BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE FOR STUDY
2.4 Institutional Support Mechanisms
53
Students learn how disciplinary experts read and write texts in their field and “how the disciplines are different from one another, how acts of inquiry produce knowledge and multiple representational forms (such as texts written in particular ways or with different symbolic systems or semiotic tools), as well as how those disciplinary differences are socially constructed” (Moje, 2008: 103). In support of the focus on disciplinary literacy as a benefit to students, Rainey and Moje (2012) state that:
[it is] what students need to usher them into the ways of thinking and knowing and communicating in the disciplines ... teachers can reveal for students what the underlying practices and values and assumptions are of [their] disciplines so that they [students] may fully engage in them (77).
Similarly, Shanahan and Shanahan (2012) agree that the aim of disciplinary literacy is to
“find ways of teaching students to negotiate successfully the literacy aspects of the disciplines ... [a]s an effort, ultimately, to transform students into disciplinary insiders who are able to approach literacy tasks with some sense of agency and with a set of responses and moves that are appropriate to the specialized purposes, demands, and mores of the disciplines” (8). “Being literate in a discipline means both deep knowledge of disciplinary content and keen understanding of disciplinary ways of making meaning” (Fang, 2012: 20).
Fang (2012: 20) goes on to state that “literacy development involves simultaneous engagement with disciplinary content (e.g. core concepts) and disciplinary habits of mind (e.g. reading–writing, viewing–representing, listening–speaking, thinking–reasoning, and problem-solving practices consistent with those of content experts)” (20). The concepts of literacy and disciplinary literacy are relevant in this study, which critical research question 1 seeks to answer.
54
has been characterised by underpreparedness which further widens the articulation gap32. It is for this reason that such students require institutional support that have manifested in many forms, including programmes and intervention structures aimed at the development of academic literacy.
Such mechanisms assist students to manage their transition from secondary schooling to university education so that they can acquire ways of thinking and learning aligned with the demands of academia and intellectual rigour. These mechanisms have taken the form of ASPs which, for example, provided extra tutorials and assistance alongside [students’]
normal studies (NARSET, 1997); generic academic literacy courses and discipline-specific academic literacy courses (McKenna, 2003); writing centres (Leibowitz et al. 1997;
Hutchings, 2006) and the subsequent inclusion of ADPs such as foundation or extended curriculum programmes (Cantrell, 2008: 44). For the purpose of this study, the support mechanism in focus is academic literacy (AL).
2.4.1 Defining Academic Literacy (AL)
Various researchers have proffered definitions of Academic Literacy (AL). Boughey (1994) explains that definitions of academic literacy most commonly offered at South African universities tend to revolve around the “ability to use and understand the language of instruction in a form and register appropriate to academic contexts” (22). Examples of this definition are conveyed by Amos (1999) who defines academic literacy as the student’s ability to read and write effectively within the university context (178); or as teaching academic language skills to assist students in their studies or research (Jordan 2004 and Hyland, 2006). Lea and Street (2006) define academic literacies as the diverse and multiple literacies found in academic contexts such as disciplinary and subject matter courses. Short and Fitzsimmons (2007) offer a comprehensive definition of academic literacy as that which includes “reading, writing, and oral discourse; varies from subject to subject; requires knowledge of multiple genres of and purposes of text use and is influenced by students' personal, social, and cultural experiences” (2). Leibowitz (1994) takes this definition further in stating that this will imply the student’s ability to read and write within the academic context with independence, understanding and a level of
32 The “articulation gap” is the gap between “students’ capabilities and universities’ expectations” (Marshall, 2009: 65). This is discussed in Chapter 4.
