Challenging the Boundaries Between School-sponsored & Vernacular Literacies. Urban Indigenous...

478

Challenging the Boundaries between School-sponsored and Vernacular Literacies: Urban Indigenous Teenage Girls Writing in an ‘At Risk’ Programme

Ellen GroteEdith Cowan University, Mount Lawley, Australia

Contemporary views of literacy as a wide range of sociocultural practices acknow-ledge a comprehensive account of adolescents’ literate lives, which includes previously unrecognised vernacular literacies. Contrasting descriptors such as official/unofficial and sanctioned/unsanctioned have been used to describe adolescent writing from different domains. While these distinctions are useful, the boundaries between them are subject to transgression. This paper draws on ethnographic data collected in a vocational education training programme for Year 10 students identified as being at educational risk. Adopting a communities of practice perspective, the study focuses on the school-sponsored writing practices of a group of Aboriginal English speaking girls. It describes how the girls recruited resources from communities of practice in which they participated outside the classroom. The findings indicate three ways in which the boundaries between school-sanctioned and vernacular literacy practices became disrupted, including: (1) the authorisation of unofficial practices; (2) the authorised and unauthorised infusion of unofficial content; and (3) the recruitment and accept-ance of teen writing styles in school-sponsored tasks. It is argued that challenging the boundaries between official and vernacular literacies may be not only inevitable, but worthy of encouragement as a strategic way of promoting the participation of disaf-fected students in school-sponsored literacy activities.

doi: 10.2167/le659.0

Keywords: adolescents, indigenous, literacy, literacy practices, multicultural, vernacular literacies

IntroductionCurrent understanding of literacy as a wide range of sociocultural practices

(e.g. Barton & Hamilton, 1998; Baynham, 1995; New London Group, 1996; Street, 1984) enables us to view adolescent literacy practices in more meaningful ways. In the context of school this perspective acknowledges traditional school litera-cies and also vernacular literacies, that is, literacy practices which have been adapted to suit the aims of those to whom the practices have been introduced (Carrington, 1997). Scholars have begun to explore the relationship between vernacular and school-sponsored literacy practices (e.g. Anderson & Irvine, 1993; Cummins & Sayers, 1997; Heath & Mangiola, 1991; Knobel, 1999; Myers, 1992), firstly, because it is important to know what adolescents can already do with literacy (Hinchman et al., 2003; Knobel, 1999), and secondly, because ver-

0950-0782/06/06 0478-15 $20.00/0 © 2006 E. GroteLANGUAGE AND EDUCATION Vol. 20, No. 6 , 2006

le20-6.indb 478 30/11/2006 09:44:30

Challenging the Boundaries 479

nacular literacies embrace the local knowledges valued by community members (Camitta, 1993; Heath, 1983; Malcolm et al., 2002a; Shuman, 1986, 1993).

While some argue for the need to make connections between out-of-school and school-sponsored literacies (e.g. Hull & Schultz, 2002; Knobel, 1999), others express caution regarding the recruitment of personal literacies into the classroom (Myers, 1992; Wallace, 2002). Many mainstream students see school literacy activities as a matter of ‘doing school’ (Knobel, 1999: 187), but continue to engage in them because of the value they, their families and/or like-minded peers attach to them (Knobel, 1999; Myers, 1992). For many Australian Indig-enous students, there are a number of complex social, economic and cultural factors that make it difficult for them to see the relevance of school in their personal lives (Beresford & Partington, 2003). The consistently poor levels of literacy achievement and participation of Indigenous students in Western Australia’s education system continue to provide evidence that the needs of this minority group remain unaddressed (Department of Education, Western Australia, 2003; Education Department Western Australia, 1996).

This paper draws on ethnographic data collected for a larger study (Grote, 2004) which investigated the vernacular and school-sponsored writing practices of a group of Indigenous girls enrolled in a Year 10 vocational education training programme designed to be sensitive to the needs of educationally at-risk students. Adopting a communities of practice (CoP) perspective (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998), the study focuses on the ways in which a group of Indig-enous girls participated in school-sponsored literacy activities in the classroom. The findings highlight three ways in which the distinctions between the girls’ school-sanctioned and vernacular literacy practices were challenged, including: (1) the authorisation of unofficial practices; (2) the authorised and unauthorised infusion of unofficial content; and (3) the recruitment and acceptance of teen writing styles in school-sponsored tasks. It is argued here that challenging the boundaries between official and vernacular literacies may be not only inevita-ble, but also a practical way of encouraging disaffected students to participate in school-sponsored literacy activities.

BackgroundExplorations into the writing practices of adolescents have contributed to a

comprehensive understanding of their literate lives. These investigations dem-onstrate how reading and writing are used to negotiate social meanings and identities, and enable teenagers to see themselves in relation to their commu-nities and the wider world (e.g. Camitta, 1993; Finders, 1996, 1997; Malcolm et al., 2002a; Moje, 2000; Shuman, 1986, 1993). Numerous descriptors such as official, public, sanctioned, recognised, authorised and/or standard have been used to contrast vernacular, unofficial, hidden, unsanctioned, unrecognised, unauthorised and/or non-standard literacy practices. The ways in which these terms have been applied are discussed below.

