Running Head: AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
Embedding Literacy Instruction in Authentic Contexts
Kelly Harper
Vanderbilt University, Peabody College
1
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
2
Abstract
This paper looks at how literacy instruction can be embedded in authentic contexts in order to
make the acquisition of reading and writing skills more meaningful. The push for authentic
literacy experiences is supported by the theory of situated learning which proposes that
knowledge should be developed within contexts and through activities authentic to the field or
culture from which it originated. In addition, authentic literacy instruction is essential to the
enactment of the ideological model of literacy. The paper examines how authenticity has been
conceptualized by the literacy field and expands on four commonly identified criteria including
real purposes, connections to students’ lives, authentic texts, and real audiences. Benefits of
embedding literacy experiences in authentic contexts such as increased motivation, transfer of
knowledge, gains in reading and writing skills, and emotional support of children are explored.
Lastly, several curricular frameworks which support the implementation of authentic literacy
instruction are described. These include inquiry circles, thematic units, Concept Oriented
Reading Instruction, and authoring cycles. To conclude, implications for teaching as well as
future research are considered.
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
3
Introduction
In Ms. Kneller’s second grade class crocheting is all the rage (Kneller & Boyd, 2008).
Students have crocheted scarves, flowers, purses, flags, oven mitts, necklaces, and even a large
afghan for a local charity. In addition, community members such as grandparents are invited to
crochet along students on special days. Although crocheting was initially introduced as a way to
improve students’ fine motor skills for handwriting, it quickly became an activity which
permeated the curriculum and served as a catalyst for many literacy events. For example, faced
with the prospect of dwindling supplies, Ms. Kneller read aloud books to the class about how
characters have worked towards solving similar problems. As a result, the class decided to write
letters to local craft stores requesting yarn. After receiving a donation, the students wrote thank
you notes and then participated in a guided writing activity in which they discussed how to spend
the money. Sticky notes were used to make a shopping list for the supplies. Later when students
expressed interest in learning more advanced stitches, books about crocheting techniques were
placed in the class library for students to browse. Furthermore to address issues of mishandling
materials, students wrote letters to Ms. Kneller explaining how they would be more responsible
for their hooks and yarn in the future. Crocheting has become a part of the classroom culture and
is largely responsible for forming a strong community of learners (Kneller & Boyd, 2008).
In Ms. Booth’s first grade classroom students’ curious questions are vital capital for rich
learning experiences, so when a young boy asks where the garbage goes, a full blown inquiry
ensues (Harvey & Daniels, 2009). Students examine school trash bags to see what is being
thrown out, view websites documenting how other kids have monitored what goes into the trash,
and read books about recycling. Students write and draw about what they learn and document
further questions they have. In an effort to go directly to the source, the class visits a local
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
4
landfill where they observe how trash is deposited and interview employees. After hearing that
the landfill is almost at capacity, students turn their focus to implementing a school wide
recycling program aimed at reducing the school’s trash output.
Although the elementary classrooms described in the vignettes above may seem very
different, they have one important thing in common. Students are engaged in authentic literacy
events. In Ms. Kneller’s class students read and write to learn more about crocheting and to
solve problems arising from their crocheting activities. In Ms. Booth’s class, the students read
and write in order to find answers to questions emanating from their inquiry about the school
garbage. In both cases students’ use of literacy derives from the need to seek and communicate
information for real purposes such as getting funding for crocheting materials or finding out the
best ways to recycle. Ms. Kneller and Ms. Booth create meaningful literacy experiences by
capitalizing on naturally occurring questions and problems and modeling how students can act
towards them in literate ways. As a result students perform literacy tasks very similar to those
people engage in outside of school such as drafting requests for funding, writing thank you notes,
composing interview questions, searching the web for information, reading how to books, and
more. In effect, students are reading and producing authentic texts and communicating to real
audiences whether that be to their schools or to local businesses.
Unfortunately, the learning experiences described above are relatively rare in today’s
classrooms. The relentless push towards state and national standards as well as rigid curriculum
mandates has led to teaching which can be described as disconnected, isolated, and irrelevant to
children’s lives outside of school. Wells (2000), who analyzes schools from a Vygotskian
theoretical lens, dismisses today’s curriculum as far removed from the needs and ambitions of its
audience and thus counterproductive to learning. Many researchers and teachers have realized
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
5
the implications of such stilted instruction and as a result during the past three decades there has
been a push towards making classroom contexts and activities more “authentic” or “real”
(Newmann & Wehlage, 1993). A number of curriculum frameworks have surfaced which aim to
create learning experiences more closely resembling learning that occurs outside of school such
as the inquiry based approached evident in Ms. Booth’s class. Underlying these efforts is the
assumption that authenticity leads to more meaningful learning.
For this paper, I reviewed the literature on authentic learning and instruction in light of
literacy development. Based on my findings, I will argue that teachers should strive to embed
literacy instruction in more authentic contexts in order to promote meaningful literacy learning.
I will begin by describing two complementary theoretical frameworks which support authentic
literacy including Lave’s situated learning and Street’s ideological model of literacy (as cited in
Brown, Collins, & Durgid, 1989; as cited in Hall, 1998). This will be followed by a discussion
about how authentic reading and writing has been conceptualized by educational researchers
during the past two decades and how the identified criteria can lead to meaningful learning.
Next I will further argue for the importance of authentic literacy instruction by discussing
additional benefits including potential to improve motivation, increase transfer of knowledge,
produce growth in comprehension and writing skills, and support children during stressful times.
Then, I will review how teachers have responded to the movement towards authenticity and
describe several different frameworks which support authentic literacy as well as useful
assessment tools. Lastly I will discuss how the findings relate to my future classroom and point
out implications for further research.
Theoretical Grounding
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
6
In order to understand why there should be a movement towards more authentic literacy
learning in classrooms, I must first explain the discrepancy that exists between ideal learning
situations as described from a theoretical standpoint and current pedagogical practices in schools.
