This week I read an article titled, “A Planning Framework for Integrating Digital Literacies for Disciplinary Learning,” which took a slight spin on what I have been previously been learning about disciplinary literacy. This article is focused on the notion that digital literacies and disciplinary literacies should be integrated together within the disciplines. It goes on to argue that, “When technologies are used to explore ideas, disciplinary thinking shapes the selection and the use of the digital tool. Likewise, the use of the digital tool shapes disciplinary thinking. Instructional planning requires careful reflection on both the selection of the tool and its use in disciplinary context” (Castek & Manderino, 2017, p.697). In other words, this article is arguing that disciplinary teaching and learning becomes great when teachers are able to carefully interweave technology and literacy.

 Later on, in the article, the authors provide an example as to what this form of disciplinary teaching can look like in a Social Studies class. This example was a teacher created an activity where the students had to create a personalized Facebook account for a person in the decade of the 1960s. Assumingly, the students were learning about the time-period of the 1960s; therefore, this activity granted them the opportunity to connect what they were learning in class to an open-ended, flexible, engaging, technological activity (Castek & Manderino, 2017, p.699). I especially appreciated this example because I was assigned a very similar assignment in my 8^th grade US History class. For mine, I had to create a Facebook profile for one the US Presidents. I personally enjoyed this assignment because it allowed me to get really creative with what I was learning about the Presidents in the course to modern-day likes. By this I mean choosing what that specific President’s “favorite song” would be based on what I knew about the President back in his day.

 While this is just one example among an infinite amount of how a teacher can connect digital literacy to disciplinary literacy, I found this example to be superb. As I have mentioned in previous blogs, I find it extremely important that students in middle-school are given a purpose and something to relate to within the content, and I think this social media activity is a great way to achieve that purpose as well as incorporating disciplinary literacy. It can be extremely boring to sit in a class and learn through a lecture what the 1960s were all about. Therefore, by providing this creative outlook where students can use something that they use on a daily basis and are extremely familiar with (Facebook), the students are granted an opportunity to apply what they learned about the 1960s by putting themselves in the mind of an individual during this decade to create an authentic Facebook page. Even though Facebook is not as common today for students in middle-school as it was when I was in school, I still think teachers can extend similar activities to other social media platforms that the students are more familiar with such as Instagram or Twitter.

All-in-all, I found this article to be extremely interesting. I learned the best ways to connect digital literacies with disciplinary literacies. All of this information will help shape the future teacher that I will one day be.

Reference:

Castek, J., & Manderino, M. (2017). A planning framework for integrating digital literacies for disciplinary learning.  Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 60(6), 697-700.

This week, I read an article titled, “Inquiry into Assessment Strategies: From Kidwatching to Responsive Teaching” by Heidi Mills and Tim O’Keefe. This article offered many strategies regarding using inquiry for assessment; however, I would like to focus this blog on the concept of “kidwatching.”  This entire article is based off of the teaching strategies and data collected from the classroom of the author. Therefore, O’Keefe uses the strategy of “kidwatching” in his classroom. O’Keefe practices kidwatching by, “gathering information that reflects his students’ strengths, needs, and interests as readers and writers” (Mills & O’Keefe, 2011, p.3). In other words, he “watches” or observes his students and takes a strong interest into who they are individually (personally and academically) and uses this information to guide him to make decisions for his class like what books the class will read, what strategies he will use to teach certain content, or what activity he will align with a certain book (Mills & O’Keefe, 2011, p.3). However, I am going to put my own spin on the concept of kidwatching in comparison to how it was implemented in this article.

I find this concept of kidwatching to be extremely important for a teacher to practice in any subject, not just reading and English. As the article states, “it is through careful kidwatching over extended periods of time that teachers truly get to know their students” (Mills & O’Keefe, 2011, p.2). I believe that the difference between a good teacher and a great teacher is that the great teacher takes the time to know each student through his or her personal interests, strengths and places of development, and the student’s needs. Of course it is important for a teacher to recognize a student’s strengths, weaknesses, and needs, but I strongly believe that knowing the students’ personal interests is just as important. Focusing on students in middle school as this is my certification area, these students yearn for a purpose and something to relate to. When those students are sitting at a desk for 7 hours a day, 5 days a week, and 180 days a year, they need to know that what they are learning is important and has a purpose. If a teacher can find a way to relate the content to something the student can relate to or even to a real-world example, then the student will recognize that purpose. I recently used the example in one of my courses where if a student is being taught how to multiply percents in a math class, the teacher can relate that content to a specific student’s interest in shopping. Then the next time the student goes shopping with her mom, she will be able to calculate what 50% off $20.00 is for a shirt she wants in front of her mom. Therefore, this student just found a connection between the “boring” content and one of her favorite activities: shopping. Not only did this student just see that what she is learning in school can be applied to her everyday life, but she also just made her mom proud.