Camitta (1993) uses the descriptors ‘vernacular’ and ‘unofficial’ to refer to the notes, letters, diaries, journals and poems of the junior high school students in her study. She characterises this type of writing as ‘traditional and indigenous to the diverse cultural processes of communities as distinguished from [italics

le20-6.indb 479 30/11/2006 09:44:30

480 Language and Education

added] the uniform, inflexible standards of institutions’ (1993: 228–9). Camitta’s definition suggests that these practices fall into dichotomous categories; however, the students’ vernacular writing exhibited characteristics of academic texts, e.g. intertextuality in the form of ‘mosaic’ or ‘patchwork’ (p. 239) texts in which students recruited materials from other sources. They also manipulated institutionalised genres, sometimes combining them, as in the ‘poem/letter’ incorporating ‘poetic diction’ (p. 240) which can be associated with both tradi-tional literary conventions and popular culture.

In a study of the literacy practices of suburban Euro-American girls, Finders (1997: 24) also appears to advocate a dichotomous relationship between ‘two literate systems’: ‘sanctioned literacies’ are defined as practices which are ‘rec-ognized, circulated, and sanctioned by adults in authority’. In contrast, the term ‘literate underlife’ (after Goffman, 1961) is used to describe activities ‘designed and enacted to challenge and disrupt the official expectations’ (Finders, 1997: 24). In addition, Finders (1996: 97) makes reference to Scott’s (1990) terminol-ogy ‘hidden’ and ‘public transcripts’ in her analysis of literacy and power in the school context. Although Finders suggests that these are divergent concepts, Scott (1990) points out that they can be equally envisioned as positioned at opposite ends of a continuum, varying according to the extent to which expres-sion needs to be censored.

Moje (2000: 651) employs the descriptor ‘unsanctioned’ in her study of the graffiti, tags, hand signs, poems, stories, journal entries and letters written by gang-associated youths in Salt Lake City’s ethnic communities. But Moje extends the notion of vernacular literacy practices to include semiotics such as clothing, colour, hair and make-up (for girls) which support meanings expressed in written texts. Juxtaposed by symbols, these texts are seen as powerful ‘tools’ to commu-nicate social meaning and values, construct ethnic and gendered identities, and to position gang-associated youth in relation to the local mainstream society. In a similar manner to the adolescents in Camitta’s 1993 study, these youths drew on adult genres to make meaning, as in their ‘gangsta’ prayers which parodied a text structure highly valued by the local dominant church culture.

In Malcolm et al.’s (2002a: 11) study of urban Indigenous youth in Perth, Western Australia, the terms ‘vernacular’ and ‘unrecognized’ are used to describe the community-based literacy practices which employ ‘non-standard varieties of English [which] are often either unnoticed, ignored, or condemned as subversive acts’. Graffiti was the most prominent of the latter and sometimes included playful texts involving intertextual processes that enhanced meanings and, as mentioned above, are analogous to those found in academic literacies. For example, the graffiti text ‘NWA Nyoongars with Attitude’ (Malcolm et al., 2002a: 78) invokes the name of the African American hip hop group Niggaz With Attitude to communicate an affiliation with international youth culture as well as a local ethnic identity. Although vernacular and school literacies are viewed as distinct entities, Malcolm and colleagues propose inviting vernacular literacy skills into the classroom to approximate a more ‘inclusive curriculum’ (p. 103).

Shuman (1986, 1993) appears more cautious about characterising the rela-tionship between vernacular and school-sponsored writing in her study of collaborative adolescent writing. Although she uses the term ‘vernacular’ to describe written texts which value ‘local, rather than academic, standards’

le20-6.indb 480 30/11/2006 09:44:30


(1993: 267), she cautions that a lack of correspondence between standard and non-standard practices should not be construed as a ‘binary opposition’ because ‘privileged channels and/or genres’ (1993: 267) must also be consid-ered. Although Shuman is concerned with issues of power in relation to orality, writing, and entitlement (to speak or write), her assertion acknowledges a complex relationship between vernacular and standardised literacy practices. This was evident in the writing that students did for fun, e.g. ‘The Constitution of Love’, or to take a more authoritative stance, e.g. a petition addressed to the principal protesting an unpopular decision. The fact that vernacular texts share attributes and processes found in standardised literacy practices suggests that the borders between the two are less distinct than the categorical terms imply. This paper focuses on school-sponsored texts and practices to provide additional evidence of how the boundaries between vernacular and school-sponsored lit-eracies were disrupted in terms of practices, content, and language use.

Theoretical FrameworkTo facilitate an understanding of the nature of literacy practices within the

sociocultural context of a classroom and to focus the analysis at the level of the girls’ group, a CoP perspective (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998) was adopted. This model offers an alternative understanding of learning as par-ticipatory social practices in which practice is seen as ‘a process by which we can experience the world and our engagement in it as meaningful’ (Wenger, 1998: 51). A CoP is characterised by Wenger as comprising three dimensions: mutual engagement, joint enterprise and a shared repertoire. The ‘shared reper-toire’ which manifests itself in the ‘routines, words, tools, ways of doing things, stories, gestures, symbols, genres, actions, or concepts’ (p. 83) is seen to emerge as members participate together and develop relationships that enable them to work on a common endeavour.