55
engagement with the learning. Particularly pertinent to this study is the description of academic literacy practices by Lea and Street (1998) as “reading and writing – within disciplines [that] constitute central processes through which students learn new subjects and develop their knowledge about new areas of study” (160). Weideman (2006: 84) listed the components of academic literacy that students need to master to become academically literate:
● understand a range of academic vocabulary in context;
● interpret and use metaphor and idiom, and perceive connotation, word play and ambiguity;
● understand relations between different parts of a text, be aware of the logical development of (an academic) text, via introductions and conclusions, and know how to use language that serves to make the different parts of a text hang together;
● interpret different kinds of text type (genres), and show sensitivity for the meaning that they convey and the audience that they are aimed at;
● interpret, use and produce information presented in graphic or visual format;
● make distinctions between essential and non-essential information, fact and opinion, propositions and argument; distinguish between cause and effect, classify, categorise and handle data that make comparisons;
● see sequence and order, do simple numerical estimations and computations that are relevant to academic information, that allow comparisons to be made, and can be applied for the purposes of an argument;
● know what counts as evidence for an argument, extrapolate from information by making inferences, and apply the information or its implications to other cases than the one at hand;
● understand the communicative function of various ways of expression in academic language (such as defining, providing examples, arguing) and;
● make meaning (e.g. of an academic text) beyond the level of the sentence.
2.4.2 AL as a Support Mechanism
The early provision of academic literacy at HEIs needs to be understood in light of Boughey’s (1994) definition of AL quoted in the preceding paragraph. According to Boughey (1994), since the language of instruction (at South African universities) for many of those [students] identified as being academically illiterate [author’s emphasis] is a second, third or even fourth language, the roots of this illiteracy are often perceived to lie in a lack of knowledge of the additional language compounded by a lack of familiarity with the way in which academic text is structured rhetorically, syntactically, and lexically. As a result of this perception, the development of academic literacy has traditionally been
56
addressed by the provision of adjunct programmes or courses which have tended to focus on remedial instruction in the second language and ‘how to’ classes in academic reading and writing skills (22).
Boughey and Niven (2012) attribute the demise of academic support due to the challenges to the universities made by academics such as Vilakazi (1986) and others who argued that it was not students who were ‘underprepared’ for higher education but rather the other way round: universities were underprepared for the task of embracing the diversity that would characterise student populations following a shift to democracy. (Chapter 1 of this study traced the provision of academic support and academic development at tertiary institutions in South Africa pre- and post-apartheid as well as the call for universities to change). AL at HEIs were then transformed into academic development structures and were offered in faculties as either generic, embedded or separate courses. As academic development structures, AL courses that are generic and decontextualised use general texts to teach and serve students from a wide range of disciplines. AL courses that involve collaboration and partnerships in the form of team teaching between academic literacy specialists and disciplinary specialists are embedded courses. Alternatively, AL can be offered as a separate course within a faculty, using the content of a particular discipline to impart the literacies or genres required for that discipline.
Generally, AL courses have been conceived as intervention measures with the purpose of remedying any existing gaps in literacies required for students’ reading, writing and speaking that stem from their educationally disadvantaged backgrounds. Such a view then perceives the role of AL as being able to provide students with a list of decontextualised skills that require mastery for academic success. Such a view is likely to confine the acquisition of literacies to the boundaries of the AL lecture venue, thus depriving the disciplinary specialists33 of the opportunity to make explicit the literacy practices essential for their own disciplinary discourse/epistemology.
AL has been perceived as a ‘quick-fix’ or ‘language-repair-facility’ where, for example, after a year-long exposure to academic reading and writing in science in the AL classroom,
33 A disciplinary specialist, in the context of this study, refers to the HE academic (tutor/senior tutor/lecturer) who has knowledge of the academic fields of biology, chemistry, mathematics or physics, having specialised in its study. The disciplinary specialist conveys this knowledge to the students studying a particular discipline.
57
underpreparedness is expected to be remedied and transformed into proficiency. There exists the misconception or superficial notion that AL teaching involves “an autonomous list of transferable generic skills” (Jacobs, 2007: 875), the surface features of English and the rules of grammar which, once mastered, means a resolution of students’ difficulties in language and subsequently, improved academic performance. I concur with Jacobs (2007) that this type of understanding “perpetuates higher education practices that identify students as the problem, thereby absolving lecturers from critically reflecting on their own practices” (878). Street’s (2003) suggestion that “literacy varies from one context to another” and cannot be viewed as “neutral and universal” (77) is relevant to this study.