 Again, I think that giving the students a purpose for what they are learning will come a long way. Kidwatching grants the teacher a great opportunity to determine this information which can guide the teacher to make educational decisions based on this data. In any subject, teachers can note that a certain student wears NHL jerseys every day, one student has horses on her notebook, a group of students are talking about their orchestra concert, two girls are planning a big shopping spree, and so much more. These interests are so important to the students, so why not include them in their learning? By practicing good kidwatching and recognizing these things, the students will then know and understand that what they are learning has a purpose, and they will feel accepted in the classroom.

Reference:

Mills, H., & O’Keefe, T. (2011). Inquiry into assessment strategies: From kidwatching to responsive teaching. Talking Points 22(2), 2-8. retrieved from http://www.ncte.org/library/NCTEFiles/Resources/Journals/TP/0222-may2011/TP0222Inquiry.pdf

This week I read a very interesting study that was published by Shanahan, Shanahan, and Misischia. This study was titled, “Analysis of Expert Readers in Three Disciplines: History, Mathematics, and Chemistry,” and it researched through an investigation the similarities and differences of how literacy is read across these three disciplines. For a quick summary of the linguistics of the investigation, the researchers created three groups where one group was dedicated to each discipline. Each group then was comprised of either two historians, two chemists, or two mathematicians; two professors who teach aspiring teachers in one of those three disciplines; and two high-school history, math, and chemistry teachers (Shanahan & Shanahan & Misischia, 2011, p.393). The focus of the study was as follows: “Using think-aloud protocols, transcripts from focus group discussions, a recursive process of member checking, and a cross-disciplinary consideration of reading approaches identified in each discipline, the study identified important differences in the reading behaviors of the six disciplinary experts” (Shanahan & Shanahan & Misischia, 2011, p.393). While I found the data of the study to be extremely interesting, especially with seeing how differently the historians, mathematicians, and chemists read pieces from their designated field as well as pieces that students in high school would read in that specific class, I would like to focus on the data acquired from the mathematician as mathematics is my content area of focus. I then will use this data to find implications for disciplinary literacy in my own teaching.

The results were broken down into 8 different categories: Sourcing, Contextualization, Corroboration, Text Structure, Graphic Elements, Critique, Rereading of close reading, and Interest” (Shanahan & Shanahan & Misischia, 2011, p.393). To make sense of this of the data, I included the table-formatted summary of how mathematicians read texts.

This table is taken directly from the article on pages 406-407 (Shanahan & Shanahan & Misischia, 2011, p.406-407).

Through this study and the data that was collected, I now understand how mathematicians read mathematical texts. This information is really important to know in regard to disciplinary literacy within the content areas. As I have been emphasizing on every one of my blogs, disciplinary literacy is using reading and writing to push students to understand the roots of the content in a specific content area. Our goal as teachers is to use reading and writing strategies to get the students to, in this case, “think like a mathematician.” Furthermore, if the goal of disciplinary literacy is to encourage the students to think like the expert of the content area, then we, as teachers, should understand how those experts think. How can we push and encourage students to stop memorizing content and to rather “think like a mathematician” if we do not even know how a mathematician thinks? The research and data conducted and collected through this study taught me how a mathematician, an expert in the discipline of mathematics, thinks and reasons through a mathematical piece. With this information in mind, I can now apply it to my future teaching to incorporate disciplinary literacy strategies in mathematics to fully encourage my students to “think like a mathematician.”

Based on the data of this study, we see that mathematicians pay very close attention to accuracy when reading a mathematical text. The article expands on this by saying, “The mathematicians in this study were quite forthright about it: If a text includes mathematics, then it is likely to contain error, and part of the math reader’s challenge is to be aware of such error.” (Shanahan & Shanahan & Misischia, 2011, p.422). In other words, mathematicians are constantly looking for errors when reading. A way to apply this mindset of a mathematician to teaching math is to give students worked-out problems that are solved incorrectly in more than one place. The students must then find the errors, fix the errors, and provide an explanation as to why the first solution was incorrect and how their solution is correct. This encourages students to think like a mathematician while also incorporating disciplinary literacy because the students are looking for accuracy and error as mathematicians do while also providing a written explanation.