Wenger maintains that CoPs do not exist in isolation, but rather interact with other CoPs in complex ways. Although ‘boundaries’ (p. 103) form between them, the process of ‘brokering’ (p. 109) facilitates the communication of ideas. In the context of the school, teachers perform the critical role of ‘brokers’ as they mediate the exchange of cultural knowledge between the CoPs of the admin-istration, adult mainstream society and classroom so that ‘new possibilities of meaning’ (p. 109) can be introduced. In the present study, the girls’ collectivity was viewed as a small CoP embedded within the CoP of the classroom. The practices the girls adopted were influenced by the CoPs of the school as well as the Indigenous (and other) adolescent groups they participated in outside the classroom.

The Study

Research settingThe study took place in a school located on the outskirts of Perth, Western

Australia in a community of low socioeconomic status. There were approxi-mately 835 students in the school, 10% of whom were Indigenous, a relatively high proportion for a metropolitan school. The upper school (Years 11 and 12)

le20-6.indb 481 30/11/2006 09:44:30


had a large vocational education training programme. In 2001 an adapted version of this was piloted as the WAVE1 (Work and Vocational Education) programme for those Year 10 students, aged 14 to 16, who were identified as being at risk of leaving school with no marketable skills. The programme brochure described its aim as providing ‘a stimulating and supportive alternative that leads to post-Year 10 options, TAFE [Technical and Further Education] or employment’. In 2002, the second year of the programme’s development, permission was granted by staff, students and parents to allow the study to take place.

ParticipantsStudents were invited into the WAVE programme for reasons that fell along

gendered lines. With few exceptions, the girls were accepted because of frequent truanting while the boys were admitted for behavioural issues. Five Indigenous girls, Shauntay, Kyandra, Melissa, Ambryn, and Larissa were the focal group of the study. Another Indigenous girl, Rachel, was a member of the collectivity for the first term, but left school. All six Indigenous girls spoke Aboriginal English, a non-standard dialect of Australian English (Kaldor & Malcolm, 1991) as their home language. There were also boys in the WAVE class, but their writing practices were not considered in the study.

Although some of the girls had been friends before the year began, it was not friendship that brought them into the WAVE classroom. The group would be classified as a ‘public’ rather than ‘private’ (Hey, 1997: 40) collectivity because it was on the basis of need that they were accepted into the programme. Admission was determined by the three WAVE teachers in consultation with two school-based Aboriginal and Islander Education Officers who were members of the local Indigenous community.

Data collection and analysisThe study took place over the course of one academic year. Five data collec-

tion techniques were triangulated: (1) participant observation (265 hours); (2) the collection of 124 school-sponsored and 152 vernacular written texts; (3) oral interviews with teachers; (4) written questionnaires eliciting the girls’ percep-tions of their out-of-school literacy practices; and (5) a writing activity using prompts to collect attitudinal data. For the purposes of this paper, however, I draw mainly on the first three data sets: participant observation field notes to provide background details of the programme and writing practices, written texts for an analysis of language use, and teacher interviews for their perspec-tive of tasks.

My role as participant observer could be characterised as ranging from ‘passive’ to ‘moderate’ (Spradley, 1980, 58) because I sat in the back of the classroom, taking notes as an onlooker. I did not directly participate in classroom activities, although I spoke with students informally. I also engaged with par-ticipants when asking their permission to photocopy texts or print out email and Power-Point presentations. Permission was usually granted. The girls also offered private writing when no request was made. Electronic versions of data were entered into the QSR N6 software programme. Sections of texts were coded as sub-themes under six organising topics: focus group profiles, writing practices, language use, gender, cultures, and teacher profiles.

le20-6.indb 482 30/11/2006 09:44:30


In addition to triangulating the different data sets to confirm information (Lincoln & Guba, 1985), the participants were consulted regularly. However, as in all eth-nographic studies conducted on communities by an outsider, I was constrained in my access to insider meanings shared by the girls. As a non-Indigenous adult researcher, discussing the girls’ literacy practices and language use with them was not always productive. Although I felt that I was able to establish a relationship of trust with the girls, based on my expressed and apparent lack of authority and unwillingness to report observed violations of classroom/school rules, there were undoubtedly power issues that remained. Furthermore, the Western academic practice of making language and literacy practices into objects of inquiry is a cross-cultural challenge faced by non-Indigenous researchers when working with Australian Indigenous participant-informants (e.g. Coombs et al., 1983; Malcolm et al., 1999). An additional problem in eliciting information is that direct questions are uncommon and considered impolite in the Aboriginal English speech community (e.g. Eades, 1982). Although it was impossible to completely overcome these problems, they were somewhat mitigated by consulting the Abo-riginal and Islander Education Officers, who had had training and experience in cross-cultural communication and could provide Indigenous understandings of language and literacy practices. Although the interpretations of members of the same speech community do not necessarily converge, their insights were taken into account. (For previous uses of this ‘two-way’ research approach, see Malcolm et al., 1999, 2002a, 2002b).

Findings/Discussion

Literacy in the WAVE classroomLiteracy development was promoted in the WAVE programme as an important

aspect of its design. Although the timetable dedicated only two hours per week towards literacy instruction, literate activities were integrated into other com-ponents. For example, every Monday morning students wrote journal entries to reflect on the past week and set obtainable goals, an activity monitored by teachers, though students’ texts remained private. The students’ Health Studies and Current Issues projects required the use of library books and the Internet; and the Life Skills unit used two class sets of workbooks (Netolicky, 1996, 1998) featuring short readings and open-ended questions about dilemmas faced by troubled teenagers. Computer literacy skills were allocated two hours per week, but were also a significant component of the optional business and tourism voca-tional education unit, which the girls (and one non-Indigenous boy) participated in for three hours per week. While these learning activities were officially estab-lished to enable students to meet curriculum requirements, the programme was flexible. Table 1 summarises the main literacy activities of the first term.

