Práticas de letramento em sala de aula: uma análise de ações letradas como construção social

Maria Lucia Castanheira*, Judith L. Green & Carol N. Dixon**

 

Resumo

Neste texto, argumenta-se que letramento não é um processo único e universal, que tenha o mesmo significado para todas as pessoas. Ao contrário, entende-se que letramento é um processo dinâmico em que o significado de ação letrada é continuamente (re)construído, localmente, por participantes de diferentes grupos sociais. Para corroborar tal argumento, examinamos como uma perspectiva compartilhada de letramento é estabelecida por participantes no dia-a-dia de uma sala de aula. Orientados pela abordagem etnográfica interacional, analisamos como os alunos e os professores de uma turma de inglês estabelecem as condições para leitura, produção e discussão de textos, durante um curso de verão. A partir dessa análise, apresentam-se considerações teórico-metodológicas para o desenvolvimento de pesquisas sobre práticas escolares de letramento.

Palavras-chave: Letramento; Análise do discurso; Interação em sala de aula.

 

Literacy practices in classrooms: examining literate actions as socially constructed

Abstract

In this article, we argue that literacy is not a universal process that has the same meaning for everybody. Rather, literacy is understood as a dynamic process in which the meaning of literate action is locally and continuously redefined by participants of a social group. To support this argument, we examine how a common understanding of literacy was established by participants in a classroom. Adopting an interactional ethnographic approach, we analyze how students and teacher define conditions for reading, writing and discussing texts, during a summer course. Based on this analysis, we raise theoretical and methodological issues to be considered when developing research on school literacy practices.

Keywords: Literacy; Discourse analysis; Classroom interaction.

 

Pratiques scolaires de literacie: un analyse de l'action lettrée comme une construction sociale

Résumé

Dans ce texte, on argumente que la literacie n’est pas un processus unique et universel, qui ait le même sens pour tous. Au contraire, on comprend la literacie comme un processus dynamique où le sens de l’action lettrée est continûment (re)construit, localement, par des participants aux différents groupes sociaux. Pour confirmer un tel argument, nous examinons la manière par laquelle une perspective partagée de literacie est établie par des participants du quotidien d’une salle de classe. Orientées par l’approche ethnographique interactionnelle, nous analysons comment les élèves et les professeurs d’une classe d’anglais établissent les conditions pour la lecture, la production et la discussion de textes, pendant un cours d’été. À partir de cette analyse, on présente des considérations d’ordre théorico-méthodologique pour le développement de recherches sur les pratiques scolaires de literacie.

Mots-clé: Literacie; Analyse du discours; Interaction en salle de classe.

 

 

Texto completo disponível apenas em PDF.

Full text only available in PDF format.

 

 

Referências

ALLINGTON, Richard (1984). Oral reading. In P. D. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of Reading Research. New York: Longman, pp. 829-864.        [ Links ]

ALVERMAN, Donna E. (1989). Teacher-student mediation of content area texts. Theory into Practice, 18(20), pp. 142-147.

APPLEBEE, Arthur N. (1981). Writing in the Secondary School: English and the Content Areas (Report nº 21). Urbana, Il: National Council of Teachers of English.

BAKER, Caroline & LUKE, Allan (Eds.) (1991). Towards a Critical Sociology of Reading Pedagogy. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

BARTHOLOMEU, David & PETROVSKY, Anthony R. (1986). Facts, Artifacts and Counterfacts: Theory and Method for a Reading and Writing Course. Pourtsmouth, NH: Boyton/Cook Publishers.

BERGAMO, H.; GREEN, Judith L. & RIDGEWAY, D. (1988). Reflection and Beyond: Emerging Strategies and Issues in Professional Development, a Case of the Columbus Instructional Model. Unpublished paper presented at the Reflection Conference, Orlando, FL.

BERGAMO, H., GREEN, Judith L. & RIDGEWAY, D. (1989). Making Professional Development Last: Issues and Research, Policy and Practice. Unpublished paper presented at the Invitational Conference on Professional Development, University of New England, Nothern Rivers, Lismore, Australia.

BLOOME, David (Ed.) (1986a). Literacy and Schooling. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

BLOOME, David (1986b). Building literacy and the classroom community. Theory into Practice, 15(2), pp. 71-76.

BLOOME, David (1989). The Social Construction of Intertextuality on Classroom Literacy and Learning. Unpublished paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.

BLOOME, David & EGAN-ROBERTSON, Ann (1993). The social construction of intertextuality in the classroom reading and writing lessons. Reading Research Quarterly, 28 (4), pp. 304-334.

CASTANHEIRA, Maria Lucia; CRAWFORD, Tereza; GREEN, Judith L. & DIXON, Carol (2001). Interactional ethnography: an approach to studying the social construction of literate practices. Linguistic and Education, 11(4), pp. 353-400.

CHANDLER, Susann (1992). Learning for what purpose? Questions when viewing classroom learning from a socio-cultural curriculum perspective. In H. Marshall (Ed.), Redefining Learning: Roots of Educational Restructuring. Norwood: NJ: Ablex.

COCHRAM-SMITH, Marilyn (1984). The Making of a Reader. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

COLLINS, Elaine & GREEN, Judith (1992). Learning in classroom settings: making or breaking a culture. In H. Marshall (Ed.), Redefining Learning: Roots of Educational Restructuring. Norwood: NJ: Ablex, pp. 59-85.

