Academic literacy for undergraduates is a long road that requires didactic interventions in different disciplines. This study proposes the creation of discursive communities for the socialization of academic reading among peers through video reviews. The implementation was conducted during four academic years (between 2017 and 2021) with students of the Teaching Degree (373) and the Master’s Degree in Secondary Education Teaching (118) of Universitat de València. The analysis of the video reviews focuses on the position of the reader (in our case, a pre-service teacher) as a mediator. After reviewing different proposals of analysis of this audiovisual genre and the visualization of the corpus (416 video reviews), four analysis categories were delimited: content selection, recommendation criteria, presentation of the reading and its author, and the construction of the discourse. The qualitative analysis conducted allowed us to identify two main types: reproductive and critical video reviews, both characterised in this work. The results show two key elements: the appropriation of the rhetorical situation created by the video review genre and the reading experience. The adoption of a critical vision not only requires depth in disciplinary knowledge, but also requires the development of more complex linguistic resources.
Article Details
How to Cite
Martí-Climent, A., Reig, A., & Rodríguez-Gonzalo, C. (2024). Academic literacy and reading’s socialization through video reviews in teacher training. Ocnos. Journal of reading research, 23(1). https://doi.org/10.18239/ocnos_2024.23.1.386
Martí-Climent, Reig, and Rodríguez-Gonzalo: Academic literacy and reading’s socialisation through video reviews in teacher training
Introduction
The search for new forms of socialisation of reading in teacher training has been
the object of our approach to video reviews, as a technical and discursive variant
of the conventional genre, which allows for new forms of social management of knowledge.
In our case, we aim to create reading communities in which future teachers become
mediators among their peers. After exploring the genre possibilities in the classroom
for four academic years (2017-2021), in a first study of the collected corpus () we established two types of video reviews: academic and informative. The first ones
aim to share knowledge on different aspects of language teaching. Informative video
reviews focus on the formation of criteria on the bibliography of children’s literature
that future teachers will use in their classrooms, in their role as reading mediators
with early years pupils ().
In this article, we focus on academic video reviews and delimit the characteristics
of the two variants, reproductive and critical, which show two ways of approaching
specialised reading and the way it is shared among peers.
Reading in teacher education
The issue of reading in teacher education is a constant in many recent studies, whether
they focus on analogue or digital reading. Many prospective teachers do not read regularly,
i.e. they do not read enough and are not intrinsically motivated to read. Many studies
highlight the need to foster the reading habit during university education, so that
those who are going to be educators and therefore mediators in their students’ reading
can approach reading education with criteria.
In spite of some nuances, the aforementioned studies focus on literary or recreational
reading. explore the careers of trainee teachers by analysing their reading life histories
and point out the precariousness of the reading background of future teachers. According
to , their reading habits are scarce and their relationship with reading as a pleasure
or personal activity of a voluntary nature is weak. highlight the need for intrinsic motivation to consolidate the reading habit and
consider that university education seems to influence the conviction of the need to
be a reader, which would explain the decrease in the percentage of non-readers between
the first and fourth year of Education degrees. As university education progresses,
students read more regularly because of the importance of reading as a source of specialised
knowledge.
This other type of reading, related to academic tasks, is often dissociated from the
reading habit, although it is necessary in the ongoing training of any teacher in
order to deepen their work and keep up to date. Reading to learn involves documenting
from different texts, interpreting information and constructing and transforming knowledge.
In this sense, reading in its epistemic aspect is a competence to be developed throughout
life.
Academic literacy and specialised reading
Academic literacy is a multidimensional construct shaped by socio-cultural and historical
contexts, as shown in review of research between 2002 and 2019. Specialised reading, essential in this
literacy, involves mastering the notions and strategies necessary to participate in
the discursive culture of a professional field or discipline. It develops especially
in university education, when future professionals have to acquire command of the
forms of reasoning instituted according to the discursive conventions of each speciality
().
The development of academic literacy is not spontaneous; it requires explicit instruction
and interventions (Shanahan, 2012, quoted in ). In teacher training, teachers need to become readers who understand the principles
underlying the different ways of intervening in the classroom.
Years ago, showed two models of approach to literate practices, which they called “telling knowledge”
and “transforming knowledge”. In the former, the author reproduces the acquired knowledge
without considering the communication situation, as is the case in the “transforming
knowledge” model. Situations that only encourage “telling knowledge” promote more
superficial learning than those that force “transforming it”. The latter cases, typical
of mature composition, promote the development of complex operations of abstraction,
construction and evaluation of textual structures, rhetorical formulations and content.
In teaching situations, it is a matter of proposing activities so that students can
reconstruct the system of ideas and methods of a field of study, through participating
in the practices of reading, writing and thinking proper to it ().
Later socio-cultural approaches showed the importance of the shared context of reading
(who is reading, with what background and for what purpose, who is writing, from what
theoretical positions and for what purpose), in order to access critical positions,
as a higher level of understanding. Critical reading varies in each discipline because
the procedures and nature of knowledge are different ().
