Gee talks about the “seven building tasks of language”, with one of these building tasks being the act of “practices” (activities). There is a difference between one saying something and actually doing it, and this is how Gee describes the difference between simply informing someone of something, and showing them how something is done. Gee states, “By a “practice” I mean a socially recognized and institutionally or culturally supported endeavor that usually involves sequencing or combining actions in certain specified ways” (Gee 32). Using Gee’s logic, the act of practices is the most relevant when it comes to the science discourse. In science, without proof from tests and activities there is no solution to solving a hypothesis. These experiment results are vital to the research of scientists and the validation of their work. Similarly, in the work of Nair and Nair, they present to us the IMRAD format as means for the organization of a research paper. Using the formula, explaining results of the test, experiment, etc. is the most vital part of a paper. Nair and Nair explain, “Thus, the value of the paper depends on what is contained in this (Results) section, and it must be presented in an absolutely clear manner in just the right number of words, neither more nor less” (Nair and Nair 20). As Nair and Nair explain, this section of the paper presents new knowledge to the reader and is based off the results of the activity or practice the author preforms. The author must use a practice as stated by Gee to achieve these results. The practice used can be an experiment or test, leading to the description of the results to the reader.
According to Gee, it is difficult to achieve full literacy of a new Discourse. Literacy can be defined in numerous different ways of context, but has a specific meaning when it comes to Discourse. Gee explains, “Thus, I define “literacy” as the mastery of or fluent control over a secondary Discourse” (Gee 9). Using Gee’s logic, full literacy of a Discourse means a person has mastered the specific Discourse in which they are attempting to acquire. This mastery allows the person to be an active member of the Discourse and they can implement this Discourse into their values, beliefs, and actions. In the work of Christina Haas, there is a study she presented that takes place over the four year college career of a student named Eliza. Haas kept track of Eliza’s literacy and understanding of college level text and how she interacted with the text. In her first two years of school, she simply read text to retain information but she was able to teach herself new reading techniques and strategies as the years went on. Haas states, “By her senior year she often viewed texts as multiply connected-to authors and scientists, to other readers, and to historical circumstances-and even demonstrated some understanding of her own connections both to scientific texts (and, by implication, to their authors) and to the objects of her own research” (Haas 69). Eliza was able to achieve full literacy in the Discourse of college level understanding of text after four years in school. It was a gradual progression to reach this level in her academic career, but through perseverance and hard work, she was able to achieve it. She proves Gee’s idea of the difficulty of achieving literacy in a Discourse wrong as she prospered her senior year.
ENG110I
