This study focused on the apprenticeship opportunities in a collaborative writing context. The examination of written artifacts and discursive interactions revealed that collaborative contexts offered unique participatory spaces that allowed students to use their knowledge in ways that exceeded their independent competence. Of note, too, is that the study revealed students' active and constructive role, refuting the perception that most students with disabilities are passive learners in the teaching-learning process. Implications of the study further suggest the importance of peer collaborations in creating successful literacy apprenticeships, as well as in providing teachers with greater insight into the developmental progress and literacy potentials of their students in the context of situated literacy activity.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bakhtin, M.M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.
2.
Barnes, D. (1993). Supporting exploratory talk for learning. In K. M. Pierce & C. J. Gilles (Eds.), Cycles of meaning: Exploring the potential of talk in learning communities (pp. 17-34). Portsmouth, NH : Heinemann.
3.
Baynham, M. (1995). Literacy practices: Investigating literacy in social contexts. New York: Longman .
4.
Biemiller, A., & Meichenbaum, D. (1998). The consequences of negative scaffolding for students who learn slowly—A commentary on C. Addison Stone's "The metaphor of scaffolding: Its utility for the field of learning disabilities." Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31, 365-369.
5.
Butler, D.L. (1998). In search of the architect of learning: A commentary on scaffolding as a metaphor for instructional interactions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31, 374-385.
6.
Cazden, C. (1988). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann .
7.
Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (1993). The power of literacy and the literacy of power . In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), The powers of literacy: A genre approach to teaching writing (pp. 63-89). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
8.
Durrell, D., & Catterson, J. (1980). Durrell analysis of reading difficulty. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.
9.
Engestrom, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation . In Y. Engestrom, R. Miettinen, & R. Punamaki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp.19-38). New York: Cambridge University Press.
10.
Englert, C.S. (1992). Writing instruction from a sociocultural perspective: The holistic, dialogic, and social enterprise of writing. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 153-172.
11.
Englert, C.S., Garmon, A., Mariage, T.V., Rozendal, M.S., Tarrant, K., & Urba, J. (1996). The Early Literacy Project: Connecting across the literacy curriculum. Remedial and Special Education,
12.
Englert, C.S., & Mariage, T.V. (1996). A sociocultural perspective: Teaching ways-of-thinking and ways-of-talking in a literacy community. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 11, 157-167.
13.
Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative research in education. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd. ed.) New York : Macmillan.
14.
Erickson, F., & Schultz, L. (1977). When is a context? Some issues of theory and method on the analysis of social competence. Quarterly Newsletter for ComparativeHuman Development, 1(1), 5-10.
15.
Evertson, C., & Green, J.L. (1986). Observation as inquiry and method. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), The third handbook for research on teaching (pp. 162-213). New York: Macmillan.
16.
Forman, E.A., & McCormick, D.E. (1995). Discourse analysis: A sociocultural perspective. Remedial and Special Education, 16, 150-158.
17.
Forman, E.A., & McPhail, J. (1993). Vygotskyian perspective on children's collaborative problem-solving activities. In E. A. Forman , N. Minick, & A. Stone (Eds.), Contexts for learning: Sociocultural dynamics in children's development (pp. 213-229). New York: Oxford University Press.
18.
Gee, J.P. (1992). The social mind: Language, ideology and social practice. New York: Bergin & Garvey.
19.
Gee, J.P., & Green, J.L. (1998). Discourse analysis, learning, and social practice . Review of Research in Education, 23, 119-169. Itasca: F.E. Peacock.
20.
Gee, J.P., Michaels, S., & O'Connor, M.C. (1992). Discourse analysis. In M. LeCompte & J. Goests (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research in education (pp. 228-291). New York: Academic Press.
21.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1979). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine.
22.
Halliday, M.A.K., & Martin, J.R. (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power . Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
23.
Harre, R., & van Langenhove, L. (1991). Varieties of positioning . Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 21, 303-407.
24.
Hedegaard, M. (1996). The zone of proximal development as basis for instruction. In H. Daniels (Ed.), An introduction to Vygotsky (pp. 171-195) New York: Routledge.
25.
Hicks, D. (1996). Contextual inquiries: A discourse-oriented study of classroom learning. In D. Hicks (Eds.), Discourse, learning and schooling (pp. 104-141). New York: Cambridge University Press.
26.
Knobel, M. (1999). Everyday literacies: Students, discourse and social practice. New York: Peter Lang.