Access to academic reading allows access to communities of practitioners who share
knowledge and critical perspective on blogs, in the press and in the specialist literature.
It is a type of peer mediation that is underdeveloped in initial training. Students
read to learn (and to demonstrate their learning) but no situations are provided for
them to share their knowledge or make reasoned judgements useful to their peers.
The socialisation of reading and the use of video in the school context
The ways in which readers socialise reading today have been affected by the use of
technology. In contrast to the pyramidal and hierarchical model of information conveyance,
technology makes it possible for any individual to play the dual role of sender and
receiver of digital content. points out that social reading or reading 2.0 defines a new reality where reading
mediation tasks are transformed. Reading ceases to be a hobby that provokes isolation
to become a “construct of conversations” ().
As point out, web 2.0 becomes a great support for the collaborative construction of
knowledge and an excellent resource to favour communication between learners, experts
and peers. According to , in the networks students are more active in their learning process, they become
“wreaders”, which allows them to develop their media competence.
In a school context, reading mediation can be understood in two ways: as a link between
books and early readers () or as a reading community among professionals. In the first case, mediation is a
function of the creation of a reading habit. Mediators are the first recipients of
works that they will then read or recommend to their pupils. In the second, mediation
is understood as an exchange of professional readings between peers.
In both situations, technology enables new genres and practices whose success lies
in the social, public, interactive and global character that allows for the socialisation
of reading (). In this sense, video becomes an instrument of knowledge and a means of expression,
motivating students’ media literacy ().
Allué and Cassany (2023) study the use of video in secondary education as an emerging
practice focused on the development of literary and linguistic competence and among
its potentialities they highlight its relationship with the learner's audiovisual
culture. In turn, they identify the review as a free, youtuber-style summary and commentary
of readings, albeit without followers, likes or comments.
situate booktubers in youth reading practices and distinguish between analysis, collection
and selection videos and place reviews in the first group. Video reviews, as a reformulation
of reviews, emerge “as a discursive genre for literary mediation with its own characteristics
[...] taking advantage of the creative potential of the multimodality and the interactive
possibilities of YouTube” ().
In our approach, video is a learning and assessment tool that allows students to develop
strategies for understanding and critical elaboration of content for their peers,
which promotes access to academic culture (). Our didactic proposal aims to enable future teachers to provide in-depth and useful
information to their peers, while learning how to use video for academic purposes.
Method
This research asks how our students exercise the role of mediators in academic reading,
when they read not only for themselves but also for their peers. We investigated how
future teachers socialise the readings through the observable data in the video-reviews
made.
To that end, we conducted a series of interventions during four academic years (between
2017 and 2021) with students of the Bachelor’s Degree in Primary Education and the
Master’s Degree in Secondary Education at Universitat de València. Video reviews were
made individually, in Spanish or Catalan, in three subjects: two in Primary School
Teaching (Learning to read and write -ALE-, and Development of communicative skills
in multilingual contexts -DHCCM-) and one in the Master’s Degree in Secondary Education
(Learning and teaching of the subject, in our case Spanish Language and Literature
-AEM).
The selection of participants in this qualitative research is intentional (), as they have been chosen because of their link to the object of the research, which
refers to the training of future teachers of Primary and Secondary Education. A total
of 491 students participated: 373 students of Bachelor’s and 118 students of Master’s
degrees. The final corpus consists of 416 academic video reviews (table 1).
Table 1Corpus
YEAR
SUBJECT
NO. OF GROUPS-
CLASSROOM
NO. OF
VIDEOS
NO. OF
STUDENTS
2017-2018
ALE
2
60
75
1
39
39
2018-2019
ALE
2
51
75
1
36
40
AEM
1
27
36
2019-2020
DHCCM
1
25
25
ALE
1
26
38
AEM
1
42
43
2020-2021
DHCCM
1
33
40
ALE
1
39
41
AEM
1
38
39
TOTAL
13
416
491
The activity consisted on reading academic works from the bibliography of language
and literature teaching subjects and their subsequent presentation by means of a video
review. This video review - about five minutes long - was shared on YouTube and disseminated
in a forum with the aim of creating a professional reading community in which works
of formative interest were shared to broaden the students’ reference selection. The
aim was to socialise academic readings. According to the instructions, the video review
should talk about the work read, indicate the interest in reading or consulting it,
include the technical specifications, a selection of information about the content
of the text and a reasoned evaluation of the work.
In the initial phase of the research, we identified, coded and sorted all the videos
in the corpus. Subsequently, after an initial screening, we selected a representative
sample of video reviews from different subjects and courses and established the categories
of analysis relevant to our research. In accordance with these categories, by means
of a peer selection procedure, 3 video reviews from each academic year were analysed.
The sample is made up of 18 video reviews: 12 of Bachelor’s and 6 of Master’s degrees.
As we have pointed out, the video review responds to a reformulation of the genre
of the review with its own characteristics. In a previous study (), the socio-reading competence of future teachers was analysed according to three
issues: socialisation of reading, communicative aspects and digital resources, and
the relevance of placing the socialisation of reading at the centre of the analysis
was determined. This is explained by the fact that our didactic proposal gives priority
to the training of teachers as mediators of disciplinary readings.