I will first briefly overview the principles of situated learning in relation to the learning which
typically occurs in elementary classrooms (Brown et al., 1989). Then I will describe how situated
learning can be put into practice through the cognitive apprenticeship approach. Because this
paper focuses specifically on authentic literacy learning, I will follow my discussion of situated
learning theory (which applies generally to all learning) with a review of Street’s (1984)
ideological model of literacy which was developed in response to the autonomous model of
literacy prevalent in schools (as cited in Hall, 1998). I believe that the situated learning theory
and the ideological model of literacy draw on the same underlying principles with the latter
being more concerned with the acquisition of reading and writing skills.
The theory of situated learning or situated cognition which was developed by Jean Lave,
identifies the context and activity in which knowledge is developed as integral to what is learned
and is frequently cited as a theoretical support for work on authentic learning (as cited in Brown
et al., 1989). It proposes knowledge is more effectively transferred when it is derived from a
series of interactions with authentic physical and social environments. For example, Miller and
Gildea believe that a student is more likely to learn vocabulary in incidental ways such as
reading a book or engaging in an oral language exchange than by looking up dictionary
definitions because the word(s) is situated in an authentic context which is of significance to the
learner (as cited in Brown et al., 1989). Students must engage in activities that are authentic to a
particular field’s culture in order to adequately master the use of its tools and understand their
real purposes. This type of learning is contrasted by the learning which typically occurs in
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
7
schools, where students learn the use of tools within the culture of school not in the context in
which they were intended to be used. Students are taught abstract concepts through exposure to
neat textbook examples which are far removed from what occurs in the real world. Students are
then inculcated with the belief that the concepts they learn in school are not transferable to their
real lives. Another underlying principle of situated learning theory is that knowledge is best
developed through social interactions in which people work together to construct understanding
(Brown et al., 1989; Wells, 2000). However, in schools students are often found working
individually at their desks and talking amongst each other is discouraged. In sum learning is
something which should be situated in authentic contexts and activities.
As a remedy to the contrived learning experiences which are perpetuated by school
culture, Brown et al. (1989) propose a cognitive apprenticeship approach to learning in which
students learn to use the tools of particular fields within contexts authentic to their real purposes
while working collaboratively with peers. Using this approach, teachers help students become
competent in using the cognitive tools of different domains through modeling, guided practice,
and independent application. Teachers create a set of authentic activities through which students
can co-construct knowledge in ways that people do in the real world. An example of how this
would occur in literacy is illustrated when the students in Ms. Kneller’s class make a list of
supplies they need to get at the store. The context in which the list was created is authentic
because the students needed to shop for more crocheting materials using the donation from a
local craft store. The class worked together to decide what they would buy instead of making
individual lists which would have been counterproductive to their goal. As a result of this
activity students experienced an authentic function of writing and produced a text that would
then be used to accomplish a real goal—buying the supplies!
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
8
In their work, Street and Street also address the mismatch between optimal contexts for
knowledge development and learning experiences prominent in schools with specific attention to
literacy instruction (as cited in Hall, 1998). They have termed the disconnect between school
uses for literacy and how literacy is used in the real world the pedagogisation of autonomous
literacy. This phenomenon results when literacy is distanced from a meaningful social context
and instead held up as object to analyze and study thus obscuring its intended purposes. Ways in
which schools perpetuate an autonomous model of literacy include developing curriculum genres
which are classroom literacy routines concerned more with procedure than making meaning of or
creating text. In addition, texts are presented as neutral and accepted as the truth instead of being
addressed as “laden with significance for power relations and ideology” (Street & Street as cited
in Hall 1998, p. 10). Schools also tend to privilege certain types of texts over others, particularly
narratives and essays, which happen to be the types of literacy least pursued outside of a school
context. In concurrence with Brown et al., Street and Street point out that literacy tasks are
completed individually which is at odds with how literacy is learned in the real world—within
social contexts. Lastly, schools enact autonomous literacy by constantly moving students from
one literacy concept to another which results in the feeling that literacy is something which is
always slightly out of reach. The pedagogisation of literacy thus occurs when schools create
their own version of literacy acquisition which exists in opposition to how literacy operates
within cultures in the real world.
In response to how literacy operates in schools, Street developed a new model of literacy
instruction which he termed ideological literacy (as cited in Hall, 1998). This model states that
“literacy draws its meaning from being situated within cultural values and practices,” and thus
should be related to students’ everyday lives and communities (Street as cited in Hall, 1998, p.
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
9
11). Because literacy derives it meaning from the culture in which it is created and different
cultures have their own set of practices, there are multiple literacies not just one “right’ literacy. I
use the term culture here in the traditional sense to refer to values, beliefs, and practices common
to a particular group of people as well as more generally to refer to ways of developing and
communicating knowledge in specific academic and occupational fields. Street proposes several
ways in which the ideological model of literacy can be enacted in schools. These include
allowing reading and writing experiences to arise from social situations, teaching students
multiple genres, engaging students in critical explorations of texts, using literacy to expand
students’ thinking and awareness of the world beyond the classroom, and giving students the
opportunity to negotiate situations they care about in literate ways. It is clear that both the
ideological model of literacy and situated learning draw on the principle that learning should be
embedded in authentic contexts (Street as cited in Hall, 1998; Brown et al., 1989).
In this section I described how learning should occur in contexts which closely match real
functional contexts. Although this has been frequently agreed upon from a range of theoretical
perspectives beyond what was discussed here, an operational definition of authentic literacy
learning which can be used to guide pedagogical decisions is harder to pinpoint (see Gee, 1992;
Wells, 2000). Varying criteria ranging from vague descriptors to specific rating scales have
appeared in the literature. In the next section I will attempt to answer the question “what is
authentic literacy learning?” by synthesizing the criteria prevalent in my review of the literature.