27.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation . New York: Cambridge University Press.
28.
Lemke, J.L. (1987, April). Talking science: Content, conflict and semantics. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.
29.
Martin, J.R. (1993). A contextual theory of language. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), The powers of literacy: A genre approach to teaching writing (pp. 116-136). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
30.
Martin, J.R., & Rothery, J.Grammar: Making meaning in writing. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), The powers of literacy: A genre approach to teaching writing (pp. 137-153). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
31.
McDermott, R., & Varenne, H. (1995). Culture as disability. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 26, 324-348.
32.
Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
33.
Merriam, S.B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass .
34.
Minick, N. (1996). The development of Vygotsky's thought: An introduction to Thinking and Speech. In H. Daniels (Ed.), An introduction to Vygotsky (pp. 28-53). New York: Routledge.
35.
Morgan, W. (1997) Critical literacy in the classroom. New York: Routledge.
36.
O'Connor, M.C., & Michaels, S. (1993). Aligning academic task and participation status through revoicing: Analysis of a classroom discourse strategy. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 24, 318-335.
37.
Palincsar, A.S. (1998). Keeping the metaphor of scaffolding fresh—A response to C. Addison Stone's "The metaphor of scaffolding: Its utility for the field of learning disabilities." Journal of Learning Disabilities , 31, 370-373.
38.
Palincsar, A., & Brown, A.L. (1994). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117-175.
39.
Putney, L., Green, J., Dixon, C., & Durn, R. (in press). Consequential progressions: Exploring collective-individual development in a bilingual classroom. In C. D. Lee & P. Smagorinsky (Eds.), Constructing meaning through collaborative inquiry: Vygotskian perspectives on literacy research. New York: Cambridge University Press.
40.
Reid, D.K. (1998). Scaffolding: A broader view. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31, 386-396.
41.
Reid, D.K., Robinson, S.J., & Bunsen, T.D. (1995). Empiricism and beyond: Expanding the boundaries of special education. Remedial and Special Education, 16, 131-141.
42.
Rogoff, B. (1994). Developing understanding of the idea of communities of learners. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 1, 209-229.
43.
Rogoff, B. (1995). Development through participation in sociocultural activity. New Directions for Child Development, 65, 45-65.
44.
Rogoff, B., Malkin, C., & Gilbride, K. (1984). Interaction with babies as guidance in development . In B. Rogoff & J. V. Wertsch (Eds.), Children's learning in the zone of proximal development (pp. 31-44). San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.
45.
Rose, M. (1999). "Our hands will know": The development of tactile diagnostic skill— teaching, learning, and situated cognition in a physical therapy program. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 30, 133-160.
46.
Roth, W.M. (1998). Designing communities. Boston : Kluwer Academic.
47.
Roth, W., & McGinn, M.K. (1998). Inscriptions: Toward a theory of representing as social practice. Review of Educational Research, 68(1), 35-59.
48.
Rueda, R., Gallego, M.A., & Moll, L.C. (2000). The least restrictive environment: A place or a context?Remedial and Special Education, 21, 70-78.
49.
Schaffer, H.R. (1996). Joint involvement episodes as context for development . In H. Daniels (Ed.), An introduction to Vygotsky (pp. 251-280). New York: Routledge.
50.
Skrtic, T.M., Sailor, W., & Gee, K. (1996). Voice, collaboration, and inclusion: Democratic themes in educational and social reform initiatives. Remedial and Special Education, 17, 142-157.
Stone, C.A. (1998). Moving validated instructional practices into the classroom: Learning from examples about the rough road to success. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 13, 121-125.
53.
Turner, J.C. (1995). The influence of classroom contexts on young children's motivation for literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 31, 410-441.
54.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
55.
Wertsch, J.V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
56.
Wertsch, J.V., & Tulviste, P. (1996). L. S. Vygotsky and contemporary developmental psychology. In H. Daniels (Ed.), An introduction to Vygotsky (pp. 53-74). New York: Routledge.
57.
Wong, B.Y.L., Wong, R., & Blenkinsop, J. (1989). Cognitive and metacognitive aspects of learning disabled adolescents' composing problems. Learning Disability Quarterly, 12, 300-322.
58.
Wong, B.Y.L., Wong, R., Perry, N., & Sawatsky, K. (1986). The efficacy of a self-questioning summarization strategy for use by underachievers and learning disabled adolescents in social studies. Learning DisabilitiesFocus, 2(1), 20-36.