Issues relating to language and literacy practices were never explicitly discussed in terms of what was official or unofficial; however, students and teachers acted in ways that suggested a distinction did exist. For example, students raised questions about writing requirements for school-sponsored tasks. They were also observed concealing personal email and letters when they sensed a teacher was looking. If students were caught writing private messages during class activities, they were asked to put them away or to close

le20-6.indb 483 30/11/2006 09:44:30


the email programme. While the distinction between private and school writing was respected by students and teachers in theory, in practice there was seepage across boundaries. Analysis of participant observation field notes and text data indicate that this was particularly salient in terms of practices, content and language choices which did not conform to standardised conventions. Although there was leakage across the boundaries between vernacular and traditional school-sponsored literacy practices in both directions (Grote, 2004), this dis-cussion focuses on school-sponsored activities. These are described in terms of authorised unofficial practices in relation to a writing task, the authorised and unauthorised infusion of unofficial content, and the recruitment and acceptance of teen writing styles. The descriptions of writing events and students’ texts were selected on the basis of typicality with regard to routine practices, content and language features.

Authorised unofficial practicesThe WAVE girls’ Monday morning journals provide clear examples of the

authorisation of unofficial practices in terms of their status. Students were issued with exercise books for journal writing and instructed to keep them in classroom binders. However, the prevailing procedure within the girls’ CoP was to either keep journal entries in their bags or take them home. While writing entries, the girls usually sat together around a table in the back of the room discussing past and future weekend events. Melissa’s texts were typically minimal, non-reflec-tive recounts using fairly standard English, as shown in Extract 1. (To facilitate reading and the discussion, longer extracts of the girls’ writing are divided into numbered idea units [Chafe, 1982]).

Extract 1: Melissa’s journal entry 1 On the weekend, I went to my friends house. 2 We were going to go to the movies

Table 1 WAVE class literacy tasks for Term 1

Type of Literacy

Tasks

Traditional print

Weekly Monday morning journal entries

Short answers to questions in the workbooks Teenage Survival Guide (Netolicky, 1996) and Teenagers Learning About Life (Netolicky, 1998)

Five-Task Literacy Project: (term long)1. critical evaluation of a website2. business letter3. informal letter4. word sleuth (word search puzzle) on a topic of student’s choice5. poster on a topic of student’s choice

Résumé building tasks

Applications and form filling related to work experience placements

Computer PowerPoint presentation on an admired person (computer skills class)

PowerPoint presentation on a country of interest (tourism)

le20-6.indb 484 30/11/2006 09:44:31


3 but we ended up staying home! 4 Then at 8.00 we went for a walk 5 and ended up sleeping over another friends house . . . 6 On Sunday I went to go see my Best friend 7 – who I havent seen in 3 weeks.

Despite Melissa’s fairly standard English grammar, she tended to dispense with standard writing conventions, in particular capitalisation and punctua-tion. Melissa capitalised the proper noun ‘Sunday’, but contrary to convention, also the common adjective ‘Best’. There is an absence of apostrophes showing possession in the word ‘friend’ (lines 1 and 5) and the contraction of have and not (line 7). Perhaps the most unconventional punctuation is the use of a series of full stops at the end of line 5. The practice of using a series of full stops to separate clauses is one that appears to have crossed over from her vernacular email writing. An example of one of these texts is shown in Extract 2.

Extract 2: Melissa’s email 1 wass up? 2 so did u go 2 karaz party on Monday nite? 3 i didnt 4 . . . i heard it was pretty good! 5 guess what 6 bonnie was wearing my jumper . . . 7 no thanx 2 u!

While Extract 1 deviates from standard writing conventions in terms of punc-tuation and capitalisation, by contrast, Extract 2 shows minimal adherence, as would be expected in an email text written to a friend.

Kyandra’s journal writing was similar to Melissa’s in her minimal use of language. One entry was a mere five words: ‘On the weekend I did nothing’. Unlike Melissa’s journal entries, however, Kyandra’s texts showed more seepage from vernacular practices, particularly in her use of colloquial language. This is illustrated in Extract 3, which was written following an eventful weekend when Kyandra had something to write and reflect on.

Extract 3: Kyandra’s journal entry 1 well on friday I did Jack shit 2 ON saturday night some one broke into my house 3 + trashed my room 4 + tryed to burn it down 5 the pigs the dumb sluts didn’t do anything 6 so I stayed up all night with a knife in my hand 7 waiting for them to come back 8 but I’M over it now 9 I don’t mind 10 I got my pay back for all the fucking shit I ever did.