What is Authentic Literacy Learning?
In the field of education, the term authentic is often associated with such words as
meaningful, relevant, real, and useful. Although these are all valued aspects of authenticity, in
order for teachers to effectively engage their students in authentic learning, they need a clear
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
10
definition of how this concept can be translated into developing reading and writing experiences.
Therefore in this section I will look at how authentic learning has been conceptualized in the
literacy field by analyzing the range of definitions that have been proposed and identifying
common criteria among them. Although this list is certainly not exhaustive, the components that
were most frequently cited in the literature include authenticity of purpose, connection to
student’s lives outside of the classroom, using authentic texts, and providing real audiences.
Although these elements are often interdependent, I describe them separately in order to develop
a comprehensive picture of how teachers can create truly authentic literacy experiences for their
students. Subsequently I will describe how these criteria exist on a continuum and review
several models which have been developed to evaluate the authenticity of literacy events.
Throughout the section connections will be made to how each criterion increases the
meaningfulness of literacy learning therefore strengthening my argument for why teachers
should work towards enhancing the authenticity of their literacy instruction.
Real Purposes
According to the implications of sociocultural theory, true learning occurs when students
participate in activities which have real purposes (Wells, 2000). In the literacy community
activities with real purposes have been described as those which serve true communicative
functions (Bergeron & Rudenga, 1996; Duke, Purcell-Gates, Hall, & Tower, 2006). In other
words, the literacy event occurs as a result of the need to seek or express information thus
resembling communication which occurs outside of a school setting. As Hall (1998) indicates,
school literacy is distanced from real literacy because it is not used as a means to end but rather
an end in itself. In the real world, one’s purpose for reading or writing most frequently results
from one of the following broad categories: desire to answer a question (which relates to
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
11
informing oneself and others), solve a problem, accomplish a task, or entertain/be entertained.
Two additional categories which apply only to writing include the need to persuade or express
personal information such as writing a journal. Ms. Kneller’s class writing letters to businesses
requesting funding for a project is an example of an activity which results from a real-life need to
communicate information in order to accomplish a task (Kneller & Boyd, 2008). Once students
finish school, any of the aforementioned purposes for engaging in literacy tasks will likely arise
from natural curiosity and interest or stem from the need to fulfill job and home responsibilities.
Thus in order for teachers to establish real purposes for using literacy, they need to create
learning opportunities which employ one of these two natural catalysts for reading and writing.
Teachers can create environments in which authentic purposes for literacy are generated
by capitalizing on teachable moments, prompting student questions through demonstrations and
presentations of discrepant events, and encouraging students to explore and express their own
interests and backgrounds (Duke et al., 2006). For instance, following a literature circle
discussion about the book Frog and Toad, two students decided to do further research on the
difference between frogs and toads while two other students from the group created a book on
how to be a good friend (Harvey & Daniels, 2009). Teachers can also expose students to how
literacy functions to fulfill a variety of daily tasks by modeling and involving them with literacy
events such as filling out the attendance, sending a note to another teacher, creating a schedule,
and writing an email. Because the nature of school makes it difficult to completely break free
from autonomous literacy, Hall (1998) suggests using sociodramatic play with younger students
as a vehicle for using literacy to fulfill real functions. He observed a kindergarten classroom in
which literacy events such as writing lists, filling out planning applications, and writing
estimates all derived from the building of a pretend car repair garage. When literacy events in the
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
12
classroom serve true communicative purposes they are rendered more authentic because they
closely mirror how people engage in reading and writing outside of school thus increasing the
activities’ meaningfulness.
Connection to Students’ Lives
Another criterion which scholars agree is a determinant of a learning experience’s
authenticity is its connection to students’ lives outside of school (Ableser, 2008; Cronin, 1993;
Duke et al., 2007; Harste et al., 1988; Newmann & Wehlage, 1993; Renzulli, Gentry & Reis,
2004; Rhodes & Shanklin, 1993). As Street states, literacy instruction should be embedded in
the cultural values and practices of the homes and communities in which students live (as cited in
Hall, 1998). In addition, literacy events should be positioned to build on students’ interests and
curiosity. Drawing on my analysis of the literature which highlights this criterion, I will share
four ways in which literacy experiences can be created to be relevant to students’ lives.
First, teachers should draw on students’ funds of knowledge which include their cultural
backgrounds and lived experiences when developing literacy curriculum (Gonzalez, Moll, &
Amanti, 2005). When students see themselves in the curriculum, they are much more likely to
view learning experiences as relevant and meaningful. One teacher uncovered students’
identities while simultaneously engaging them in authentic literacy tasks by having students
explore the history of their names (Roessing, Frey, & Fink, 2006). Students interviewed parents
about how they selected their name, researched name origins, and looked at how popular their
names were throughout history. During all of these phases of investigation, students were
reading and writing in purposeful ways. Another way teachers can increase a literacy event’s
authentic nature is by addressing children’s social and emotional needs in times of crisis through
literacy (Ableser, 2008). In such a situation, literacy becomes more relevant for children because
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
13
it functions as an expressive outlet for difficult issues affecting their lives. When Mary Cowhey
(2006) was faced with helping her students deal with the aftermath of September 11th, she
followed a student’s lead and encouraged students to write letters to people they wanted to
connect with during this time of tragedy. Students wrote letters to family members assuring them
of their safety, to firefighters in Brooklyn thanking them for their bravery, and to pen pals in
South Africa informing them of what had happened to America. Through their writing students
gained comfort and were able to make sense of what was going on in their world. Thirdly,
literacy learning is authenticated when students are given the opportunity to address real-life
problems which raise their sociopolitical consciousness. These issues may either be present at a
local level such as contamination of a stream near the school or more global such as human
rights (Short, 2009). Renzulli, Gentry, and Reis (2004), are proponents of using “enrichment
clusters” in schools which allow students to participate in inquiry about real problems specific to
topics in which they are interested. They identify four criteria which a problem must meet to be
considered “real” including a personal frame of reference, no set solution, motivation to discover
solutions which change people’s attitudes and beliefs, and real audiences. Solving real life
problems creates opportunities for students to construct meaning through reading and writing for
real purposes (Duke et al., 2007). Lastly, building on students’ interests is an easy and common
sense way to create literacy experiences which are relevant to students’ lives. There are endless
ways to do this but some specific examples include having students keep journals in which they
write about their lives and experiences, incorporating open inquiry circles into the classroom,
and encouraging students to record any questions that arise in wonder notebooks (Harvey &
Daniels, 2009). Reading workshop and writing workshop developed by Nancy Atwell and Lucy
Calkins respectively are also literacy instructional formats which allow students choice in which
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
14
books they read and which topics they write about (Atwell, 1998; Calkins, 1994). In sum, when
activities have value beyond the classroom, they become more authentic (Newmann & Wehlage,
1993).
