Discursive Met knowledge and Content Area Literacy

Gee (1989) equated literacy with the ability toteachers includes understanding how reasoning in
participate in social situations or discourses.everyday situations compares to reasoning in
Although much of Gee's later work in discoursesscience and mathematics. If a teacher explicitly
emphasized issues in addition to participation (e.g.,understands how the dominant discourses of
identity), we find his earlier formulation of literacyschool science and mathematics work—as
to be useful for this study. Gee noted twodiscursive practices—then this knowledge can
different types of literacies or discourses: "primarybe used to help students who do not control
discourses," which develop in familial surroundings,these discourses to bridge the gap. Indeed,
and "secondary discourses," which are used in allresearchers have shown that traditional science
other contexts (p. 22). From Gee's perspective,instruction often excludes students' personal
the purpose of schooling is to help studentsexperiences as resources for evaluating scientific
participate in and gain control over secondaryclaims (Warren, Ballenger, Ogonowski, Rosebery,
discourses that are valued by society. Discourses& Hudicourt-Barnes, 2001). Teachers who
so valued are considered "dominant discourses"have discursive met knowledge of how claims
(Gee, 1989, p. 20).work, both in students' everyday reasoning and in
 school science, can help students understand how
Gee argued that the alignment betweenschool science is both similar to and different from
mainstream culture and dominant discourses helpseveryday life.
explain why mainstream students generally have 
less difficulty participating in such discourses thanGee's notions of met knowledge and powerful
do other students. Because the dominantliteracy provide a useful frame for considering our
discourse is similar to their experiences, there iscontent area literacy work with science and
less difference to Links London overcome. Wemathematics preservice teachers. As teacher
argue that a parallel exists here and that becauseeducators, we aim to prepare teachers who
content area teachers are highly proficient in theirunderstand and can bridge the differences in the
dominant discourse, they, like mainstreamdominant discourses of school mathematics and
students, are challenged to notice it. This has thescience and the secondary discourses of their
effect of rendering the discursive practices ofstudents. Because university content courses
subjects such as science and mathematics, likegenerally fail to develop met knowledge of Links
the proverbial water to the fish, invisible to theOf London Charms science and mathematics as
teacher.discursive practices, teacher education has an
 important role to play. In this article, we illustrate
Gee (1989) called the knowledge of discursivehow one assignment was useful in generating met
practices "powerful literacy". Powerful literacyknowledge of important features of school
goes beyond participation in-or control of—ascience and mathematics discourse that are
discourse to include the met knowledge requiredparticularly important for understanding the central
to critique that discursive practice. For example,role of literacy in teaching and learning content.
one kind of discursive met knowledge useful for