2.4.3 AL Modules offered at Tertiary Level
The AL modules or models outlined below serve as institutional measures used to meet the needs of a number of students whose inadequate academic literacy levels pose as a challenge to them being able to cope with the demands of the academic environment that constitute the tertiary studies. The reason for introducing the nature and scope of the academic literacy modules within this study is to contextualise the rationale of AL modules within the higher education environments. This is relevant as this study explores issues regarding the acquisition of discipline-specific literacies in science in the foundation modules of biology, chemistry, mathematics and physics offered within the FP.
Furthermore, the outline of the scope of other AL modules helps draw some comparisons and contrasts with SCOM.
2.4.3.1 A Bridging Programme Model
van Wyk (2002) and van Wyk and Greyling (2008) outline the rationale for an academic reading and writing course at the University of Free State (UFS). They state that, in an attempt to address the issue of imbalances at secondary schooling and its impact on underpreparedness for tertiary level, UFS offered a year-long bridging programme in the early 1990s which included the English Language Course. The aim of the course was to develop students’ reading and writing potential so that they could reap academic success at tertiary level. The aim of concentrating on academic reading skills revolved around the need to pay attention to students’ comprehension and critical skills. The focus on reading had the dual purpose of improving students’ extensive and intensive reading capabilities.
58
Extensive reading skills ensured that students read widely and engaged meaningfully with a variety of books, simultaneously incorporating skills such as text processing skills and academic vocabulary acquisition; and intensive reading drew students’ attention to pertinent features of a reading text. The course emphasized “explicit teaching of the process of reading-for-writing” (van Wyk, 2002: 228). The academic writing component of the course paid attention to the students’ ability to express information and ideas clearly and logically. This course incorporated grammar as part of its syllabus and used the technique of process writing, i.e. the traditional writing process of planning, writing, revising and editing to enhance students’ writing skills. Overall, it attempted to socialize the students into the academic discourse34 community. Although this English Language Course identified reading as the core, it does bear similarities with the SCOM course offered in the FP. In the English Language Course, reading content is science-based and texts are deconstructed through the mechanism of scaffolding35. Writing in SCOM is developed and implemented in a similar manner.
2.4.3.2 The Writing Centre (WC)
Although academic models feature prominently in foundation programmes offered at tertiary institutions, the establishment of the Writing Centre (WC) has also become a common feature. The WC is often described as skills-based units that provide walk-in, individual consultancy services for students from all faculties and all academic levels of the university. The WC offers one on one consultation to assist students with a draft assignment or writing task. It has been intimated that a consultation is a useful moment of intersection between the content and the individual approach to learning (Harris, 1995).
Archer (2007) explains that the WC was traditionally considered a remediation centre aimed at rectifying language deficiencies in students but its purpose has changed over the
34 “A Discourse is a socially accepted association among ways of using language, of thinking, feeling, believing, valuing, and of acting that can be used to identify oneself as a member of a socially meaningful group or ‘social network’, or to signal (that one is playing) a socially meaningful ‘role’ ” (Gee, 1990; 143).
This concept is expanded on in Chapter 3.
35 The term ‘scaffolding’, first used by Wood et al. (1976), refers to “the support that a teacher can give learners so that they can work at a much higher level than is possible on their own. Scaffolding support enables learners to successfully practise complex skills; as they become independently competent, the scaffolding is gradually withdrawn” (Rose et al. 2003). This concept is further explained in Chapter 3.