Authentic Texts
In addition to implementing literacy events which serve real-life purposes and relate to
student’s lives outside the classroom, the authenticity of texts used and produced is also a key
component of authentic learning (Barnitz, 1986; Bergeron & Rudenga, 1996; Duke et al., 2007;
Rhodes & Shanklin, 1993). When considering texts read by or to students, there are several
elements to contemplate including content, genre, and linguistic features. In terms of content,
teachers should select texts which require students to critically examine their beliefs and expand
their understanding of situations beyond school (Hall, 1998; Short, 2009). Gay recommends
using literature which is relevant to students’ cultural backgrounds as well as literature which
exposes them to cultural groups they may not have encountered (2010). To avoid the privileging
evident in the autonomous model of literacy, Hall encourages teachers to expose students to
multiple genres instead of just narratives (1998). On a more linguistic level, Carol Edelsky
emphasizes the need for natural texts which provide students with the opportunity to use all
language processes (as cited in Barnitz, 1994). Rhodes and Shanklin (1993) are also proponents
of using materials that allow students to use language in natural social contexts. Other
researchers address both the texts read by students and those produced by students. In a study
conducted to assess how authentic literacy activities help develop comprehension and writing
skills, a literacy event’s authenticity was evaluated on two domains, one of which was text
(Purcell-Gates, Duke, & Matineau, 2007). In this study authentic texts were described as those
which can be found outside of school and are used for purposes other than learning to read and
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
15
write. Types of authentic text formats include newspapers, brochures, magazines, books,
webpages, blogs, letters, emails, recipes, manuals, and more. All of these formats can be used
for reading purposes as well as creation purposes, but the important factor is that their
employment results from a true need to seek or communicate information and that there is an
authentic audience to receive the information. From my review of the literature I have
determined that in order to be authentic, the texts used and produced in classrooms must contain
content critical to students’ understanding of themselves and the world, represent multiple
genres, capitalize on students’ language processing, and be found outside of a school setting.
Real Audiences
A fourth standard significant to authentic learning is having a real audience for which
communication is intended. This specifically applies to the writing process and its subsequent
products because outside of school contexts, people typically only write if they have an audience
even if it is themselves (Duke et al., 2007). To be truly authentic audiences should not serve
evaluative purposes such as a teacher reading a journal assignment for a grade. Instead writers
should have real readers. Having a real audience is often the result of an activity which has an
authentic purpose (Duke et al., 2007). For example, at the request of a first grade teacher, fourth
grade students may compile a book of interesting facts about plants for the younger students to
read during their plant unit. Authentic audiences can exist within the classroom, school,
community, or even in another country. One framework views the audience as ranging from
assigned to self-selected and looks at three domains including who controls selection, who the
intended audience is, and how the audience exists outside of the classroom to determine how
authentic it is (Bergeron & Rudenga, 1996). Harvey and Daniels (2009) suggest expanding
students’ audiences by using multimedia formats such as blogs, podcasts, videos, and social
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
16
networking outlets. Having genuine audiences for student’s written work and other literacy
products helps students develop more advanced metacognitive and communication skills as they
explain new concepts through oral and written language (Rowe, Harste, & Short 1988). In
addition, children are typically more invested in literacy events in which they are communicating
with an actual audience because the event becomes more relevant and meaningful.
Authenticity Continuum Models
There is a strong consensus in the literature that authentic learning exists on a continuum
and is not a characteristic which is simply present or absent (Cronin, 1993). I will discuss a few
of the models scholars have created to determine a literacy event’s degree of authenticity. As
referred to previously, Bergeron and Rudenga (1996) developed a framework which consists of
five elements they feel most accurately define authentic literacy learning which are purpose,
choice, audience, resources, and relevance. Each element has its own continuum which labels
both the low and high end of the spectrum. For example an activity’s purpose can fall between
“evaluation/practice” and “communication.” Under each element are guiding questions which
are intended to help the user determine where an event falls within each element. Newmann and
Wehlage (1993) created a framework similarly formatted which assesses authenticity of
instruction in restructuring schools. There are five standards—higher order thinking, depth of
knowledge, connectedness to the world beyond the classroom, substantive conversation, social
support for student achievement—each of which is rated on a scale of 1 to 5. Extensive criteria
are established for each rating. This continuum differs from the latter because it was designed for
general education and focuses specifically on how the instruction supports cognitive aspects of
learning. Although this model was not created with literacy learning in mind, it does take into
account some of the key components of authentic instruction which researchers in the literacy
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
17
field agree upon and provides an additional example of how authenticity can be conceptualized.
