Initially reading the assigned articles, content, content area, and disciplinary literacy were vague terms that seemed to run together as one in my mind. It has now come to my attention that although they are connected, they are, in fact, separate terms, but all in all, essential to learning. Content, in brief, is “what the words are all about” (Wolsey & Lapp, p. 6). Content is “what” you are reading. In every word and paragraph, some type of content is being conveyed to you, the reader. Content area goes a little broader – it incorporates content. It is the different subjects in school like science, mathematics, English, etc. As stated in Wolsey & Lapp’s article, content area is the “’how’ of content as it appears in schools.” Disciplinary literacy incorporates learning specific content, all while enhancing reading and writing strategies to broaden the knowledge and understanding of a subject. As stated in Wolsey & Lapp’s article, “power of knowledge comes from being part of its production, rather than from merely possessing it.”
With this, disciplinary literacy encourages people to be “metadiscursive.” Metadiscursivity occurs when “people not only engage in many discourses but also know how and why they are engaging” so these engagements can eventually be used to broaden their knowledge in not only schools, but in every-day-life (Moge, p. 103). As teachers, we must understand that students do not learn in one single manner, but instead, incorporate many different learning strategies. It is stressed that students must be familiarized with a domain in order for them to practice disciplinary literacy. They must be interested in the subject and be able to connect their knowledge with their experiences inside and outside of school. This provides them with an opportunity to eventually think in an “identity,” and therefore, think critically.
Disciplinary literacy, as seen by Moje, is how knowledge is produced specific to a certain subject or domain. She believes that you must have background in a certain domain to understand and produce knowledge in a specific subject. She stresses identifying with the subject and relating that identity to every-day-life. She believes that literacy skills should be incorporated in all subjects in order to be successful – writing is crucial to science, although the “language” may differ from that of an English class. Gee, while he agrees that literacy skills are connected to the production of knowledge, stresses that “the meaning of words, phrases, and sentences are always situated, that is, customized to our actual content” (Gee, p. 716). He believes that disciplinary literacy is a social language and that everything you read and learn is through connections to experience.
Content Area Reading 
After reading your initial post, I am intrigued by our mirroring understandings of educational phrases, such as content, content area, and disciplinary literacy. These phrases are used in education so often, yet many educators and professionals do not know their individual definitions. I also have read articles by Wolsey, Lapp, Moje, and Gee, and believe I have grasped a decent understanding of the terminology, just as you have. I enjoyed seeing the parallels of my own post and your own. At the beginning of your post, you state that general use of these phrases leads them to be vague terms that can sometimes run together. In education, there are so many phrases with overlapping meanings and uses. When defining the aforementioned phrases, I too described content as the “what”, content area as “subject area”, and disciplinary literacy as the “how” in student learning. I thought it was interesting how you utilized concepts from the readings into succinct, simply stated definitions. Being able to break down words to their simplest meaning, aids in understanding, and therefore, proper use of the phrases and how we execute them as future educators. In regard to educational adjectives, such as metadiscursive, I, too, focused on the importance of multiple engagements of languages and schools of thought in my discussion post. From reading your post, I believe you and I share the understanding of Moje’s stress on multiple languages and how they aid student understanding inside of and outside of school. At the end of the day, I believe one of the main point of our reading and posts is that students do not learn, nor do they live, singularly. Students and their lives are meant to have levels of plurality, to be complex, informed beings. As future teachers, I believe we have a responsibility to be as informed in meaning and uses of content and theory to best prepare our students for after-school life. I look forward to continuing to read your and my other peer’s shared and differing thoughts and ideas about the profession.
LikeLiked by 1 person