Comparing Barton And Hamilton Literacy Practices

DIFFERENT BETWEEN LITERACY PRACTICE AND EVENT
Barton and Hamilton (2000) contend that literacy practices are not always directly observable because they involve values, attitudes, feelings, and social relationships. Literacy practices also comprise people's awareness, construction, and discourse of literacy as well as how people make sense of literacy. Although Barton and Hamilton recognize that literacy practices are internal to the individual. Practices are also the social processes that connect people and include shared cognitions represented in ideologies and social identities shaped by social rules. Barton and Hamilton argue that rather than understanding literacy as a set of properties inherent within an individual, we should understand
the relationships between people, groups, and communities.
Literacy Practices are general cultural ways of using written language which people draw upon in their lives and can include people's awareness of literacy, constructions of literacy, discourses of literacy, and how people talk about and make sense of literacy, which is all internal to the individual at the same time are social processes shaped by social rules. Literacy practices exist in the between people, groups, and communities as opposed to being just a set of properties residing in individuals (Barton, 2000).

In contrast, Literacy events are observable episodes where it has a role existing in a social context and can be regular, routine, or repeated as part of formal procedures and expectations of social institutions or structured by informal expectations and pressures of home or peer group (Barton, 1994, 2000; Heath, 1983).
Barton and Hamilton see literacy event as activities which involve text talking about the activities. Therefore, any literacy practice must situate reading and writing activities to motivate the practice. Though Barton and Hamilton 1998 argue that reading and writing are not the only way we can attach a meaning. "The researchers pointed out that most literacy events are repeated activities p:
8"
(Perry 2012: 53).
While differentiating between literacy events and literacy practice, the researchers described Literacy events as an "observable activities". This means that we can see what people are doing with texts. Practices, in contrast, must be inferred because they connect to unobservable beliefs, values, attitudes, and power structures. Ivanic, Hamilton, and Barton (2000) also stated that literacy events are activities usually involves written text it has participants, settings, tools and the type of activities performed by the participants. Due to the emphasis on literacy events, those who work within this framework of literacy as social practice tend to focus on print and written texts. Perry, (2012) said literacy event can be described on the basis of social practice perspective, like reading of bible during church service, prayers or for study. "This practice is a continuous event that can be observable in people" (Perry, 2012:53). For example, to teach reading and writing to hearing impaired students, the researcher used three genres of writing as an expository, descriptive and narrative genre. Literacy Events are observable episodes where literacy has a role existing in a social context and can be regular, routine, or repeated as part of formal procedures and expectations of social institutions or structured by informal expectations and pressures of home or peer group (Barton, 1994, 2000; Heath,
1983)
Literacy events are central to researching literacy practices because they are observable activities often linked to a written text or routine sequence of behavior Researching literacy practices involves looking at what people do with literacy events, what these events mean to them, and how they fit into people's lives. It is how events and texts fit into practices instead of viewing how practices reveal events. This method of viewing literacy practices as suggested by Barton and Hamilton (2000) furthers helps in understanding that there are different literacies and that generally, literacies are a means to some ends, whether social, cultural, or personal. Some researchers no longer consider the traditional view of literacy as an autonomous set of skills but to be an appropriate model to understand the diversity of reading and writing among specific communities or groups of people. Thus, the shift to an ideological model of literacies advocates that we cannot teach literacy objectively with following social effects but that the ways in which people interact are already a social practice. Along with participants, predisposed ideas about literacy, social interaction is what affects the nature of the literacy learned (Purcell-Gates, 2007).

AUTONOMOUS AND IDEOLOGICAL MODEL OF LITERACY
Street (1984 define 'autonomous' model of literacy as the development of a series of decontextualized basic skills. This means learning has no context it can take place anywhere It assumes unidimensional progress from illiterate to literate, towards 'civilization' or economic 'take-off. (Barton, 1994:190). The researcher cites an example of an unidimensional progress as for where 'illiteracy' is seen as a 'problem' or a liabilities which must be 'detected', 'treated early', 'prevented' or remediated in some way (Street, 1984). Street stated that autonomous postulates that the skills of reading, writing and numbering are context free, and are common in time and space, and generate consequences for cognition, social progress, and individual achievement. (Cabral, & Martin-Jones (2008) this means that it is a general skill that one has to acquire.
A linguistic approach to literacy defines autonomous as a form of assigning symbols (graphemes) to each of the phonemic sounds of a language rather than to syllables or whole words. Street (1984) calls this approach the "autonomous model" because of its views the acquisition of literacy as independent of any social factors. They argue that alphabetic literacy is superior to non-alphabetic systems because fewer symbols are used to represent a greater number of words an autonomous approach to literacy state that literate people are cognitively superior to non-literate people and that literates view the world more rationally than non-literates. From the autonomous-model perspective, being able to read and write is a manifestation of an ability to rise above. (Bizzell 1988).
Theories supporting "autonomous" is literacy theory by Vygotsky, a psychologist, published Language and Thought in 1934 (in English 1962) where he argued that "the human mind is formed through the active assumption of the cultural store of the past, embodied in material artefacts, rituals, belief systems, writing systems, and the modes of social interaction they entail." (Vygotsky, 1934, in Cole & Cole, 2006, p. 310). Vygotsky had carried out a large number of empirical studies during the time of rapid introduction of literacy in Soviet Central Asia in the 1930s. One of his conclusions of these studies was that major differences in abstract reasoning exist between literate and illiterate persons. According to Vygotsky the reason for this is because "literacy changes the structure and content of human activity, [and] a conscious effort is required to both acquire and use [literature]" (ibid., p. 311 In the autonomous model] learning of literacy is underpinned by dominant ideologies and separated from the context in which it will be applied. The main purpose of literacy teaching and learning is the development of human capital, which will enhance the economic productivity of the nation. (Markauskaite, 2006, p. 1) While looking at the autonomous model (Street, 1993) described literacy as the acquisition of technical skills acquired by an individual which affect social and cognitive processes. Street also believe that one's an individual acquired reading and writing in an individual create self-reflection, logical thinking in an individual. Therefore, in an autonomous model, literacy is separated from its social context and considered an independent variable making it possible to associate literacy with symbolic elements such as progress, social mobility and economic stability (Gee, 1996).