• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

site logo
The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language
search
  • Home
  • About TESL-EJ
  • Vols. 1-15 (1994-2012)
    • Volume 1
      • Volume 1, Number 1
      • Volume 1, Number 2
      • Volume 1, Number 3
      • Volume 1, Number 4
    • Volume 2
      • Volume 2, Number 1 — March 1996
      • Volume 2, Number 2 — September 1996
      • Volume 2, Number 3 — January 1997
      • Volume 2, Number 4 — June 1997
    • Volume 3
      • Volume 3, Number 1 — November 1997
      • Volume 3, Number 2 — March 1998
      • Volume 3, Number 3 — September 1998
      • Volume 3, Number 4 — January 1999
    • Volume 4
      • Volume 4, Number 1 — July 1999
      • Volume 4, Number 2 — November 1999
      • Volume 4, Number 3 — May 2000
      • Volume 4, Number 4 — December 2000
    • Volume 5
      • Volume 5, Number 1 — April 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 2 — September 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 3 — December 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 4 — March 2002
    • Volume 6
      • Volume 6, Number 1 — June 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 2 — September 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 3 — December 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 4 — March 2003
    • Volume 7
      • Volume 7, Number 1 — June 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 2 — September 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 3 — December 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 4 — March 2004
    • Volume 8
      • Volume 8, Number 1 — June 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 2 — September 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 3 — December 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 4 — March 2005
    • Volume 9
      • Volume 9, Number 1 — June 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 2 — September 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 3 — December 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 4 — March 2006
    • Volume 10
      • Volume 10, Number 1 — June 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 2 — September 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 3 — December 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 4 — March 2007
    • Volume 11
      • Volume 11, Number 1 — June 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 2 — September 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 3 — December 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 4 — March 2008
    • Volume 12
      • Volume 12, Number 1 — June 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 2 — September 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 3 — December 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 4 — March 2009
    • Volume 13
      • Volume 13, Number 1 — June 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 2 — September 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 3 — December 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 4 — March 2010
    • Volume 14
      • Volume 14, Number 1 — June 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 2 – September 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 3 – December 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 4 – March 2011
    • Volume 15
      • Volume 15, Number 1 — June 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 2 — September 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 3 — December 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 4 — March 2012
  • Vols. 16-Current
    • Volume 16
      • Volume 16, Number 1 — June 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 2 — September 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 3 — December 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 4 – March 2013
    • Volume 17
      • Volume 17, Number 1 – May 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 2 – August 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 3 – November 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 4 – February 2014
    • Volume 18
      • Volume 18, Number 1 – May 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 2 – August 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 3 – November 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 4 – February 2015
    • Volume 19
      • Volume 19, Number 1 – May 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 2 – August 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 3 – November 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 4 – February 2016
    • Volume 20
      • Volume 20, Number 1 – May 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 2 – August 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 3 – November 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 4 – February 2017
    • Volume 21
      • Volume 21, Number 1 – May 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 2 – August 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 3 – November 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 4 – February 2018
    • Volume 22
      • Volume 22, Number 1 – May 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 2 – August 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 3 – November 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 4 – February 2019
    • Volume 23
      • Volume 23, Number 1 – May 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 2 – August 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 3 – November 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 4 – February 2020
    • Volume 24
      • Volume 24, Number 1 – May 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 2 – August 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 3 – November 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 4 – February 2021
    • Volume 25
      • Volume 25, Number 1 – May 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 2 – August 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 3 – November 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 4 – February 2022
    • Volume 26
      • Volume 26, Number 1 – May 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 2 – August 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 3 – November 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 4 – February 2023
    • Volume 27
      • Volume 27, Number 1 – May 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 2 – August 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 3 – November 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 4 – February 2024
    • Volume 28
      • Volume 28, Number 1 – May 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 2 – August 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 3 – November 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 4 – February 2025
    • Volume 29
      • Volume 29, Number 1 – May 2025
  • Books
  • How to Submit
    • Submission Info
    • Ethical Standards for Authors and Reviewers
    • TESL-EJ Style Sheet for Authors
    • TESL-EJ Tips for Authors
    • Book Review Policy
    • Media Review Policy
    • APA Style Guide
  • Editorial Board
  • Support

Dimensions of Literacy: A Conceptual Base for Teaching Reading and Writing in School Settings, 2nd edition

March 2006 — Volume 9, Number 4

 

Dimensions of Literacy: A Conceptual Base for Teaching
Reading and Writing in School Settings, 2nd edition

Author: Stephen B. Kucer (2005)  
Publisher: Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Pages ISBN Price
Pp. v + 353 0-8058-4941-6 (paper) $39.95 U.S.

Written primarily for teachers and teacher educators, Dimensions of literacy: A conceptual base for teaching reading and writing in school settings, 2nd edition provides remarkably comprehensive, balanced and pedagogical explanations of research and theory about learning and teaching written language. In the first chapter, its author, Dr. Stephen Kucer, presents the view that literacy has linguistic, cognitive, sociocultural and developmental “dimensions,” and he undertakes the daunting task of presenting the enormous amount of theorizing and research in all four dimensions. Using examples, charts, summary tables and narratives, the author provides a clearly teachable text, and his organization of a vast amount of material is commendable, even extraordinary. Teacher educators might, with some supplementation (to be discussed later), find this book an excellent foundation for an upper undergraduate or master’s level course in teaching literacy.