Another strategy focuses on using both graphics and the text to interpret information. Therefore, I could give the students detailed words problems that require the use of some type of graphic that could be anything from a chart, graph, or diagram. Again, something as simple as this gets the students to think like a mathematician because they are having to interpret the graphic and the text to find the solution to a problem.

The opportunities to incorporate disciplinary literacy into mathematics are truthfully endless. As I have said time and time again, the root of disciplinary literacy is to push the students to think like a mathematician to have them fully understand the content. However, I find it very important that the teacher knows how a mathematician thinks before encouraging this. This study brought attention to this and demonstrated how a mathematician thinks so that I can now implement this data into my own teaching.

Reference:

Shanahan, C., Shanahan, T., & Misischia, C. (2011). Analysis of expert readers in three disciplines: History, mathematics, and chemistry. Journal of Literacy Research, 43(4), 393-429.Wimmer, J. J., Siebert, D., & Draper, R. (2017). Digital mathematics literacies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 60(5), 577-580.

September 24, 2019

For the past 5 or so weeks, I have been learning about disciplinary literacy. After reading article after article and having class discussion after class discussion about how wonderful disciplinary literacy is and all the amazing benefits of it for students, I was still a bit skeptical on how disciplinary literacy can be implemented or even be beneficial in a Mathematics class. If you have not read my previous blogs, here is my own definition of disciplinary literacy so the rest of this blog makes sense to you. Disciplinary literacy is using reading and writing in any content area (Mathematics, Social Studies, Science, etc.) to move the students’ thinking to a new level. Rather than the students simply learning the content, the students are using reading and writing to fully understand the content. In other words, the students are pushed to think like a mathematician, historian, scientist, etc. With that definition in mind, in regard to mathematics, I could not help but wonder how can reading and writing can be incorporated into math? Isn’t it as simple as just solving a problem correctly and then moving onto the next problem? If I got the right answer, is that not enough to prove I know the content? Through my own recent experiences as well as information presented in an article, I was proven wrong on this matter.

Before I dive into the article I read today regarding disciplinary literacy in mathematics, I would like to share a personal experience. As a future Middle-Level Education teacher, I am currently in classes all about how to teach mathematics in the middle-level grades. In these classes, we learn the concepts that the students will learn in mathematics and then we learn how to teach those concepts. This past week, my class was assigned our first homework assignment. This assignment was all about comparing fractions. This seems like a walk in the park right? Well, that’s what I thought at least. My first question asked me to determine which of these two fractions was the greatest: 5/6 and 7/8. Simple right? I could make a common denominator, I could convert them into decimals, or I could even cross-multiply to compare. Well, the very fine print of that problem said, “You can only use mathematical reasoning to answer. You may not use common denominator, decimals or cross-multiply.” Instead of using math, I had to think and write which fraction was greatest using only my logic. Therefore, I had to use disciplinary literacy to explain why the one fraction was greater than the other. This truly through me for a loop as every problem of that assignment had me explain why I got the answer that I got, and why the formula or tactic I used worked. A homework assignment that could have taken me 30 minutes using what I learned in 4^th grade actually took me almost 4 hours to complete because I had to think like a mathematician to understand why the math I was doing to get the correct answer worked.

This homework assignment really opened my eyes up. Not only was I introduced to what disciplinary literacy can look like in a mathematics class, but it also made me realize that I really was not too sure as to why the math led me to get the right answer. All throughout my schooling in math, I was only taught how to solve math problems. Give me any two points on a line and I could plug and chug until I told you the slope of that line and the equation of that line. Yes, that’s great that I mastered this skill, but truthfully, I never knew the reasoning behind what I was doing, and I think that it is a big problem. I find it almost embarrassing that a senior in college had to truly had to stop and think why I am able to cross-multiply to show which fraction is the greatest. I do not think that fault is my own or even my various math teachers’ faults. Rather, I just think we, as teachers, need to shift the focus in math to guide students to understand the reasoning behind the math they are doing. Now, I understand the importance of disciplinary literacy in math, and I see how it can most definitely be beneficial. As a future educator, I do not want my students to fill the blanks in a formula to solve an equation. I want them to understand why that formula works. And, I think the best way to do this is to have the students write out a reasoning to the math they are doing to encourage them to think like a mathematician.