A third example is taken from a study that looked at how teachers can engage students in
authentic reading and writing activities with informational and procedural science texts (Duke et
al., 2007). The authors identified two domains, authenticity of purpose and authenticity of text,
and created a three point scale with descriptors for each rating. Each domain is awarded a rating
and then those ratings are added to compute the total score. These examples of how authenticity
has been categorized and operationalized provide a brief overview of how one might evaluate
how authentic a literacy event is. Even though not all researches have formulated specific rating
scales, a vast majority pointed out that authentic learning ranges from truly authentic to
inauthentic and anywhere in between.
In an effort to determine what authentic learning means in the literacy field, I reviewed
the relevant literature and selected four standards that were common to a majority of the work.
Although the standards I identified are interrelated and largely dependent on one another, I
discussed them separately in order to develop a deeper meaning of authenticity as it applies to
literacy learning. In summary, I have established that authentic literacy learning serves real
purposes, is connected to student’s lives outside of the classroom, results from the use of
materials which have functions outside of school, and targets real audiences. Although this
definition is certainly not exhaustive, it provides a sufficient framework for discussing why
teachers should embed literacy instruction in authentic contexts to make learning more
meaningful. In the next section I will describe how authentic contexts can produce learning
benefits beyond being more meaningful to students.
How is Authentic Learning Beneficial?
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
18
As a result of any movement to reform instruction in schools, an obvious question arises
in the minds of teachers and researchers: how is this particular framework beneficial to student
learning? Such is the case for the push to make literacy instruction more authentic. In the
previous section I described how authentic learning results in meaningful learning as a result of
the criteria on which it is built. Here I will present additional factors supported by the literature
which strengthen my argument for creating contexts in which authentic literacy events occur
frequently. Researchers propose that authentic literacy experiences increase motivation, increase
the potential for transfer of knowledge, lead to gains in comprehension and writing skills, and
support children during stressful times. I will discuss each factor as it relates to my argument.
Effective teachers are constantly searching for ways to intrinsically motivate their
students to engage in reading and writing more frequently and intentionally in order to further
develop essential literacy skills. As established in the previous section, one key component of
authentic learning is the ability of instructional contexts to connect to student’s realities outside
of the classroom. This has been expressed by researchers interested in developing student
motivation in literacy contexts as essential to a successful reading program (Guthrie & McCann,
1997; Ruddell & Unrau, 1997). According to Hidi and Renninger, “students who are truly
interested in a topic and view it as relevant to their own lives are more likely to work at it for
longer periods of time and enjoy doing so” (as cited in Harvey & Daniels, 2009). One way for
teachers to connect to student’s lives is to incorporate their sociocultural values and beliefs into
lessons. They can also utilize literature and writing activities which encourage students to
explore their cultural identities (Short, 2009). Another approach for motivating students to read
and write through making learning relevant to their lives is to engage students in tasks which
require them to consider problems affecting their communities (Ruddell & Unrau, 1997). Finally
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
19
student’s motivation is increased when the literacy event has a real-life purpose, also an indicator
of authenticity. Such is the case when students engage in real-life experiences and are then
provided with opportunities to use reading and writing as a means of answering their questions
which arise from the experience (Guthrie & McCann, 1988).
Aside from increasing motivation to read and write, authentic instruction can also
increase the potential for students to transfer knowledge from one context to another (Brown et
al., 1989). The goal of schools should be to equip students with the knowledge they need to be
successful in the real world and provide them with the means of knowing when, where, and how
to apply that knowledge appropriately (Donovan, Bransford, & Pellegrino, 2000). Because the
context in which knowledge is developed is integral to what is learned, this is only possible when
the activities in which students engage are structured to promote the connection of concepts and
skills developed in school with their use in the real world (Brown, et al., 1989). Essentially there
must be a deeper similarity between the types of learning which occur outside of school with that
which takes place in school (Barton & Smith, 2000; Donovan, Bransford, & Pellegrino, 2000;
Resnick, 1987). Drawing on the definition I have established for authentic learning, one can see
that the key components all work together to promote transfer of knowledge. Authentic literacy
learning is that which serves real purposes, is connected to the world beyond the classroom, has
real audiences, and uses real world materials. The emphasis on “real” is a testament to how the
nature of authentic learning is to mirror real world learning so that students will experience how
literacy is used in everyday life and thus develop lifelong literacy skills pertinent to their futures
(Bergeron & Rudenga, 1996).
It has also been shown that creating authentic contexts for literacy learning can result in
higher reading and writing achievement. In an empirical study conducted by Purcell-Gates,
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
20
Duke, and Matineau (2007), gains in the comprehension and production of informational and
procedural science texts was highly correlated with the authentic uses of literacy in that subject
area. Hiebert (1994) also conducted a series of studies to determine how authentic literacy
impacted literacy development. The first study showed that when skills based and authentic
based classroom were compared, the authentic classrooms proved to have more opportunities for
higher order thinking and student choice in designing reading and writing tasks. The second
study which examined reading and writing development in first and third grade classrooms using
authentic texts, found that students who came in at grade level made significant gains.
Interestingly, low performing first graders made little gains while on average, low performing
third graders reached grade level. It is proposed that lack of differentiation may have caused the
lesser gains in the low performing students. The third study looked at the effectiveness of
embedding word level instruction in authentic reading tasks for students receiving Chapter 1
(also known as Title 1) tutoring services. 56% of students who received the intervention were
reading on grade level by the end of the program and only 20% of those students were still
eligible for Chapter 1 services the next year as compared to 80% of students who did not receive
the intervention. In sum Hiebert (1994) points out that authentic literacy tasks produce valuable
gains in reading and writing, are more cognitively challenging, and allow students to take
ownership of literacy. Although relatively few empirical studies have been conducted on the
effects of authentic literacy learning on the acquisition of reading and writing skills, the ones
discussed here are promising and indicate the need for further studies in this area.