With respect to the linguistic dimension of literacy, rather than beginning with aspects of language as syntactic system, Kucer begins by considering the functions that language serves, and the various text-types used in social life. He considers intertextuality, for example, pointing out that it refers to the links readers and writers build among various texts, and argues that it is of utmost importance to readers. Noting that particular registers of language are used in schools, Kucer points out that these registers will be more familiar to some students than to others. After this functional, discourse-based beginning, Kucer discusses syntactic, morphemic, orthographic, graphophonemic and semantic aspects of language use, in all cases drawing readers’ attention to how understanding these may have important implications for literacy instruction. While his explicit discussion of literacy teaching is contained in only one chapter (the last), throughout the book implications of findings in linguistics, psychology, sociolinguistics and other disciplines for literacy teaching are pointed out. I particularly appreciated these discussions, as I could see their potential to elicit fruitful dialogue with teachers, both practising and in-service.

The third and fourth chapters of the book, also concerned with the linguistic dimension of literacy, discuss oral/written language distinctions, links among letters, sounds and the English spelling system, and language variation. Again using many examples, Kucer shows how prestige dialects of language are privileged not for their linguistic superiority. This chapter, although focused on linguistic dimensions of literacy, overlaps with some of the later discussion on sociocultural dimensions of language use.

The cognitive dimension of literacy is treated in four chapters, which cover aspects of psycholinguistic research on memory and perception, a model of reading and writing developed by the author, the nature and role of background knowledge on reading comprehension, and cognitive interrelationships between reading and writing. This section is particularly comprehensive and gives a nuanced view of predominant cognitive and psycholinguistic research on literacy. This dimension of literacy has certainly been in the forefront of reading and writing research for about the past twenty-five years. While many teacher educators hope teachers do not build their literacy instruction solely on this dimension, the information in these chapters is helpful and important.

Literacy’s sociocultural dimension is discussed in two chapters in which Kucer explains post-structuralist views of identity, and how these views understand literacy as sets of social practices. Kucer contrasts foundationist and social constructivist epistemologies and summarizes their differences in a concise and pithy chart (p. 229). Respectfully, he shows how a particular ideology guiding interpretation of sacred text might lead to political positions in the “literacy wars.” Again, I appreciated the potential he provides for engaging students in important debates about these matters. He also provides a brief but trenchant example of critical literacy education and notes, “[c]ritical responsive activities . . . seek to analyze and critique issues of power and perspective that weave their way through any text and any response” (p. 242). In my opinion, his clear statement of the aims of critical language pedagogy would be appreciated by many students seeking to understand the diffuse and varied literature written from this angle.

The chapter on the developmental component of literacy provides instructive examples of children learning to “maneuver and orchestrate the various levels (dimensions) of language ‘with more control, more flexibility, on expanding landscapes'” (Dyson, 2003, p. 174 in Kucer, p. 249). In some ways, this chapter serves as a good composite, since the author considers how children develop the linguistic, cognitive and sociocultural dimensions of literacy.

The final chapter of the book addresses implications of the previously reviewed theory and research on literacy education. Kucer summarizes the dimensions in another helpful chart showing how attention to text, mind, group and growth are all necessary in effective literacy instruction. He also summarizes contemporary debates in language and literacy education (with respect to focus on decoding, skills or whole language) and contrasts these with critical literacy instruction. The book concludes with a description of how each of the dimensions might be used in classroom instruction. This chapter is an admirable summary of the rest of the book, and illustrates the extensive range of knowledge teachers must bring to literacy instruction.

As should be evident by now, I am wholeheartedly enthusiastic about this book. I think it is comprehensive and represents fairly a variety of perspectives on literacy and literacy instruction. While I myself am more interested in sociocultural approaches and critical literacy education, I think it is important for students to understand the traditions of scholarship that such perspectives were built upon; this book fulfills this well. In addition, I admire how clearly the author describes the perspectives in which I am most interested.

Earlier in this review, I noted that the book might need some supplementation as a text for a course on literacy education. There is little discussion in the book of emerging perspectives on multiliteracies, or of how electronic communication technology might be important in understanding the literacy worlds of contemporary childhoods. Instructors might find articles and other texts helpful in adding these views, but I think the frameworks for understanding most scholarship in literacy that Kucer sets up will serve as overarching principles to understand other aspects of literacy.

Kelleen Toohey
Simon Fraser University
<tooheysfu.ca>

© Copyright rests with authors. Please cite TESL-EJ appropriately.

Editor’s Note: The HTML version contains no page numbers. Please use the PDF version of this article for citations.

© 1994–2025 TESL-EJ, ISSN 1072-4303
Copyright of articles rests with the authors.