This leads me into the article, “A Literature Review on Disciplinary Literacy: How Do Secondary Teachers Apprentice Students into Mathematical Literacy” by Ann Marie Hillman. While this article tends to focus on the secondary grades, I think that the strategies that Hillman suggests for teachers to use to incorporate disciplinary literacy in math can also be used in the elementary and middle-level grades with a little bit of tweaking. At the end of the article, Hillman gives some implications on how disciplinary literacy can be implemented in math. Her first implication is to encourage teachers to “ask probing questions” as this “deepens students’ understanding” (Hillman, 2013, p. 403). The more difficult a question asked by the teacher is, the deeper the student has to think which leads the student to a stronger understanding. Hillman also puts a heavy emphasis on students verifying their answers to a problem. She says, “Another implication is that mathematical literacy lends structure to children’s reasoning, particularly in a way student verify their solution… Teachers can help students construct mathematical understanding by requiring them to share their reasoning and verification processes orally or in writing” (Hillman, 2013, p. 403). However, Hillman suggests that writing may be the better way to share reasoning and verification. She then gives several ways that students can write their reasoning which include: double-entry diaries (one side shows the math while the other side shows the written reasoning), diaries (students explain their reasoning to all problems in an organized way), and triple-entry diaries (the same as double-entry, however the third column is for students to write down another way a peer solved the problem different from their way) (Hillman, 2013, p.404). All of these strategies, and many more, incorporate disciplinary literacy into mathematics. These all encourage to students to understand the why behind the problem and turns every student into a little mathematician!

Reference:

Hillman, A. M. (2013). A literature review on disciplinary literacy: How do secondary teachers apprentice students into mathematical literacy? Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 57(5), 397-406.

 As my journey through the ins and outs, do’s and don’t’s of disciplinary literacy continues, one of my burning questions has finally been answered. But, I am going to keep you suspense just a tad bit longer. As I have been reading all these intriguing articles about disciplinary literacy, I have been blown away with all the information regarding this concept that I had never heard of before or even experienced. One of the amazing things about being a teacher (or aspiring teacher as I am) is that you are a forever learner right alongside your students. From learning what exactly disciplinary is to what disciplinary literacy teaching looks like in each subject, my eyes have been opened. But, as I have been reading article after article, one thought has consistently run through my mind. The one question that has been etched on brain demanding an answer is, “Well, what about 4^th grade?” You may be confused, so let me give you a little bit of context.

I am a Middle-Level future educator; therefore, I will be certified in grades 4-8. Each and every article that I have read regarding disciplinary literacy has been directed towards high school. Every example of disciplinary literacy teaching in a lesson has come from a high school lesson. It has been so helpful to see disciplinary literacy teaching in practice, but I still constantly wondered if these same practices could even be used in elementary/middle school. In other words, I questioned if I could even apply these examples and practices in my own teaching in the grades of 4th-8th. Well kids, do you believe in miracles? Because they do exist, and my burning questions and doubts have been answered.

Shanahan and Shanahan wrote an article titled, “Does Disciplinary Literacy Have a Place in Elementary School?” The simple, straight-forward answer to the question-based titled article is “yes.” So, the next question is, what does disciplinary literacy teaching look like in elementary school? We know that in high school, disciplinary literacy teaching is basically encouraging students to use reading writing strategies in the disciplines to fully understand the discipline and to think like a historian, problem-solve like a mathematician, experiment like a scientist, etc. However, as the article suggests, the role of disciplinary literacy in elementary school is for “students to read informational text, distinguishing the differences among them and between informational texts and literature” to prepare them high school (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2014, p. 3).

Now that we know the purpose of disciplinary literacy in elementary school, here are some strategies and practices from the article that teachers can incorporate into their lessons to promote disciplinary literacy. In elementary school, teachers use many informational texts for their students to read. However, to steer away from simply reading these texts to learn the information in the content area, teachers can use, “informational texts [that] represent a wide range of text types, modalities, and purposes” in order to incorporate disciplinary literacy (Shanahan, & Shanahan, 2014, p. 3). Therefore, a small example of this is for teachers to have students determine the different purposes behind several informational texts. Another strategy is to give the students a variety of different texts on the same subject. This mimics how “experts in history, science, or English think about and evaluate what is read across sources” (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2014, p.3). Through this strategy, the students are learning to evaluate different text types on the same subject. This could involve having the students read the first-hand account on the Holocaust through Anne Frank’s diary and having them read the historical fiction novel Number the Stars. Both of these books are about the Holocaust but give information through different perspectives. One is a true story while the other is a made-up story with real-life events. It is also important, in regards to introducing disciplinary literacy teaching in elementary school, to assure that the students understand and comprehend the vocabulary in the subjects. If the students do not understand the vocabulary, then they will not understand the text (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2014, p.3).