59
years. The WC has to now deal with the fact that most students at HEIs are expected to write in English, a language which is not their mother tongue. As a university endeavour, WC provides a service to all academically underprepared students, more especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds. However, all students need to learn the academic discourses of different disciplines and the WC is particularly useful since students come to tertiary institutions with different literacies and cultural conventions (Archer, 2007). One example of a WC is at the UCT. It emerged in 1994 as a result of concerns about the quality of student writing. This centre served as a consultancy unit for students from all faculties, including those registered for foundation courses. It was an initiative aimed at addressing the difficulties experienced by students with disadvantaged schooling backgrounds in acquiring academic literacy skills essential for university study, namely writing and reasoning skills.
The essential purpose of the WC was to offer individual consultancy with students and allow the writing consultants to work with teaching staff in various academic departments with the shared aim of making writing instruction an explicit, integrated component of course curricula (Churms, undated). The concept of cross-disciplinarity in such an intervention model is a useful way of creating dialogue and discussion around academic conventions. Although in this study I do not intend to explore the viability of the WC as a support mechanism, the provision of assistance in academic writing offered in it as a response to the challenges faced by the students who are not adequately prepared for academic writing in the higher education setting has certain parallels with the purpose of SCOM.
2.4.3.3 Embedded Models of AL
Other intervention measures offered at HEIs are best described as integrated models. An example of this is the AL course that was developed and initiated in 2001 at the Durban University of Technology (DUT), (formerly known as the Durban Institute of Technology) to serve the purpose of overt language intervention. According to McKenna (2003), this course which was embedded in the mainstream curriculum, facilitated negotiated collaboration between disciplinary specialists and academic literacy specialists. The purpose of doing so was to induct students into the literacy norms of disciplines. The foundation courses offered at DUT have been integrated into mainstream subjects and the
60
consequence of this is that the AL lecturer has to interact with the mainstream lecturers.
The integrated AL model had enabled the mainstream lecturers to make changes to their curriculum in respect of teaching methodology, syllabi and assessment in an effort to facilitate the students’ acquisition of academic literacy. The AL module offered was assessed through discipline-specific portfolios and mainstream assessments. This intervention model contributed to the move from AL being a ‘quick-fix’ solution to a developing model owned by disciplines or departments who took charge of the change needed to improve students’ academic literacies.
Such an AL course offered at DUT has useful links for this study which intends to explore the discipline-specific literacies needed in and for science in the FP; the perceived challenges that these discipline-specific literacies in science could present to the students in the FP; and, the extent to which the disciplinary specialists (who are referred to as DSs36 in this study) who teach the foundation module in the disciplines of science pay any attention to such literacies in order to improve reading, writing, speaking and doing science.
Various studies have focussed on collaboration between academic literacy and disciplines within specific faculties. This allows the development of academic literacies such as reading, writing and speaking in the language of the discipline in which it is engaged. Such embedded courses involve the teaching of content knowledge by disciplinary specialists, with accompanying input about literacies fed from academic literacy specialists. AL modules are also embedded within particular disciplines at tertiary level. Jacobs’ (2005a) study conducted within the context of an Engineering Faculty at the Cape Peninsula University of Technology explored the integrated role of embedding academic literacies in the various sub-disciplines of Engineering. This integrated approach promoted close collaboration between language and engineering lecturers achieved by placing language lecturers within the Engineering Faculty. It is in this context that Jacobs’ (2005a) study enabled the teaching of reading and writing within the discursive practices of the different sub-disciplines of Engineering.
36 The Disciplinary Specialists teach one of the following foundation modules in the BSc4 (Foundation) programme: biology, chemistry, mathematics or physics. In this study, they are referred to as DSs.
61
Jacobs’ (2005a) findings indicate that engineering lecturers regard language lecturers as being responsible for inducting students into the literacy practices of engineering discourses. Her study also indicates that since engineering lecturers knew the rules of engineering discourse at an unconscious level, working with language lecturers would be able to allow the tacit knowledge of rules of engineering discourse to become more conscious and explicit to their students, thereby encouraging the role of collaborative partnership between members of two distinctive faculties: language and engineering.
This study is not angled at evaluating the various forms of academic literacy courses offered at tertiary level but drew attention to them in view of the nature of this study which is the acquisition of discipline-specific literacies in science.