Lastly, the National Council of Teachers of English promote using authentic literacy
experiences to help children cope with stressful times in their lives whether that be difficulties at
home, a crisis affecting the whole class, or an ongoing conflict in the community (Ableser,
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
21
2008). Creating contexts in which students use literacy as a vehicle for expressing and working
through difficult emotions makes the experience meaningful, purposeful, and relevant; or rather
authentic. Students have the opportunity to witness how useful literacy can be to them and
hopefully as a result will develop positive feelings towards reading and writing.
To conclude, teachers should work towards creating authentic literacy experiences
because such experiences can increase motivation, promote transfer of knowledge, lead to
growth in comprehension and composition, and support children during stressful times. When
students participate in reading and writing activities which they feel are relevant to their lives,
they assign a higher task value and thus become more motivated to learn. Additionally,
knowledge constructed in learning contexts which more closely resemble those occurring in the
real world, a characteristic of authentic learning, has a greater chance of being utilized outside of
school. Studies have shown that when students receive authentic literacy instruction, whether
that be within a science or language arts setting, reading and writing development is positively
impacted. Lastly, literacy has the potential to be used purposefully and relevantly in the face of
crises facing children. In the next section I will provide practical examples of how authentic
learning has been implemented in schools.
Thus far I have defined authentic learning based on the most frequently cited criteria in
the literature and shown how those components lead to more meaningful learning. I have also
presented potential benefits resulting from authentic learning. I have provided clear justification
for embedding literacy instruction in authentic contexts and will now explore how teachers can
create those contexts, because it is important not only that teachers know what authentic learning
is but how such learning can be fulfilled through instructional models.
How Can Teachers Create Opportunities for Authentic Literacy Learning?
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
22
First, I think it is necessary to discuss common misconceptions about authentic learning
which may prevent teachers from guiding their practices towards this ideal. Many teachers think
that authenticity is either present or absent with no in between therefore making it very difficult
and time intensive to implement (Cronin, 1993). As discussed previously, authenticity exists on
a continuum which means that teachers can take steps towards planning more meaningful
instruction without feeling overwhelmed. Secondly, some are under the false notion that
authentic learning is a foreign concept when in actuality many effective teachers already create
activities which address the key components of authenticity as a result of best practices.
Teachers may also think that learning is not authentic unless it is fun. Although authentic
learning can certainly be fun as a consequence of its purposefulness and relevance, it is more
important that it also resembles real life which is not always fun. Lastly, I would like to point
out that authentic literacy activities do not negate the need for explicit skill instruction (Barntiz,
1994). Authentic learning provides a meaningful context in which to embed such instruction.
Many instructional frameworks have surfaced which are geared towards authentic
learning including but not limited to thematic units, enrichment clusters, authoring cycles,
project-based learning, inquiry based learning, the case method, situated learning, Concept
Oriented Reading Instruction (CORI), cognitive apprenticeship, and more (Rule, 2006). I have
chosen to review those which I feel are most practical in light of district demands and apply
specifically to literacy instruction. I will provide brief overviews of inquiry circles, thematic
units, CORI, and the authoring cycle and describe how each can facilitate authentic learning
when implemented effectively. To close I will discuss methods of assessment conducive to
gauging students’ reading and writing progress within authentic contexts.
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
23
Inquiry based learning, which was first brought to elementary schools by John Dewey,
closely aligns with the components of authentic literacy and has recently been recommended as
the new American pedagogy by President Obama’s education transition team (Harvey &
Daniels, 2009). Harvey & Daniels (2009) propose teachers use several different types of inquiry
circles including mini-inquiries which give teachers the chance to model inquiry procedures,
curricular inquiries, literacy inquiries which are inspired by questions arising from literature
circle discussions, and open inquiries; all of which provide students opportunities to explore their
questions and interests through research. Because students are driven by their own curiosity,
their investigations result in reading and writing for real purposes. Subsequently the types of
reading they do are similar to the types of reading adults do every day. As students work to find
answers, they collaborate with other students thus embedding activity within social contexts
(Brown et al., 1989). Furthermore, at the close of an inquiry circle students are encouraged to
disseminate the information they have found which typically results in the creation of some type
of text. Whether students choose to compose books, brochures, manuals, or posters, they are
building understanding, providing explanations or interpretations, and synthesizing information;
(Harvey & Daniels, 2009). These texts are then presented to an audience eager to revel in the
findings. The vignette of Ms. Booth’s class shared at the beginning of the paper is one example
of how engaging in inquiry circles leads to an authentic use of literacy and results in powerful
learning experiences.
Thematic units offer another way for teachers to transition their instruction towards
authenticity (Bergeron & Rudenga, 1996). Thematic learning which has been promoted in
school for years is defined as inquiries structured around a big overarching idea or theme which
cuts across subject areas (Shanahan, 1997). These themes serve as ways to meaningfully
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
24
organize the concepts presented in curriculum so that they become more cohesive. The
implementation of thematic units is supported by sociocultural theory which sees learning as
involving the whole person or the whole mind; not merely the mastery of isolated skills (Wells,
2000). Unfortunately, the benefits associated with thematic units are often negated when
teachers fail to deeply integrate concepts across subjects and instead make shallow connections
through decorative motifs (Barton & Smith, 2000). However, upon examination of the original
theory behind thematic units, I found that this particular model of instruction is conducive to
authentic learning when implemented correctly. “Themes can provide a basis for using language
for real purposes across the curriculum and for real audiences,” both of which are key
components of authentic learning (Pike, Compain, & Mumper as cited in Bergeron & Rudenga,
1996, p. 546). This is the case when reading and writing are used to construct and convey ideas
during investigations. A case for authentic learning during thematic units is also made when
connections to student’s real lives are naturally made due to the emphasis on choice and
relevance (Bergeron & Rudenga, 1996). Finally, thematic frameworks encourage learning
through the engagement in tasks and use of resources likely to be encountered in the real world;
both of which are determinants of authentic learning (Barton & Smith, 2000).