These strategies only touch the surface of the different disciplinary literacy teaching strategies that a teacher can use in elementary school. It is a great feeling to know that 4^th grade can most definitely be included in the practices of disciplinary literacy. Remember, we as teachers, are always learning, so I am looking forward to the next bit I will learn about disciplinary literacy. I cannot wait to promote disciplinary literacy in my own teaching as a middle-school teacher.

Reference:

Shanahan, C., & Shanahan, T. (2014). Does disciplinary literacy have a place in elementary school? The Reading Teacher, 67(8), 636-639.

As discussed last week, I was introduced to a new concept in the field of education known as Disciplinary Literacy. Now that this concept has been defined, I was granted the opportunity to take my understanding to a new level which circulated around the question of “how does disciplinary teaching look across the different school subjects?” After reading two educational articles regarding this question, I will argue that disciplinary literacy teaching looks the same in each school subject.

You may now be questioning, “How can disciplinary literacy look the same in every subject when the content is so different?” The best way to begin answering this question, thus the beginning of my argument, is by introducing Moje’s 4-E’s of disciplinary teaching. Moje argues that a teacher has successfully and effectively implemented disciplinary teaching if his or her lesson has included these 4-E’s: “Engage, Eliciting and engineering, Examining words and language, and Evaluating ways with words.” (Rainey, Maher, Coupland, Franchi, & Moje, 2018, p.372). The article, “But What Does It Look Like? Illustrations of Disciplinary Literacy Teaching in Two Content Area,” presents two lessons that showcase how two teachers effectively incorporate these 4-E’s in their lesson, thus excelling in disciplinary literacy teaching. The article argues that both teachers successfully mastered these 4-E’s in their teaching; however, the lessons come from two completely different content areas: Social Studies and Physics (Rainey, Maher, Coupland, Franchi, & Moje, 2018, p.374-376).

This article made it clear both of these lessons used the 4-E’s, thus the teacher was successful in his or her disciplinary literacy teaching. But, what did the 4-E’s look like in each of those lessons? Did the teachers use similar strategies in each E? The answer to this question is “yes.” Let’s take a look:

4-E’s	Social Studies	Physics
Engaging	The students were given the question: “[The proposal in the early 1800’s was that] all [American] Indian people must move to Indiana. [From the point of view of your assigned historical figure,] should this deal happen or not?” The bulk of the lesson involved the students reading primary sources and engaging in the text to answer this question. The students then held a debate from the perspective of their historical figure.	The students were first asked to make observations about a ball in motion. Then, the students were asked to investigate, experiment and engage with their experimental questions. They then had to use their findings to answer the question: “[Think as] If this were 500 years ago and you were Galilro and you were trying to understand the nature of motion. In projectile motion, does the time it takes for an object to fall a specified distance depend on the mass of the object or on the horizontal velocity of the object?” The students then formed an argument for this question, and they formed groups to discuss.
Eliciting and Engineering	The teacher created this question that pushed the students to read history through the lens of different perspectives. In order to support this, the teacher gave the students different literary practices that historians often use to help the students read the primary sources as historians.	The teacher gave the students disciplinary literacy practices that can be used in physics to help the students form their arguments.
Examining Words and Language	The teacher gave the students graphic organizers to help them understand the historian language. He also had the students focus on the word “freedom.”	The teacher made sure that the students fully understood the difference between the words “observation” and “explanation.”
Evaluating Ways with Words	The teacher, “laid the groundwork for more in-depth evaluation of when, why and how the shared practices of history are useful and when, why, and how they may not be as useful.”	The teacher, “exemplified how, when, and why to use particular ways with words across domains.”

(Rainey, Maher, Coupland, Franchi, & Moje, 2018, p.374-376).

When looking at the 4-E’s of these lessons side-by-side, it is obvious that both teachers used very similar disciplinary literacy teaching strategies. This included: using a central question to guide the lesson, having the students examine the content through the lens of different perspectives, having the students debate or discuss their findings, guiding students through the disciplinary literacy tools of the professional of the content area (historian, scientists, etc.), and much more. Therefore, the content of each subject is completely different, but the disciplinary literacy teaching was the same as both teachers used the same strategies within the 4-E’s through the content of their subject area.

