Many immigrants and refugees in the United States must confront different linguistic and cultural contexts in their everyday life. As part of a larger ethnographic study related to refugee families and literacy, this qualitative study explores how adult English as a second language (ESL) students help their classmate Htoo Eh find ways to deal with an everyday life challenge. This study utilized two supporting theoretical frameworks: funds of knowledge and literacy as a social practice. Data sources included field notes, transcripts of video recording, artifacts, as well as conservations with the teacher and welfare coordinators. Findings demonstrate that community members utilized two funds of knowledge in particular: social network and life experience to help the focal participant. Findings also showed that adult ESL students assisted their classmates in developing three types of literacies, which were finding and obtaining childcare, knowing how the system works, and communicating with the caseworker in order to deal with an everyday life challenge. These findings suggest that educators should recognize and value adult ESL learners’ funds of knowledge as well as incorporate the knowledge into instruction. Educators also should open up space for these learners to develop literacies together as a community.
AtkinsonM. (2014). Reframing literacy in adult ESL programs: Making the case for the inclusion of identity. Literacy & Numeracy Studies, 22, 3–20.
2.
BaynhamM. (2006). Agency and contingency in the language learning of refugees and asylum seekers. Linguistics and Education, 17, 24–39.
3.
BearD. R.InvernizziM.TempletonS. (1996). Words their way: Phonics, spelling and vocabulary instruction, K-8. Columbus, OH: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
4.
BensimonE. (2007). The underestimated significance of practitioner knowledge in the scholarship of student success. Review of Higher Education, 30, 441–469.
5.
BrandtD.ClintonK. (2002). Limits of the local: Expanding perspectives on literacy as a social practice. Journal of Literacy Research, 34, 337–356.
6.
ChallJ. (1983). Stages of reading development. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Compton-LillyC.KimJ.QuastE.TranS.ShedrowS. (2019). The emergence of transnational awareness among children in immigrant families. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 19, 3–33.
9.
DanielS. M. (2019). Writing our identities for successful endeavors: Resettled refugee youth look to the future. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 33, 71–83.
10.
DixonC.GreenJ.YeagerB.BakerD.FránquizM. (2000). “I used to know that”: What happens when reform gets through the classroom door. Bilingual Research Journal, 24, 113–126.
11.
DonatoR.McCormickD. (1994). A sociocultural perspective on language learning strategies: The role of mediation. The Modern Language Journal, 78, 453–464.
12.
Fruja AmthorR. (2017). “If only I did not have that label attached to me”: Foregrounding self-positioning and intersectionality in the experiences of immigrant and refugee youth. Multicultural Perspectives, 19, 193–206.
13.
GeeJ. P. (1991). What is literacy? In MitchellC. M.WeilerK. (Eds.). Rewriting literacy: Culture and the discourse of the other (pp. 3–11). New York, NY: Bergin and Garvey.
14.
GeeJ. P. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses (2nd ed.). London, England: Taylor & Francis.
15.
GeeJ. P. (2013). Discourse and “the new literacy studies.” In GeeJ. P.HandfordM. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 397–408). New York, NY: Routledge.
16.
GhisoM. P.CampanoG.PlayerG.RusojaA. (2016). Dialogic teaching and multilingual counterpublics [Special issue International Perspectives on Dialogic Theory and Practice ]. L1 Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 16, 1–26.
17.
GlesneC. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers (4th ed.). New York, NY: Longman.
18.
GreenJ. L.McClellandM. (1999). What difference does the difference make? Understanding difference across perspectives. Discourse Processes, 27, 219–230.
19.
HopeJ. (2008). “One day we had to run”: The development of the refugee identity in children’s literature and its function in education. Children’s Literature in Education, 39, 295–304.
20.
Isik-ErcanZ. (2012). In pursuit of a new perspective in the education of children of the refugees: Advocacy for the “family.” Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 12, 3025–3038.
21.
KiyamaJ. M. (2010). Family lessons and funds of knowledge: College-going paths in Mexican American families. Journal of Latinos and Education, 10, 23–42.
22.
LantolfJ. P. (2006). Language emergence: Implications for applied linguistics—A sociocultural perspective. Applied Linguistics, 27, 717–728.
23.
LantolfJ. P. (2007). Sociocultural source of thinking and its relevance for second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10, 31–33.
