Addressing the question of why one

Addressing the question of why one particular variety of literacy among many comes to be seen and
reproduced as the standard, given the growing evidence of variation in “vernacular” writing, a number
of researchers have emphasized the privileging of schooled literacy as the model for all literacy
(Cook-Gumperz, 1986; Street and Street, 1992; Gee, 1992). Micro-ethnographic accounts of schooled
literacy practices have suggested that they are as much concerned with procedures and with
establishing the authority of the educational institution – what Bloome and others (1989) refer to as
“procedural display” – as with their claimed cognitive aims. Studies of literacy in the community
demonstrate the variety and complexity of nonschooled practices and underline the ideological and
historically recent emphasis on the schooled variety (Barton and Ivanic, 1992). Further empirical work
along these lines might help link the new literacy theories with particular practices in both home and
school. Until then, we have to be wary of generalization, although some account of the link between
literacy and pedagogy is emerging.

Results (Malay) 2:

Menangani persoalan mengapa satu jenis tertentu literasi di kalangan ramai datang untuk dilihat dan
diterbitkan semula sebagai standard, memandangkan bukti yang semakin meningkat perubahan dalam "vernakular" tulisan, beberapa
penyelidik telah menekankan pemberian hak praktis celik dididik sebagai model untuk semua literasi
(Cook-Gumperz, 1986; Street dan Jalan, 1992; Gee, 1992). Akaun micro-etnografi dididik
amalan literasi telah mencadangkan bahawa mereka adalah seperti mengambil berat dengan prosedur dan dengan
mewujudkan pihak berkuasa institusi pendidikan itu - apa Bloome dan lain-lain (1989) merujuk kepada sebagai
"paparan prosedur" - seperti matlamat kognitif mendakwa mereka. Kajian literasi dalam masyarakat
menunjukkan kepelbagaian dan kerumitan amalan nonschooled dan garis bawah ideologi dan
penekanan sejarah baru-baru ini kepada pelbagai dididik (Barton dan Ivanic, 1992). Lagi kerja empirikal
di landasan ini mungkin membantu menghubungkan teori celik baru dengan amalan tertentu dalam kedua-dua rumah dan di
sekolah. Sehingga itu, kita perlu berhati-hati dengan generalisasi, walaupun sebahagian dari hubungan antara
literasi dan pedagogi sedang muncul.