有文化的思想:一种评论

Peter V. Paul
{"title":"有文化的思想:一种评论","authors":"Peter V. Paul","doi":"10.21554/hrr.092201","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A number of d/Deaf and hard of hearing students, as well as other students in special education programs, have difficulty accessing academic content information that, traditionally, has been presented in written language in print and electronically (e.g., textbooks, other school materials, etc.). Because this information represents what students need to know, there will be a large gap in their knowledge base, and students will not have ample opportunities to develop a high level of literate thought. That is, students will not be able to represent and manipulate information, solve problems, or develop other higher-level critical thinking skills. This article presents a case for the reconceptualization of literacy—namely, a broadening of our traditional notion of literacy as being able to read and write a written language. This reconceptualization, emphasizing literate thought, requires a discussion of types of literacies and an understanding of constructs such as access and interpretation, illiteracy, and listening comprehension. Also discussed is the intertwinement of literate thought and Universal Design for Learning. The article concludes with questions for further exploration and dialogue.","PeriodicalId":431886,"journal":{"name":"Journal Human Research in Rehabilitation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"LITERATE THOUGHT: A COMMENTARY\",\"authors\":\"Peter V. Paul\",\"doi\":\"10.21554/hrr.092201\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A number of d/Deaf and hard of hearing students, as well as other students in special education programs, have difficulty accessing academic content information that, traditionally, has been presented in written language in print and electronically (e.g., textbooks, other school materials, etc.). Because this information represents what students need to know, there will be a large gap in their knowledge base, and students will not have ample opportunities to develop a high level of literate thought. That is, students will not be able to represent and manipulate information, solve problems, or develop other higher-level critical thinking skills. This article presents a case for the reconceptualization of literacy—namely, a broadening of our traditional notion of literacy as being able to read and write a written language. This reconceptualization, emphasizing literate thought, requires a discussion of types of literacies and an understanding of constructs such as access and interpretation, illiteracy, and listening comprehension. Also discussed is the intertwinement of literate thought and Universal Design for Learning. The article concludes with questions for further exploration and dialogue.\",\"PeriodicalId\":431886,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal Human Research in Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal Human Research in Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21554/hrr.092201\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal Human Research in Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21554/hrr.092201","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

许多聋哑和重听学生,以及其他特殊教育项目的学生,难以获取传统上以书面语言印刷和电子形式呈现的学术内容信息(例如,教科书,其他学校材料等)。因为这些信息代表了学生需要知道的东西,他们的知识基础会有很大的差距,学生不会有足够的机会培养高水平的文化思维。也就是说,学生将无法表达和处理信息,解决问题,或发展其他更高层次的批判性思维技能。这篇文章提出了一个重新定义读写能力的案例——也就是说,将我们传统的读写能力概念扩展为能够阅读和书写一种书面语言。这种重新概念化,强调识字思想,需要对识字的类型进行讨论,并理解诸如获取和解释、文盲和听力理解等结构。还讨论了读写思维与学习通用设计的相互关系。文章最后提出了一些有待进一步探讨和对话的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
LITERATE THOUGHT: A COMMENTARY
A number of d/Deaf and hard of hearing students, as well as other students in special education programs, have difficulty accessing academic content information that, traditionally, has been presented in written language in print and electronically (e.g., textbooks, other school materials, etc.). Because this information represents what students need to know, there will be a large gap in their knowledge base, and students will not have ample opportunities to develop a high level of literate thought. That is, students will not be able to represent and manipulate information, solve problems, or develop other higher-level critical thinking skills. This article presents a case for the reconceptualization of literacy—namely, a broadening of our traditional notion of literacy as being able to read and write a written language. This reconceptualization, emphasizing literate thought, requires a discussion of types of literacies and an understanding of constructs such as access and interpretation, illiteracy, and listening comprehension. Also discussed is the intertwinement of literate thought and Universal Design for Learning. The article concludes with questions for further exploration and dialogue.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信