Another guiding framework for instruction which draws on the fundamental aspects of
thematic units mentioned previously is CORI (Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction) which
promotes the integration of language arts with other academic domains such as science (Guthrie
& McCann, 1997). Students engage in real-life experiences and hands-on activities centered on a
guiding theme such as adaptation which naturally facilitates curiosity and questioning.
Subsequently students have the opportunity to explore concepts essential to the theme through
reading literature and expository texts, collaborating with peers, and writing. In one example of
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
25
CORI being implemented during a unit on adaptation, students went on a cricket hunt and then
documented their key features, behaviors, and habitat (Guthrie & McCann, 1997). These hands
on experiences naturally led to questions which the students began to research. After developing
some background information through personal inquiry, the students worked in collaborative
groups and develop plans for learning more about crickets. In addition, they were introduced to
other concepts about adaptation through reading novels which focused on the passage of time.
These types of experiences are highly authentic because not only do they serve as demonstrations
for how reading and writing can be used for real purposes, but they are also developed around
the use of authentic resources, provide real audiences for work, and build on students’ natural
curiosity.
Although not explicitly built on the theory of authentic learning, the last model I will
discuss embodies all of the components of such learning. Authoring cycles, developed by Harste
et al. (1988), are centered on the publication of newspapers, magazines, or books filled with
student compositions. These publications are intended to be read for enjoyment and to gain
information thus providing student work with real audiences and bolstering the authenticity of
the learning experience. The students go through a series of creative processes similar to that
experienced by writers in the real world. During the first few weeks of a cycle, students engage
in uninterrupted reading and writing adding pieces to their author folder. Students who have a
piece they want to publish meet in groups and get feedback on their work. Self-editing is
followed by peer editing and finally publication. The cycle operates on true communicative
purposes for literacy and reflects how the writing process takes place in the real world. In
addition, students are producing the types of texts people purchase and read every day. In sum,
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
26
the authoring cycle provides one way for teachers to engage students in literacy events which are
valued beyond the classroom.
When considering which curriculum models best support authentic literacy learning, one
must also consider how to assess learning in such contexts. Assessment is an integral part of
teaching because it allows teachers to evaluate how students are progressing and modify
instruction to meet the needs of those who have not made adequate gains. It is difficult to
assume learning has happened unless evidence has been collected to support that claim.
However, when teachers move towards creating more authentic literacy experiences, they move
away from the mundane worksheets and fill in the blank or multiple choice activities that are
often used to assess student learning. What tools then should be used to evaluate reading and
writing skills attained while constructing knowledge in authentic contexts? Although little is said
in the literature which directly answers this question, much work has been done on how to assess
students in ways which authentically measure what they know. In other words, these tools are
designed to more accurately reflect student performance and take into account classroom context
and content being taught. One of these tools which is very conducive to measuring change over
time and fits well with inquiry or project based learning is a literacy portfolio. These simply
consist of a collection of student work over a period of time and are described by Wiener and
Cohen (1997) to include reading logs, writing journals, work samples, and other artifacts which
serve as documentation of how students are using strategies in their work. Teachers can refer to
the portfolios themselves to look for trends or evidence that an objective has been mastered,
show them to parents during conferences, and allow students to browse through them to take
pride in their growth. Ms. Booth from the vignette at the beginning of the paper could have had
students include a reading log of their research on garbage disposal, notes on those readings, the
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
27
interview questions they wrote, and their plan for a recycling program in their portfolios.
Teachers may also want to put any anecdotal notes taken while a student is engaged in authentic
activities in their portfolio so that they can revisit student comments and reactions during that
time. In addition to keeping portfolios, having students self-assess their work by using checklists,
rubrics, or through interviews can give them ownership of their learning. It is often the case in
the real world that people self-assess and reflect on their performance, particularly in job
settings, in order to appropriately adjust their behavior so that they may achieve success.
Teachers need to be careful, however not to make assessment the end goal of learning therefore
transforming the purposes for using literacy from authentic to inauthentic. Instead teachers can
use tools such as work portfolios and self-assessments which provide authentic ways for getting
a clear picture of how students can apply literacy skills in functional contexts.
In this section I have described several instructional formats conducive to authentic
learning and illustrated one teacher’s success with allowing authentic literacy learning to unfold
in her classroom. Inquiry circles, thematic units, CORI, and authoring cycles, all have the
potential to engage students in authentic learning which is driven by the use of literacy to
construct and express ideas. However, it is not necessary that teachers implement one of these or
similar theoretical frameworks in order to promote authentic experiences. As in the example of
the crocheting class, sometimes all it takes is a simple engaging activity to allow students the
opportunity to realize the “impact of reading and writing in their world” (Kneller & Boyd, 2008,
p. 145). Along with developing contexts in which literacy can be used in authentic ways,
teachers need to be aware of what types of assessment tools best capture student growth in such a
setting.
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
28
Implications for Practice and Further Research
In this last section, I will discuss how I foresee the ideas developed in this paper affecting
my future instruction as well as implications for further research in this area. During my
participation in practicums, student teaching, and research assistantships I have witnessed much
instruction that consists of teaching isolated skills which are disconnected with real world
literacy practices or student’s lives and serve purely evaluative, school only purposes. Although
there is certainly the need to have activities which serve functions unique to the school
environment or used primarily as assessment, when this is the only type of instruction students
experience, learning becomes tedious, disengaging, and irrelevant. As a result of my review of
the literature on authentic learning, I feel that it is very important that I help my students develop
as literacy learners in authentic contexts so that hopefully they will experience reading and
writing as meaningful and useful in their everyday lives. I believe creating authentic literacy
events has the potential to re-energize learning and get children excited to explore all the ways in
which literacy can be used. In my future classroom I will strive to develop literacy events which
serve real purposes, are connected with student’s lives outside of school, provide real audiences,
and emphasize the use of authentic texts.
