Pokaż uproszczony rekord

dc.contributor.authorZalewski, Jan
dc.date.accessioned2015-12-17T10:56:43Z
dc.date.available2015-12-17T10:56:43Z
dc.date.issued2011
dc.identifier.citationJ. Zalewski, Beyond foreign language writing instruction: The need for literacy pedagogy, [in:] FLOW. Foreign Language Opportunities in Writing, eds. J. Majer, Ł. Salski, Łódź University Press, Łódź 2011, p. 5–19.pl_PL
dc.identifier.isbn978-83-7525-564-5
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11089/15704
dc.description.abstractThe situation we have found ourselves in after 1989 has all the signs of a literacy crisis. As academic teachers, we find the academic literacy skills of many our students below our expectations. Yet, we must not exclude such students, but admit them and find new ways to educate them, taking example from American institutions of higher education which faced a similar literacy crisis in the 1970s. We must provide literacy instruction for those students who lack the traditionally expected literacy skills. My point is that tertiary-level students in Poland should be offered such assistance as long as our goal is university education not only for the elite. For our democracy to thrive, its foundations need to be broadened, which means increasing the number of citizens with critical thinking/literacy skills. By organizing conferences like this one, we can build bridgeheads from which to launch not just writing instruction but literacy instruction in our tertiary education. The key point is understanding what is involved in the transition from being a teacher of the standard academic language to being a teacher of literacy.pl_PL
dc.language.isoenpl_PL
dc.publisherWydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiegopl_PL
dc.relation.ispartof“FLOW. Foreign Language Opportunities in Writing”, eds. J. Majer, Ł. Salski, Łódź University Press, Łódź 2011;
dc.titleBeyond foreign language writing instruction: The need for literacy pedagogypl_PL
dc.typeBook chapterpl_PL
dc.rights.holder© Copyright by Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, Łódź 2011pl_PL
dc.page.number[5]-19pl_PL
dc.contributor.authorAffiliationUniversity of Opole.pl_PL
dc.contributor.authorBiographicalnoteJan Zalewski is Professor of English at the University of Opole, Poland. He received his M.A. in English philology from the University of Wroclaw, Poland, and his Ph.D. in English studies from Illinois State University. He is the author of two books (“Enhancing Linguistic Input in Answer to the Problem of Incomplete Second Language Acquisition and Epistemology of the Composing Process”) and the editor of three. His current research interests focus on the acquisition of academic discourse in English as a foreign language.pl_PL
dc.referencesBenesch, S. 2001. Critical English for academic purposes: Theory, politics, and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.pl_PL
dc.referencesBerlin, J. A. 1988. “Rhetoric and ideology in the writing class”. College English, 50. 477-494.pl_PL
dc.referencesBerlin, J. A. 2003. “Rhetorics, poetics, and cultures: Refiguring college English studies. West Lafayette”. In Parlor Press. (Originally published by National Council of Teachers of English, 1996).pl_PL
dc.referencesBizzell, P. 1982. “College composition: Initiation into the academic discourse community”. Curriculum Inquiry, 12. 191-207.pl_PL
dc.referencesBizzell, P. 1987. “Language and literacy”. In Theresa Enos (ed.), A sourcebook for basic writing teachers, 125-137. New York: Random House.pl_PL
dc.referencesBizzell, P. 1990. “Beyond anti-foundationalism in rhetorical authority: Problems defining cultural literacy”. College English, 52. 661-675.pl_PL
dc.referencesBizzell, P. 1992. Academic discourse and critical consciousness. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesElbow, P. 1991. “Reflections on academic discourse: How it relates to freshmen and colleagues”. College English, 53. 135-155.pl_PL
dc.referencesFairclough, N. 1995. Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. London: Longman.pl_PL
dc.referencesFlower, L. 1994. The construction of negotiated meaning: A social cognitive theory of writing. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesFromkin, V. and R. Rodman. 1988. An introduction to language (4th edition). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.pl_PL
dc.referencesHeath, S. B. 1983. Ways with words: Language, life, and work in communities and classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesHirsch, E. D., Jr. 1982. “Cultural literacy”. American Scholar, 52. 159-169.pl_PL
dc.referencesHorowitz, D. 1986a. “Process not product: Less than meets the eye”. TESOL Quarterly, 20. 141-144.pl_PL
dc.referencesHorowitz, D. 1986b. “What professors actually require: Academic tasks for the ESL classroom”. TESOL Quarterly, 20. 445-462.pl_PL
dc.referencesIvanic, R. 1997. Writing and identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. Amsterdam: Benjamins.pl_PL
dc.referencesJohns, A. M. 1997. Text, role, and context: Developing academic literacies. New York: Cambridge University Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesKasper, L. F. 2000. “New technologies, new literacies: Focus discipline research and ESL learning communities”. Language Learning and Technology, 4. 105-128.pl_PL
dc.referencesKern, R. 2000. Literacy and language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesNational Council of Teachers of English. 1961. The national interest and the teaching of English: A report on the status of the profession. Champaign, IL: NCTE.pl_PL
dc.referencesNew London Group. 1996. “A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures”. Harvard Educational Review, 66. 60-92.pl_PL
dc.referencesNorth, S. M. 1987. The making of knowledge in composition: Portrait of an emerging field. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.pl_PL
dc.referencesOlson, D. R. 1991. “Literacy as metalinguistic activity”. In D. R. Olson and Nancy Torrance (eds.), Literacy and orality, 251-270. New York: Cambridge University Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesPennycook, A. 2001. Critical applied linguistics: A critical introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.pl_PL
dc.referencesPolanyi, M. 1962. Personal knowledge: Towards a post-critical philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesReichelt, M. 2005. “English-language writing instruction in Poland”. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14. 215-232.pl_PL
dc.referencesRiley, P. 1996. “Developmental sociolinguistics and the competence/performance distinction”. In G. Brown, K. Malamkjaer and J. Williams (eds.), Performance and competence in second language acquisition, 118-135. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesSantos, T. 1992. “Ideology in composition: L1 and ESL”. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1. 1-15.pl_PL
dc.referencesScardamalia, M. and C. Bereiter. 1987. “Knowledge telling and knowledge transforming in written composition”. In S. Rosenberg (ed.), Advances in applied linguistics, vol. 2. Reading, writing, and language learning, 142-175. New York: Cambridge University Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesScardamalia, M. and C. Bereiter. 1994. “Development of dialectical processes in composition”. In B. Stierer and J. Maybin (eds.), Language, literacy, and learning in educational practice, 295-309. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.pl_PL
dc.referencesScholes, R. J. and B. J. Willis. 1991. “Linguistics, literacy, and the intentionality of Marshall McLuhan‘s Western man”. In D. R. Olson and N. Torrance (eds.), Literacy and orality, 215-235. New York: Cambridge University Press.pl_PL
dc.referencesSimmel, G. 1950. “How is society possible?”. In K. H. Wolff (ed. and trans.), The sociology of Georg Simmel, 337-350. New York: Free Press. (Original work published in 1908).pl_PL
dc.referencesSwales, J. M. 1990. Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. New York: Cambridge University Press.pl_PL


Pliki tej pozycji

Thumbnail

Pozycja umieszczona jest w następujących kolekcjach

Pokaż uproszczony rekord