ACADEMIC LITERACY

Academic Literacy

Academic Literacy

In terms of cooperate organization, the course participants were organized into groups. Each group comprised a tutor, a support tutor (third year education student) and up to 10 students. Students interacted with the four resources model individually, in pairs, in small groups, or as a whole group. Although we provided opportunities for all students to interact within this space in a range of ways, we decided in advance which interact ional organization would be used and when. We did not allow multiple forms and routes to participation (McCool 1991)

Nevertheless, we did offer participants the opportunity to take up different roles within the group. As teachers, we saw ourselves primarily as designers and enablers, rather than taking up authoritarian leadership roles. We did not insist on compulsory attendance and the size of the groups allowed us to conduct the course in an informal interact ional format (Feature 11). In this context, students began to see themselves and us as part of a various communities of learners. These communities continued to evolve and address new goals in other education subjects (Hurst 2004).

How do content and interact ional organization reflexively shape each other?

The way the content was organized and designed shaped the way that students and tutors engaged in and used various literacy practices, enabling students to develop a repertoire. (Free 1992) Additionally, these practices shaped and re-shaped the content, because the course encouraged students to interact as code-breakers, meaning- makers, text users and text analysts (Luke 2000), 1992; Free body & Luke, 1990; Luke & Free body, 1999, 2000). This, in turn, re-shaped how students engaged with the literacy's of the course.

What are the portals that give students access to interactions with the signs?

The short course was a portal for only some of the students who were enrolled in the first year education subject. Some students were segregated from others. Those with more expertise were not expected to join the course. Even though students self-selected to participate, it was explained that the course was aimed at 'disadvantaged' students, as determined by the requirements of the university equity funding scheme. Although the students, who were constructed as novices, and the tutors, who were constructed as experts, shared a common space, it was assumed that learning was the job of the students and teaching was the job of the experts (Greenleaf 2001).

The purpose of the course was to give ...