The appearance of unconventional punctuation and capitalisation in both girls’ journal entries (Extracts 1 and 3) and the swearing and colloquial language in Kyandra’s texts indicate that the girls interpreted the private school-sponsored

le20-6.indb 485 30/11/2006 09:44:31


task as one that would allow for such practices. With the exception of the final full stop in line 10, Kyandra dispensed with punctuation and her use of capital letters was irregular, e.g. ‘ON’ (line 2) and the letter m in ‘I’M’ (line 8). In regard to Kyandra’s use of ‘shit’ (line 1) and ‘fucking shit’ (line 10) it is relevant that swearing was frequently discussed in relation to school rules and, in terms of these rules, considered ‘inappropriate’. Yet, swearing was very much a feature of the WAVE students’ discourse, where explanations are that it is an acceptable Aboriginal English discourse practice in many Aboriginal homes and communi-ties (Langton, 1988), and ‘inappropriate’ language in school is common among Australian adolescents (Oliver et al., 2003).

Kyandra’s use of ‘trashed’ (line 3) and the derogatory references to police, i.e. ‘pigs’ and ‘dumb sluts’ (line 5), are examples of colloquial expressions more common in adolescent speech than in school-sanctioned texts. While colloquial language is normally discouraged in school-sponsored writing, its presence in this text can be explained by the very purpose of the activity described by the teacher, i.e. to provide opportunities for students to externalise emotional responses to weekend events. The fact that journal entries remained under student control might also have facilitated an understanding that they could ignore standardised writing conventions and use expressive colloquial language.

The inclusion of swear words and colloquial language in Kyandra’s texts and the rejection of standardised writing conventions in both Melissa and Kyandra’s journal entries provide linguistic (and graphic) evidence of authorised unofficial practices (e.g. swearing among Indigenous and non-Indigenous adolescents) seeping into official writing practices in the WAVE classroom, and thereby blurring the distinction between vernacular and official writing practices. From a CoP perspective, the CoPs of Aboriginal communities and adolescents at large were reflected in the CoP of the focal group. Further, the inclusion of ‘inappropriate’ language in written rather than spoken texts is explained by the inherently ambiguous nature of the journal task, a school-sponsored task for which writing was respected as being private.

Authorised and Unauthorised Infusion of Unofficial Content

Set tasksProviding opportunities for students to choose topics for their computer

skills projects facilitated the recruitment of what is traditionally viewed as non-academic content into the official arena, most notably in the form of popular culture. In a project aimed at developing skills associated with the Microsoft PowerPoint programme, the teacher instructed the students to research an admired person on the Internet and to record handwritten notes and plans in computer class journals. PowerPoint presentations were subsequently assessed by the student writer, fellow classmates and the teacher on the basis of the docu-mentation of the process, design, time management and the demonstration of skills which contributed to the final product. In addition to teaching computer and oral language skills, the teacher explained that the project gave him the opportunity to get to know individual student’s interests to facilitate the devel-opment of positive relationships.

le20-6.indb 486 30/11/2006 09:44:31


Hip hop celebrities were chosen as topics by all but one girl. Their choices reflected/ constructed their affiliation with American hip hop culture observed in other practices in and out of class. The teacher sanctioned the use of hip hop celebrities as topics and authorised students to search for websites on them. However, while the teacher was helping a student or was distracted by school business, the girls took liberties to download music videos, games and sites unrelated to their presentations. Allowing students to choose hip hop celeb-rities, as opposed to the more traditional icons, such as politicians, scientists, social activists or literary figures, is somewhat controversial. From this tradi-tional perspective, the use of popular culture celebrities as the focus of a school task provides evidence for the authorised infusion of unofficial content. The girls’ surreptitious appropriation of class time to download sites which did not directly contribute to their projects can be viewed as the unauthorised infusion of unofficial content into classroom activities. While the infusion may be seen as a classroom management issue, it also appears to be an inevitable reality of class-rooms in which students outnumber the teacher who is expected to monitor the group while attending to individual student needs or routine school business.

In another class, the teacher allowed students to choose their topics for the five-task literacy projects shown in Table 1. In response, the girls chose hip hop themes. In the word sleuths that Shauntay, Melissa, Kyandra, and Rachel designed, each girl concealed hip hop celebrities’ names in a lettered grid. Kyandra, Ambryn, and Shauntay applied the hip hop theme in their posters and Shauntay used it in her informal and business letters. The inclusion of hip hop themes in literacy tasks is generally not advocated in traditional school literacy practices and may be seen as additional evidence of the authorised infusion of unofficial content in a set task.

The use of unofficial content in the form of popular culture remains contro-versial. Popular culture as a classroom resource has been advocated by some (e.g. Buckingham & Sefton-Green, 1994; Doecke, 2003) and criticised by those who argue that ‘it is not our role to nurture those sites’ (Wallace, 2002: 111). Yet it seems that being allowed to choose their topics encouraged the WAVE girls’ participation and made it possible for them to appropriate the activities and make them their own. From a CoP perspective, the girls’ enthusiasm for intro-ducing content associated with hip hop culture reflected their membership in the adolescent CoPs they participated in outside of school where aspects of hip hop culture appeared to be valued commodities (cf. Cutler, 1999).

GraffitiAnother way in which unofficial practices permeated the boundaries of

school-sponsored practices was the way in which graffiti was written on school-issued materials during class time. Inscriptions often featured the names of hip hop icons and local boys such as the following which appeared on the inside of Kyandra’s file cover: ‘Melissa ♥z tupac + Nelly + JaRule + Andrew + Sam D. – All ♥ly sings’. The heart symbol (♥) was used to represent the word love, and according to the Aboriginal and Islander Education Officers, the expres-sion ‘lovely thing’ or the alternative Aboriginal English pronunciation ‘lovely sing’ was frequently used by local Indigenous girls to refer to boys of interest. The substitution of the alveolar fricative [s] for the dental fricative [θ] occurs

le20-6.indb 487 30/11/2006 09:44:31


in the speech of some Aboriginal English speakers (Malcolm, 2003). Its alpha-betic representation in the written expression ‘All ♥ly sings’ illustrates how the girls used writing to construct an Indigenous identity, while the inclusion of the names of male hip hop celebrities (and local boys) communicates heterosexual feminine identities and an alignment with international youth culture.