In terms of future research, although there is a lot of literature on authentic learning in a
general sense, there needs to be more exploration into what authentic learning means in the
context of literacy development as well as how this looks. To gain a deeper understanding, I feel
that more empirical evidence is needed on the benefits already claimed to result from authentic
literacy instruction as well as what additional benefits may be reaped. In addition, more tales
from the field which report how teachers are promoting authentic literacy learning in their
classrooms will help other teachers develop ways to do the same in their classrooms.
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
29
References
Ableser, J. (2008). Authentic literacy experience to teach and support young children during
stressful times. Young Children, 6(2), 74-79.
Atwell, N. (1998). In the middle: New understandings about writing, reading, and learning.
Portsmouth, NH: Boyton/Book publishers, Inc.
Barnitz, J. G. (1994). Discourse diversity: Principles for authentic talk and literacy instruction.
Journal of Reading, 37(7), 586-591.
Barton, K. C., Smith, L. A. (2000). Themes or motifs? Aiming for coherence through
interdisciplinary outlines. The Reading Teacher, 54(1), 54-63.
Bergeron, B. S., Rudenga, E. A. (1996). Seeking authenticity: What is “real” about thematic
literacy instruction? The Reading Teacher, 49(7), 544-551.
Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Durgid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning.
Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
Calkins, L. (1994). The art of teaching writing (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Cowhey, M. (2006). Black ants and Buddhists: Thinking critically and teaching differently in the
primary grades. Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.
Cronin, J. F. (1993). Four misconceptions about authentic learning. Educational Leadership,
50(7), 78-80.
Donavan, S.M., Bransford, J. D., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind,
experience, and school, (Ed.). Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Duke, N. K., Purcell-Gates, V., Hall, L. A., Tower, C. (2006). The Reading Teacher, 60(4), 344355.
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
30
Gay, G. (2010). Culturally Responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. New York:
Teachers College Press.
Gonzalez, N., Moll, L.C., Amanti, C. (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in
households, communities, and classrooms. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Inc., Publishers.
Guthrie, J. T. & McCann, A. D. (1997). Characteristics of classrooms that promote motivations
and strategies for learning. In Guthrie, J. T. & Wigfield, A. (Eds.) Reading Engagement:
Motivating readers through integrated instruction (128-148). Newark, Deleware:
International Reading Association.
Hall, N. (1998). Real literacy in a school setting: Five-year-olds take on the world. The Reading
Teacher, 52(1), 8-17.
Harste, J. C., Short, K. G., Burke, C. (1988). Creating classrooms for authors: The readingwriting connection. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Educational Books, Inc.
Havey, S., & Daniels, H. (2009). Comprehension and collaboration: Inquiry circles in action.
Portsmouth, NH: Heineman.
Hiebert, E.H. (1994). Becoming literate through authentic tasks: Evidence and adaptions. In R.B.
Ruddel, M. R. Ruddell, & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading
(4th ed., pp. 391-413). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Kneller, S. A., Boyd, M. P. (2008). “We were slow, it was challenging and “It was hard not to
make knots”: Crocheting as a literacy event in a second grade classroom community.
Early Childhood Education Journal, 36, 135-147.
Leland, C. H., Harste, J. C., Huber, K. R. (2005). Out of the box: Critical literacy in a first-grade
classroom. Language Arts, 82(4), 257-268.
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
31
Mills, H., Stephens, D. (2004). Theory in practice: The legacy of Louise Rosenblatt. Language
Arts, 82(1), 47-55.
Newmann, F. M., Wehlage, G. G. (1993). Five standards of authentic instruction. Educational
Leadership, April, 1-12.
Purcell-Gates, V., Duke, N. K., Martineau, J. A. (2007). Learning to read and write genrespecific text: Roles of authentic experience and explicit teaching. Reading Research
Quarterly, 42(1), 8-45.
Renzulli, J.S., Gentry, M., Reis, S. M. (2004). A time and place for authentic learning.
Educational Leadership, 62(1), 73-77.
Resnick, L.B. (1987). The 1987 Presidential Address: Learning in school and out. Educational
Researcher, 16(9), 23-20, 54.
Rhodes, L.K. & Shanlin, N. (1993). Windows into literacy: Assessing learning K-8. Portsmouth,
NH: Heinemann.
Roessing, L., Frey, N., Fink, L.S. (2006). What’s in a name? A whole lot of talking, researching,
and writing. Voices from the Middle, 14(2), 22-30.
Rowe, D. W., Harste, J. C., Short, K. G. (1988). The authoring cycle: A theoretical and practical
overview. In Harste, J. C., Short, K. G., Burke, C. (Eds.) Creating classrooms for
authors: The reading writing connection. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Educational
Books, Inc.
Ruddell, R. B. & Unrau, N. J. (1997). The role of responsive teaching in focusing reader
intention and developing reader motivation. In Guthrie, J. T. & Wigfield, A. (Eds.)
Reading Engagement: Motivating readers through integrated instruction (102-125).
Newark, Deleware: International Reading Association.
AUTHENTIC LITERACY LEARNING
32
Rule, A. C. (2006). Editorial: The components of authentic learning. Journal of Authentic
Learning, 3(1), 1-10.
Shanahan, T. (1997). Reading-writing relationships, thematic units, inquiry learning…In pursuit
of effective integrated literacy instruction. The Reading Teacher, 51(1), 12-18.
Short, K. G. (2009). Critically reading the word and the world: Building intercultural
understanding through literature. Bookbird, 47(2), 1-10.
Weiner, R. B. & Cohen, J.H. (1997). Literacy portfolios: Using assessments to guide instruction.
Des Moines, IA: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Wells, Gordon. (2000). Dialogic inquiry in education: Building on the legacy of Vygotsky. In
Lee, C.D. & Smagorinsky, P. (Eds.), Vygotskian perspectives on literacy research:
Constructing meaning through collaborative inquiry (51-85). Cambridge: Cambridge