While this article focused solely on Social Studies and Physics, this argument can extend to the other subject areas as well. Very briefly, I will talk about my content area of focus: Mathematics. The article, “Disciplinary Literacy Through the Lens of the Next Generation Science Standards” compares scientific disciplinary practices in the main subject areas. The article states that one practice of mathematics is, “constructing viable arguments and critiquing the reasoning of others” (Houseal, Gills, Helmsing, & Hutchinson, 2016, p.381). Comparing this to the 4-E’s of the Social Studies and Physics lessons, this practice of math aligns with the engage part of the lessons where the students debated and discussed their arguments. While this is only one short example, it still adds to the argument that disciplinary literacy teaching looks the same in each subject.

References:

Houseal, A., Gillis, V., Helmsing, M., & Hutchison, L. (2016). Disciplinary literacy through the lens of the Next Generation Science Standards.  Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 59(4), 377-384. 

Rainey, E. C., Maher, B. L., Coupland, D., Franchi, R., & Moje, E. B. (2018).  But what does it look like?  Illustrations of disciplinary literacy teaching in two content areas.  Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 61(4), 371-379.

For the first time, I was introduced to the term “disciplinary literacy.” While I am familiar with the definition of these two words by themselves, these words together created a concept that was foreign to me. After reading the works of Wolsey & Lapp as well as Moje, I recognize now the extreme importance of disciplinary literacy in education.

Beginning my journey of this new notion, Wolsey and Lapp brought attention to three different concepts behind disciplinary literacy in education: content, content area, and disciplinary literacy itself (Wolsey & Lapp, 2017, p.6-8).  These three standard concepts together help to define what exactly disciplinary literacy is, but first it is important to differentiate between the three.

First, content, as explained by Wolsey and Lapp, is “what the author, using words and other modalities, tries to convey to the reader while the reader brings experiences of her or his own to the content” (Wolsey & Lapp, 2017, p.6). In other words, content is simply what the students will be learning. Next, content area, in its simplest terms, is the different subjects that a school offers. Your common examples are math, social studies, English, science, art, physical education, music, etc. Wolsey and Lapp define content area as, “a means of thinking about the way content is organized during the school day or year” (Wolsey & Lapp, 2017, p.7). To differentiate between the two, Wolsey and Lapp distinguish content as the “what” and content area as the “how” (Wolsey & Lapp, 2017, p.7). Now, we can put the definitions of content and content area together to define disciplinary literacy. Disciplinary literacy focuses on content in a specific content area; however, in part with learning the content of a subject, the students learn the importance of reading and writing within that subject (Wolsey and Lapp, 2017, p.3).  More specifically, in Moje’s article, she sees disciplinary literacy as “the understanding of how knowledge is produced in the disciplines, rather than just building knowledge in the disciplines” (Moje, 2008, p.97). Therefore, disciplinary literacy encourages the students to think like a historian, to experiment like a scientist, problem-solve like a mathematician, etc. in the midst of learning the subject. In this practice, students are not just learning content. Rather, they are enhancing their reading and writing to truly understand the subject.

Now that disciplinary literacy is defined, I am then challenged to extend my thinking to my content area of focus: mathematics in grades 4-6. When it comes to the subject of math, disciplinary literacy is not following a cookie-cutter format to learn how to create an equation based off of a word problem. Disciplinary literacy in math is understanding how that format works and being able to use reading and writing to articulate an answer to the “how.” A good practice of disciplinary literacy in a math classroom is to have the students not only complete the math problem, but also have them write out in words the explanation, logic, and facts behind the work and solution. Therefore, they are thinking like a mathematician.

A great fact about being a teacher is that you are constantly learning alongside your students just as I am still learning about disciplinary literacy. From these readings, my knowledge on disciplinary literacy has enhanced as I have learned that teachers now focus on the “how” rather than the “what” when teaching new content. This is a new concept to think about, but I now understand how important disciplinary literacy is to a student’s education.  

References:

Moje, E.B. (2008). Foregrounding the disciplines in secondary literacy teaching and learning: A call for change.  Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52(2), 96-107. 

Wolsey, T. D., & Lapp, D. (2017). Literacy in the disciplines: A teacher’s guide for grades 5-12. Chapter 1. New York, NY: Guilford.