Given the language and literacy difficulties noted previously of those entering vocational study, how have researchers responded? Vocational education is particularly diverse across the globe (Billett, 2011; Mazenod, 2016), from secondary school based education in Germany, to polytechnics and technical and further education (TAFE) colleges in Australia, through to general and vocational education that has a tertiary trajectory in the Nordic countries (Boeren & Holford, 2016). In spite of the widespread and diverse nature of vocational education internationally, less focus than might be expected has been placed on the study of the technical language of the trades.
The current literature on trades language comes from a range of traditions. These include new literacy studies, workplace studies, the vocational ESL (VESL) tradition in the US, and, particularly in studies of language in vocational education in Europe, studies in higher and further education. To date, however, the field of English for specific purposes has been weighted towards university education, and vocational education has been neglected (Coxhead, 2018).
1.3.1 Studies in the new literacies studies tradition
Over the last two decades in Australia, New Zealand, and the UK, the new literacy studies tradition has been influential in research into literacy in vocational education. The new literacy studies (Street, 1984) views literacy as multiple practices that vary with use, purpose, and social context. In this view, moving into a new context, such as trades study, requires the acquisition of new literacy practices, and with them, associated values. These practices are not necessarily transferable from other literacy contexts, such as school study. They extend beyond learning the formal features of language in a context (for example specialised vocabulary) to familiarity with specialised texts, their social purposes, and the values associated with them. This focus on the specificity of the texts and talk associated with particular disciplines, occupations, or trades aligns with the central purpose of ESP, which is to support studentsâ acquisition of the specialised genres of their educational, professional, and occupational fields. Differences between the new literacies and ESP approaches include the greater emphasis placed on values and identity by the new literacy studies (e.g., Lea & Street, 1998; IvaniÄ, 1998) and the central role of linguistic description in ESP.
Prominent in the new literacies tradition is a large-scale study by IvaniÄ et al. (2009) in the context of British vocational colleges. This study built on recognition in the new literacies research of the multiple nature of literacy and that literacy is specific to the field in which it is used, a notion also central to ESP. It investigates the different kinds of text and talk that students in a wide variety of vocational fields must use. IvaniÄ et al. (2009) show that trades-based literacy involves a wide range of demanding tasks. According to Edwards, Minty, and Miller (2013), vocational reading and writing are not only demanding, but staff and students tend to underestimate these demands. This UK-based research considered a range of trades, including childcare, hospitality, painting and decorating, and bricklaying. However it did not analyse the lexical, discoursal, and visual elements of the language of the trades. We believe such investigation to be useful, especially for the development of teaching resources. This belief reflects the ESP tradition in which we are working, where attention has traditionally been given to linguistic description of language specific to particular occupations and disciplines. Such description is necessary to develop teaching interventions and resources.
Within the same large-scale UK study, Edwards et al. (2013), investigating the field of hospitality, suggest that reading and writing for academic and workplace purposes are essential for success in hospitality, but they are more demanding than is generally recognised by either staff or students. Another associated study by Smith et al. (2008), this time in the field of childcare, notes that literacy in vocational fields is more complex than is generally recognised. Interestingly, they found that this complexity was actually greater in the earlier levels of study.
Under the umbrella of the same UK study, Edwards and Miller (2008, p. 127) found that in Scottish vocational colleges most of the writing students did in a range of vocational areas, including childcare and hospitality, was for the purpose of assessment. They found that the reading and writing students do in the classroom was different from what they were required to do for assessments and that teachers were not always aware of the complexity of transforming information from one genre or context into another. Like Edwards et al. (2013) and Smith et al. (2008), Edwards and Miller (2008) found that lower level students were required to use a wider range of reading and writing practices than those at higher levels. At higher levels, literacy practices became more academic.
IvaniÄ et al. (2007) warn against claims that there is a decline in literacy in vocational contexts in the UK, suggesting instead an increasing diversity of âvernacularâ text and multimodal literacy practices in which students engage outside college but are not employed in college literacy events. They used ethnographic methods, including interviews with 100 students enroled in 30 vocational units, as well as the collection of artefacts, to understand the studentsâ literacy practices. IvaniÄ et al. (2007) recommend that college tutors could consider employing some of the multiple literacy practices that learners use outside of college. Similarly, Miller and Satchwell (2006) recommend that teachers develop greater awareness of studentsâ âeverydayâ literacies, claiming that this will improve teacher respect for studentsâ literacy practices and improve studentsâ experiences of further education by âincreasing potential for negotiating the border between vernacular and curriculum literaciesâ (2006, p. 135). Although following these suggestions is likely to increase student engagement, we consider it more important for vocational teachers to support students to acquire literacy practices that are central to the trade and embody the values of the trade rather than neglecting these in favour of vernacular literacies.
A study in New Zealand, by Sligo, Tilley, Murray, and Comrie (2019), confirmed the specific nature of literacy that building apprentices, and their managers and training coordinators, saw as necessary to apprentices. The focus of the vocational trainers and apprentices is literacy that supports their ability to practice their trade rather than a notion of literacy for its own sake. As Sligo et al. (2019) found, the emphasis in vocational education is on acquiring instrumental literacy that is grounded in the apprenticesâ technical field, which is necessary for them to become members of their workplace communities of practice.
The studies on vocational literacy by IvaniÄ and her colleagues are valuable in their exploration of the literacy practices that students of these different fields must use. However, they stop short of investigating the lexical, discourse, and visual features of language associated with the different literacy practices. The present study attempts to go beyond this to investigate in greater depth the lexical, grammatical, rhetorical, and multimodal features of texts. This includes texts written by students (such as the builderâs diary), texts that vocational students have to read (course textbooks), talk (such as classroom teaching), and also the visual features of multimodal writt...
