knowledge or skill in a given situation.
3. The middle years are definitely the most crucial one when it comes to gaining literacy. In spite of the progress made in middle school reforms and attendant improvements in literacy standards, significant gaps remain in literacy provisions for adolescent learners especially those who are educationally disadvantaged.
Literacy intervention programs like conscious choice of the right literacy pedagogy style are needed for improving the literacy process and making it more effective in achieving its objectives (Martin, J.R.,1999).
A number of studies emphasize the need for literacy intervention programs. Such intervention programs are needed for identification of particular needs of different types of learners (Gray, B. ,1998).
Empirical evidence shows that right pedagogy style like pedagogy of literacy learning goes a long way in achieving the objectives of enhanced literacy levels. My research so far suggests that that breaking up the teacher talk according to the steps in the Scaffolding Interactional Cycle makes the pattern more visible and highlights the ‘interactivity’ of the Cycle in the way each move establishes a foundation for the next.
Scaffolding interactional style, if practiced consciously, increases the efficiency and effectiveness of the teaching process. Learning is imparted to students in a better way as they are able to follow the cognitive process itself.
The theory and practice of scaffolding interactional style is devised in such a way so as to ensure that all students are equipped with the knowledge resources required to participate successfully in classroom discourses which take place around texts distributed to all the students of the class (Culican, S. J.,2005).
One of the major challenges of scaffolding interactional style is that teachers are required to completely change their teaching style. The teacher is required to more actively participate in the learning process of the students. Students too are not passive listeners but are required to actively apply their mind. Scaffolding interactional style requires application of learning by students.
The scaffolding approach propounded in Learning to Read : Reading to learn is significantly different from other pedagogic styles . Empirical evidence clearly shows that this style has been effective in improving literacy in students who are finding accomplishment of functional literacy a challenging task (Gee, J.P. ,1996).
The scaffolding interactional style can be practiced in different environment settings, not limited to classrooms. They can be practiced at homes between parents and teachers or in other informal settings and relationships. This approach also encourages self-learning by students as they can apply the three stages themselves for learning. It can also cater to the complex literacy demands of an increasingly abstract curriculum at the higher levels. This style is especially successful in imparting learning to students from non- English language backgrounds and from economically and socially backward sections of the society.
References:
Anstey, M., & Bull, G. (1996). Re-examining pedagogical knowledge and classroom practice. In G. Bull & M. Anstey, (Eds.), The literacy labyrinth (pp. 89- 106). Sydney: Prentice-Hall.
Campbell, R., & Green, D. (Eds.). (2006). Literacies and learners: Current perspectives (3rd ed.). Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Education Australia.
Culican, S. J. (2005). Troubling teacher talk: The challenge of changing classroom discourse patterns. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education, University of Western Sydney, NSW. Retrieved from http://www.aare.edu.au/05pap/cul05592.pdf
Gee, J.P. (1996) Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses, Taylor & Francis, London.
Gray, B. (1998) Accessing the Discourses of Schooling: English Language and Literacy
Development with Aboriginal Children in Mainstream Schools, Thesis submitted for
Doctor of Philosophy, Department of Language, Literacy and Arts Education,
University of Melbourne
O’Neill, S. (2011). Basic transcript analysis. EDX1170 Foundations of language and literacy course notes, Toowoomba: University of Southern Queensland.
O’Neill, S. & Gish, A. (2009). Transcript 2, Spoken text extract Year 3 teacher and class group. Adapted from O’Neill, S. & Gish, A. (2008). Teaching English as a second language (pp. 136-139). South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
Harker, R., Mahaar, C. & Wilkes, C. eds (1990) An Introduction to the Work of Pierre
Bourdieu, Macmillan, London
Heath, S.B. (1983) Ways with Words: Language, Life and Work in Community and
Classrooms, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Martin, J.R. (1999) ‘Mentoring Semogenesis: ‘genre-based’ literacy pedagogy’ in F.
Christie ed. Pedagogy and the Shaping of Consciousness: Linguistic and social processes, London: Cassell (Open Linguistics Series)
LF56
But you can order it from our service and receive complete high-quality custom paper. Our service offers EDUCATION essay sample that was written by professional writer. If you like one, you have an opportunity to buy a similar paper. Any of the academic papers will be written from scratch, according to all customers’ specifications, expectations and highest standards.”