From a CoP point of view, the construction of multiple identities through writing practices may be seen to be influenced by the CoPs they belonged to outside the classroom. These would include the local Aboriginal English speaking community and their adolescent peer groups which aligned them with hip hop culture. The construction of heterosexual feminine identities may be seen to have been influenced by these CoPs as well as the mainstream school culture in which students are socialised into the traditional ‘heterosexual and hierarchical social order’ (Eckert, 2003: 383). The construction of multifaceted identities was common in other vernacular texts the girls produced during appropriated class time, e.g. personal email (Grote, 2005). The fact that unof-ficial practices took place during school time on school-issued materials (e.g. graffiti) or using school equipment (e.g. email programmes) provides other evidence for the unauthorised infusion of unofficial content.

The Recruitment and Acceptance of Teen Writing Styles in School Tasks

Discussion about language use in the classroom was part of the daily WAVE classroom experience, but (as mentioned above) it usually focused on rules regarding ‘inappropriate’ language and was rarely in reference to written work. One exception was when the teenage life skills workbooks (Netolicky, 1996, 1998) were first introduced, and one girl asked if full sentences were required. When the teacher established that this was not the case, it seemed to signal that informal writing conventions could be used. The girls not only responded to questions using short phrases, but also employed other non-standard writing conventions characteristic of a teen style. For instance, in her response to a workbook question about what would make the reader happier, Shauntay wrote: ‘MY FAMILY ♥ing me & probaly going shopping most of the time’. Hence, Shauntay was inconsistent in applying the conventional rules of capitalisation, spelling and standard English grammar. However, not all her non-standard practices can be attributed to her developmental stage of acqui-sition, inattention, or resistance to the standard; rather, her writing reflected a teen style.

In response to a question in the same workbook regarding whether or not two story characters had really stolen items from a shop, Shauntay wrote, ‘No because they are Just doggs to the narrator. and they just wanted her to get caught from the guy at the store’. Shauntay’s use of the double g in ‘doggs’ was found elsewhere in her email and letters to peers; it is the spelling used in hip hop celebrity Snoop Doggy Dogg’s name. From a CoP viewpoint, Shauntay’s adoption of this spelling for a school-sponsored task illustrates the influences of the adolescent CoPs that she belonged to outside of school which aligned with hip hop culture. Although the act of engaging in the school task posi-tioned her as a student, her language choice enabled her to claim ownership of

le20-6.indb 488 30/11/2006 09:44:31


the task by re-positioning herself as an affiliate member of international youth culture in which the writing conventions of mainstream culture are frequently subverted.

There was other evidence of informal teen writing conventions, which can be theorised as being part of the girls’ ‘shared repertoire’ (Wenger, 1998). For instance, the teacher said nothing about Rachel, Kyandra and Shauntay using the abbreviation ‘INFO’ to substitute for the word information on slide headings in their respective PowerPoint presentations. In Shauntay’s logbook of skills learned at her work experience placement at the local social services office, she recorded ‘debt stuff’ as one of the tasks she had performed that day. From a CoP perspective these examples of informal language use in school-sponsored texts can be seen as influenced by the adolescent CoPs they belonged to outside of school. Embedding informal abbreviations (e.g. ‘INFO’) and colloquial language (e.g. ‘stuff’) in school texts may be seen as further evidence of the recruitment of vernacular language practices, specifically teen writing, into school-sponsored texts in which standard Australian English and its associated formal conven-tions are usually expected.

It should be noted that not all practices and texts exhibited the features described above, particularly when out-of-school reader-audiences were involved. For example, supervised editing took place when students drafted articles for a newsletter distributed to Indigenous families and when they prepared insurance forms and applications for their work experience placements. However, for teacher-assessed tasks there is substantial evidence that the boundaries between vernacular and school-sponsored practices became porous.

While the practice of challenging the boundaries may be inevitable and possibly strategic in an ‘at risk’ programme, it is important to maintain a view of the multiliterate skills that students will need to succeed in their post-school lives (Elkins & Luke, 1999; Gee, 2000; Heller, 2000; Lankshear, 1997). Students in pro-grammes such as this could benefit from activities explicitly aimed at extending their existing levels of language awareness. While discussions about ‘appropri-ate’ language use in school may be necessary in the context of the institution, students could benefit from a broader understanding of language awareness. To extend their language awareness, teachers in their role as boundary brokers might guide students in an exploration of language use within different CoPs within the community at large (cf. Anderson & Irvine, 1993; Heath, 1983; Heath & Mangiola, 1991). Examining the language use in their work experience settings and other workplace contexts could provide students in vocational education training programmes a good place to start.