24.
LarrottaC.SerranoA. (2011). Adult learners’ funds of knowledge: The case of an English class for parents. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 55, 316–325.
25.
LockG. (1996). Functional English grammar: An introduction for second language teachers. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
26.
MaftoonP.ShakouriN. (2013). On the nature of interaction in SLA: A philosophical stream. English Language Teaching, 6, 120–127.
27.
McVeeM. B.BaileyN. M.ShanahanL. E. (2008). Using digital media to interpret poetry: Spiderman meets Walt Whitman. Research in the Teaching of English, 43, 112–143.
28.
MitchellC. J. (1984). Typicality and the case study. In EllenR. F. (Ed.), Ethnographic research: A guide to general conduct (pp. 238–241). New York, NY: Academic Press.
29.
MollL. (2014). L. S. Vygotsky and education. New York, NY: Routledge.
30.
MollL.AmantiC.NeffD.GonzalezN. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory into Practice, 31, 132–141.
31.
MonzóL. D.RuedaR. (2003). Shaping education through diverse funds of knowledge: A look at one Latina paraeducator’s lived experiences, beliefs, and teaching practice. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 34, 72–95.
32.
NamazziE.KendrickM. E. (2014). Multilingual cultural resources in child-headed families in Uganda. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 35, 724–737.
33.
OgbuJ. U.SimonsH. D. (1998). Voluntary and involuntary minorities: A cultural-ecological theory of school performance with some implications for education. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 29, 155–188.
34.
OlsenL. (2000). Learning English and learning America: Immigrants in the center of a storm. Theory into Practice, 39, 196–202.
35.
ParisD. (2011). Language across difference: Ethnicity, communication, and youth identities in changing urban schools. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
36.
PerryK. H. (2007). Sharing stories, linking lives: Literacy practices among Sudanese refugees. In Purcell-GatesV. (Ed.), Cultural practices of literacy: Case studies of language, literacy, social practice, and power (pp. 57–84). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
37.
PerryK. H. (2009). Genres, contexts, and literacy practices: Literacy brokering among Sudanese refugee families. Reading Research Quarterly, 44, 256–276.
38.
PerryK. H. (2012). What is literacy? A critical overview of sociocultural perspectives. Journal of Language and Literacy Education, 8, 50–71.
39.
Purcell-GatesV. (Ed.). (2007). Cultural practices of literacy: Case studies of language, literacy, social practice, and power. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
40.
RexL. A. (2000). Judy constructs a genuine question: A case for interactional inclusion. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 315–333.
41.
RumenappJ. C.MoralesP. Z. (2019). Gradual release in the early literacy classroom: Taking languaging into account with emergent bilingual students. In McVeeM. BOrtliebEReichenbergJ.PearsonP. D. (Eds.), The gradual release of responsibility in literacy research and practice (pp.119–135). Bingley, England: Emerald Group.
42.
SaldañaJ. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
SmagorinskyP. (2008). The method section as conceptual epicenter in constructing social science reports. Written Communication, 25, 389–411.
45.
SpradleyJ. P. (1980). Participant observation. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
46.
StreetB. (1984). Literacy in theory and practice. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
47.
StreetB. (2003). What’s “new” in new literacy studies? Critical approaches to literacy in theory and practice. Current Issues in Comparative Education, 5, 77–91.
VieiraK. (2016). American by paper: How documents matter in immigrant literacy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
50.
VinogradovP. (2012). “You just get a deeper understanding of things by talking”: Study circles for teachers of ESL emergent readers. Journal of Research & Practice for Adult Literacy, Secondary & Basic Education, 1, 30–43.
51.
VitanovaG. (2013). Dialogue in second language learning and teaching: Directions for research and practice. Language & Dialogue, 3, 388–402.
52.
WaringH. Z. (2014). Managing control and connection in an adult ESL classroom. Research in the Teaching of English, 49, 52–74.
53.
WaringH. Z.YuD. (2018). Life outside the classroom as a resource for language learning. The Language Learning Journal, 46, 660–671.
54.
WaterhouseM. (2017). Telling stories of violence in adult ESL classrooms: Disrupting safe spaces. TESL Canada Journal, 34, 20–41.
55.
WrightW. (2010). Foundations for teaching English language learners. Philadelphia, PA: Caslon.