COLLINS, James (1986). Using cohesion analysis to understanding access to knowledge. In D. Bloome (Ed.), Literacy and Schooling. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, pp. 67-97.

COLLINS, James (1983). A Linguistic Perspective on Minority Education: Discourse Analysis and Early Literacy. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.

COOK-GUMPERZ, Jenny (Ed.) (1986). The Social Construction of Literacy. New York: Cambridge University Press.

FAIRCLOUGH, Norman (1992). Critical Language Awareness. New York: Longman.

FAIRCLOUGH, Norman (1993). Discourse and text: linguistic and intertextual analysis within discourse analysis. Discourse and Society, 3(2), pp. 193-218.

FAIRCLOUGH, Norman (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis: the Critical Study of Language. London: Longman.

FLORIANI, Ana (1993). Negotiating what counts: roles and relationships, texts and contexts, content and meaning. Linguistics and Education, 5, pp. 241-274.

GOLDEN, Joanne (1986). An exploration of reader-text interaction in a small group discussion. In D. Bloome (Ed.), Literacy and Schooling. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

GOLDEN, Joanne (1988). The construction of a literary text in a story reading lesson. In J. Green & J. Harker (Eds.), Multiple Perspective Analysis of Classroom Discourse. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

GOLDEN, Joanne (1990). The Narrative Symbol in Childhood Literature. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

GREEN, Judith & HARKER, Judith O. (1982). Gaining access to learning: conversational, social, and cognitive demands of group participation. In L. C. Wilkinson (Ed.), Communicating in the Classroom. New York: Academic Press.

GREEN, Judith & HARKER, Judith O. (Eds.) (1988). Multiple Perspective Analysis of Classroom Discourse. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

GREEN, Judith; HARKER, Judith O. & GOLDEN Joanne.M. (1987). Lesson construction: differing views. In G. Noblitt & W. Pink (Eds.), Schooling in Social Context: Qualitative Studies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

GREEN, Judith; KANTOR, Rebecca & ROGERS, Teresa (1990). Exploring the complexity of language and learning in the classroom. In B. Jones & L. Idol (Eds.), Educational Values and Cognitive Instruction: Implications for Reform (Vol II). Hillsdale, NJ: Earlbaum, pp. 333-364.

GREEN, Judith & MEYER, Lois A. (1991).The embeddedness of reading in classroom life: Reading as a situated process. In C. Baker & A. Luke (Eds), Toward a Critical Sociology of Reading Pedagogy. Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 141-160.

GUMPERZ, John (1986). Interactive sociolinguistic on the study of schooling. In J. Cook-Gumperz (Ed.), The Social Construction of Literacy. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 45-68.

GUMPERZ, John (1992). Contextualization and understanding. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 229-253.

GUMPERZ, John & HYMES, Dell (Eds.) (1986). Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication. New York: Basil Blackwell.

HEAP, James L. (1980). What counts as reading: limits to certainty in assessment. Curriculum Inquiry, 15, pp. 245-279.

HEAP, James L. (1991). A situated perspective on what counts as reading. In C. Baker & A. Luke (Eds), Towards a Critical Sociology of Reading Pedagogy. Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 103-139.

IVANIC, Roz (1994). I is for interpersonal: discourse construction of writer identities and the teaching of writing. Linguistic and Education, 6, pp. 3-15.

IVANIC, Roz; AITCHISON, M. & WELDON, S. (1995). Bringing ourselves into our writing. RAPAL Bulletin nº 28-29, pp. 2-8.

MORINE-DERSHIMER, Greta (1988). Three approaches to sociolinguistic analysis: Introduction. In J. Green & J. O. Harker (Eds.), Multiple Perspective Analysis of Classroom Discourse. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

PUTNEY, LeAnn G. (1996). You are it! Meaning making as a collective and historical process. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 19(2), pp.129-143.

SALINGER, Jerome D. (1951). Catcher in the Rye. Boston: Little Brown.

SANTA BARBARA CLASSROOM DISCOURSE GROUP (1992). Constructing literacy in classrooms: Literate action as social accomplishment. In H. Marshall (Ed.), Redefining Students Learning. Roots of Educational Restructuring. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, pp. 119-150.

SOARES, Magda B. (1999). Letramento: um Tema em Três Gêneros. Belo Horizonte: Autêntica.

SPRADLEY, James (1980). Participant Observation. New York: Holt, Rinehart e Winston.

STREET, Brian V. (1984). Literacy in Theory and Practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.

TUAYAY, Sabrina; JENNINGS, Louise & DIXON, Carol (1995). Classroom discourse and opportunities to learn: An ethnographic study of knowledge construction in a bilingual third-grade classroom. Discourse Processes, 19, pp. 75-110.

WALLAT, Cynthia & PIAZZA, Carolyn (1988). The classroom and beyond: Issues in the analysis of multiple studies of communicative competence. In J. Green & J. O. Harker (Eds.), Multiple Perspective Analysis of Classroom Discourse. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

 

 

*Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Brasil

**Universidade da Califórnia, Santa Bárbara, EUA

Toda a correspondência relativa a este artigo deve ser enviada para: Maria Lucia Castanheira, email: lalucia@gmail.

 

 Recebido em Outubro, 2006

Aceite para publicação em Março, 2007