ConclusionThis paper has attempted to demonstrate that while the terms referring to

vernacular and official literacy practices are useful descriptors, in the context of a CoP of Indigenous girls enrolled in a programme for ‘at risk’ students, these categories were not always distinct. Many of their school-sponsored writing practices seemed to be hybridised as they appeared to privilege meaning-making and identity projection rather than strictly adhering to standardised language

le20-6.indb 489 30/11/2006 09:44:31


use and writing conventions. In light of the fact that engaging these students in school-sponsored writing activities was not only a challenge, but also the reason they were brought into the programme, these issues were not seen by teachers as top priority in the tasks described here. The study suggests that allowing the distinctions between school-sponsored and vernacular practices to be challenged might enable students to claim ownership of their schoolwork, communicate social identities and make school a more personally meaningful and relevant place to be.

I would argue that fostering the development of standardised language and literacy practices should remain a long-term objective (Wallace, 1999, 2002), but it should not come at the expense of the immediate needs of disaffected students. Adapting what counts as ‘doing school’ to the needs and personal interests of ‘at risk’ students might keep some of them engaged in literacy learning activities. Facilitating participation long enough so that they can develop existing competencies further and build confidence in their abilities (Smith & Wilhelm, 2004) can encourage students to remain at school beyond the compulsory years. Indeed, three of the five Indigenous girls stayed to complete Year 12 in an extended enhanced programme, with one enrolled in a university bridging course following graduation. Romanticising the value of either ver-nacular or school-sanctioned literacy practices is neither useful nor constructive (Anderson & Irvine, 1993), particularly for students who have become disen-chanted by school experiences and marginalised by the school. However, a more inclusive approach to literacy practices would actively acknowledge what students can already do with language and literacy. By recognising students’ vernacular literacy skills, teachers can extend existing competencies toward a wider range of the multiliterate skills and understandings students will need to participate in the CoPs of further education and/or the workplace.

CorrespondenceAny correspondence should be directed to Dr Ellen Grote, Edith Cowan Uni-

versity, Centre for Social Research, 2 Bradford Street, Mount Lawley, WA 6050, Australia ([email protected]).

Notes1. Pseudonyms are substituted for real names throughout this paper; those referring to

the girls were suggested by the participants.

ReferencesAnderson, G.L. and Irvine, P. (1993) Informing critical literacy with ethnography. In

C. Lankshear and P.L. McLaren (eds) Critical Literacy: Politics, Praxis, and the Postmod-ern (pp. 81–104). Albany: State University of New York Press.

Barton, D. and Hamilton, M. (1998) Local Literacies: Reading and Writing in One Community. London: Routledge.

Baynham, M. (1995) Literacy Practices: Investigating Literacy in Social Contexts. London: Longman.

Beresford, Q. and Partington, G. (eds) (2003) Reform and Resistance in Aboriginal Education. Crawley, WA: University of Western Australia Press.

Buckingham, D. and Sefton-Green, J. (1994) Cultural Studies Goes to School: Reading and Teaching Popular Media. London: Taylor and Francis.

Camitta, M. (1993) Vernacular writing: Varieties of literacy among Philadelphia high

le20-6.indb 490 30/11/2006 09:44:31


school students. In B.V. Street (ed.) Cross-Cultural Approaches to Literacy (pp. 228–46). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Carrington, L.D. (1997) Social contexts conducive to the vernacularization of literacy. In A. Tabouret-Keller, R.B. Le Page, P. Gardner-Chloros and G. Varro (eds) Vernacular Literacy: A Re-evaluation (pp. 82–92). Oxford: Clarendon.

Chafe, W.L. (1982) Integration and involvement in speaking, writing, and oral literature. In D. Tannen (ed.) Spoken and Written Language: Exploring Orality and Literacy (pp. 35–53). Norwood: Ablex.

Coombs, H.C., Brandl, M.M. and Snowdon, W.E. (1983) A Certain Heritage: Programs for and by Aboriginal Families in Australia. Canberra: Centre for Resource and Environmen-tal Studies, Australian National University.

Cummins, J. and Sayers, D. (1997) Brave New Schools: Challenging Cultural Illiteracy Through Global Learning Networks. New York: St Martin’s.

Cutler, C.A. (1999) Yorkville crossing: White teens, hip hop and African American English. Journal of Sociolinguistics 3 (4), 428–42.

Department of Education, Western Australia (2003) Student Achievement in English in Western Australian Government Schools: Reading 1992–2002/Writing 1992–2002. Perth, WA: Department of Education, Western Australia.

Doecke, B. (2003) Popular culture: A resource for writing in secondary English class-rooms. Paper presented at the Fourth International Conference of the Association for the Improvement of Mother Tongue Education, Lisboa, Portugal.

Eades, D. (1982) ‘You gotta know how to talk . . . ’: Information seeking in South-East Queensland Aboriginal society. Australian Journal of Linguistics 2, 61–82.

Eckert, P. (2003) Language and gender in adolescence. In J. Holmes and M. Meyerhoff (eds) The Handbook of Language and Gender (pp. 381–400). Malden: Blackwell.

Education Department of Western Australia. (1996) Monitoring Standards in Education. Perth, WA: Education Department of Western Australia.

Elkins, J. and Luke, A. (1999) Redefining adolescent literacies. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 43 (3), 212–15.

Finders, M.J. (1996) ‘Just girls’: Literacy and allegiance in junior high school. Written Communication 13 (1), 93–115.

Finders, M.J. (1997) Just Girls: Hidden Literacies and Life in Junior High. New York: Teachers College.

Gee, J.P. (2000) Teenagers in new times: A new literacy studies perspective. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 43 (5), 412–20.

Grote, E. (2004) An ethnography of writing: The writing practices of female Australian indigenous adolescents at school. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Edith Cowan University.

Grote, E. (2005) ‘Tell me the goss ok’: Urban indigenous girls (re)constructing norms, values and identities through email at school. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 28 (1), 1–18.

Heath, S.B. (1983) Ways with Words: Language, Life and Work in Communities and Class-rooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Heath, S.B. and Mangiola, L. (1991) Children of Promise: Literate Activity in Linguistically and Culturally Diverse Classrooms. Washington, DC: National Education Association.

Heller, A.B. (2000) Reconceptualizing the literacies in adolescents’ lives. Journal of Adoles-cent and Adult Literacy 43 (7), 677–9.

Hey, V. (1997) The Company She Keeps. Buckingham: Open University Press.Hinchman, K.A., Alvermann, D.E., Boyd, F.B., Brozo, W.G. and Vacca, R.T. (2003) Sup-

porting older students’ in- and out-of-school literacies. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 47 (4), 302–10.

Hull, G. and Schultz, K. (eds) (2002) School’s Out! Bridging Out-of-School Literacies with Classroom Practice. New York: Teachers College.

Kaldor, S. and Malcolm, I.G. (1991) Aboriginal English – an overview. In S. Romaine (ed.) Language in Australia (pp. 67–83). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Knobel, M. (1999) Everyday Literacies: Students, Discourse, and Social Practice. New York: Peter Lang.

le20-6.indb 491 30/11/2006 09:44:31


Langton, M. (1988) Medicine Square. In I. Keen (ed.) Being Black: Aboriginal Cultures in ‘Settled’ Australia (pp. 201–25). Canberra: Aboriginal Studies.

Lankshear, C. (1997) Changing Literacies. Buckingham: Open University Press.Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Lincoln, Y.S. and Guba, E.G. (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Malcolm, I.G. (2003) Simplification, nativisation and restructuring: Linguistic processes

impacting on indigenous education. Paper presented at the 8th Annual Round Table Conference, Centre for Applied Language and Literacy Research, Edith Cowan Uni-versity, Perth, Western Australia.

Malcolm, I.G., Haig, Y., Königsberg, P., Rochecouste, J., Collard, G., Hill, A. and Cahill, R. (1999) Towards More User-Friendly Education for Speakers of Aboriginal English. Perth: Centre for Applied Language and Literacy Research, Edith Cowan University and Education Department of Western Australia.

Malcolm, I.G., Königsberg, P., Collard, G., Hill, A., Grote, E., Sharifian, F., Kickett, A. and Sahanna, E. (2002a) Umob Deadly: Recognized and Unrecognized Literacy Skills of Aborigi-nal Youth. Mount Lawley, WA: Centre for Applied Language and Literacy Research and Institute for the Service Professions, Edith Cowan University.

Malcolm, I.G., Grote, E., Eggington, L. and Sharifian, F. (2002b) The Representation of Abo-riginal English in School Literacy Materials. Final Report. Mount Lawley, WA: Centre for Applied Language and Literacy Research, Edith Cowan University.

Moje, E.B. (2000) ‘To be part of the story’: The literacy practices of gangsta adolescents. Teachers College Record 102 (3), 651–90.

Myers, J. (1992). The social contexts of school and personal literacy. Reading Research Quarterly 27, 296–332.

Netolicky, C. (1996) The Teenage Survival Guide: For Teenagers, Parents, Teachers and Youth Workers. Perth, WA: Australian ArtMarx.

Netolicky, C. (1998) Teenagers Learning About Life: Cross-curricula Outcome Driven Lifeskills, Ethics and Citizenship Education. Perth, WA: Australian ArtMarx.

New London Group (1996) A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review 66 (1), 60–92.

Oliver, R., Haig, Y. and Rochecouste, J. (2003) Oral Language Assessment and the Communi-cative Competence of Adolescent Students. Mount Lawley: Centre for Applied Language and Literacy Research, Edith Cowan University.

Scott, J.C. (1990) Domination and the Arts of Resistance: Hidden Transcripts. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Shuman, A. (1986) Storytelling Rights: The Uses of Oral and Written Texts by Urban Adoles-cents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Shuman, A. (1993) Collaborative writing: Appropriating power or reproducing authority? In B. Street (ed.) Cross-cultural Approaches to Literacy (pp. 247–72). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Smith, M. and Wilhelm, J.D. (2004) ‘I just like being good at it’: The importance of com-petence in the literate lives of young men. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 47 (6), 454–61.

Spradley, J.P. (1980) Participant Observation. Sydney: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Street, B.V. (1984) Literacy in Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.Wallace, C. (1999) Critical language awareness: Key principles for a course in critical

reading. Language Awareness 8 (2), 98–110.Wallace, C. (2002) Local literacies and global literacy. In D. Block and D. Cameron (eds)

Globalization and Language Teaching (pp. 101–14). London: Routledge.Wenger, E. (1998) Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

le20-6.indb 492 30/11/2006 09:44:31

Challenging the Boundaries Between School-sponsored & Vernacular Literacies. Urban Indigenous...

Documents

Transcript of Challenging the Boundaries Between School-sponsored & Vernacular Literacies. Urban Indigenous...