Among the issues relating to the socialisation of reading (table 2), and in order to delve deeper into the research problem, the position of the reader
as mediator was chosen as the axis that articulates the rest of the criteria in the
table.
Table 2Aspects of the socialisation of academic reading identified in video reviews
Socialisation aspects of reading
Features
Selection of the work
Criteria for selection of the book or topic.
Role of the reader as mediator
Appropriate approach to the communicative situation posed
in the proposal (suitability for the addressee).
Title of the video
Synthetic nature, clarity, originality...
Presentation of the readings
Title, author, genre, target audience, year of publication,
publisher, contextualisation (historical and cultural
framework).
Comprehension and conveyance
Primary and secondary themes, structure and paratexts.
Intertextuality
Links to works on the same subject or by the same author.
Choice of representative content
Relevance of the selected information.
Use of multimodal elements
Inclusion of pictures, quotations, examples...
Recommendation
Criteria: type of reader, subject matter... Basis for personal
assessment.
Results
After reviewing different proposals for analysing video reviews (; ; ) and successive visualisations of the corpus, four categories of analysis were delimited
that break down the macrocategory of the reader’s role (in our case, the future teacher)
as mediator (Martí et al., ; ): the selection of content, the criteria for recommendation, the presentation of
the reading and its author, and finally, the construction of the discourse (table 3).
Table 3Types of video reviews
Role of the reader as mediator
Content selection
Criteria for
recommendation
Presentation of the
reading and its
author
Discourse
construction
Reproductive video
reviews
(VA-Rep)
Reproduction of the
work read
Linear presentation
of content, without
selection.
Generic
recommendation,
not justified.
Presentation of the
work (title,
authorship, genre,
target audience, year
of publication,
publisher).
Author's curriculum
vitae, not expressly
related to the work.
Use of addition.
Linear order.
Critical video
reviews (VA-Crit)
Critical
understanding of the
work
Choice of
representative
content. Relevance
of the selected
information.
Reasons for reading
the book reviewed:
type of reader,
subject matter, etc.
Projection of the
reading into the
reality of the
reviewers.
Rationale for
personal
assessment.
Presentation of the
work (title, author,
genre, target
audience, year of
publication,
publisher) and
contextualisation
(historical and
cultural framework).
Presentation of the
author according to
the work and the
objectives of the
review.
Structure of the
work.
Articulation of the
discourse according
to the selected
contents.
The qualitative analysis made it possible to distinguish between two main types: reproductive
video reviews (hereafter, VA-Rep) and critical video reviews (hereafter, VA-Crit)
(table 4).
Table 4Sample of analysed video reviews
Code
Books reviewed
Year
Subject
Duration
Typology
VA-M01
Abascal, M.D. (2005). Retórica clásica y
oralidad. Analecta Malacitana.
2018-2019
AEM
6’20’’
VA-Crit
VA-M02
Sánchez-Enciso, J. (2008). (Con) vivir en
la palabra. Graó.
2018-2019
AEM
4’43’’
VA-Crit
VA-M03
Trujillo, F. (Coord.) (2014). Artefactos
digitales. Graó.
2018-2019
AEM
5’40’’
VA-Crit
VA-M04
Lorenzo, F., Trujillo F. y Vez, J.M. (2011).
Educación bilingüe. Síntesis.
2019-2020
AEM
6’31’’
VA-Rep
VA-M05
Zayas, F. (2011). La educación literaria.
Cuatro secuencias didácticas. Octaedro.
2019-2020
AEM
5’40’’
VA-Crit
VA-M06
Mercer, N. (2001). Palabras y mentes.
Paidós.
2020-2021
AEM
6’04’’
VA-Crit
VA-G01
Díez de Ulzurrun Pausas, A. (1998).
L’aprenentatge de la lectoescriptura des
d’una perspectiva socioconstructivista.
Graó
2017-2018
ALE
12’29’’
VA-Rep
VA-G02
Freinet, C. (1972). El método natural de
lectura. Fontanella.
2017-2018
ALE
5’43’’
VA-Crit
VA-G03
Cuetos, F. (2008). Psicología de la lectura.
Diagnóstico y tratamiento de los
trastornos de lectura. Wolters Kluwer.
2017-2018
ALE
4’49’’
VA-Rep
VA-G04
Ferreiro, E. (2002). Pasado y presente de
los verbos leer y escribir. FCE.
2018-2019
ALE
5’53’’
VA-Rep
VA-G05
Guasch, O. (2001). L’escriptura en segones
llengües. Graó.
2018-2019
ALE
6’16’’
VA-Rep
VA-G06
Lluch, G. (2018). La lectura entre el paper
i les pantalles. Eumo.
2018-2019
ALE
13’13’’
VA-Rep
VA-G07
Cassany, D. (2006). Tras las líneas.
Anagrama.
2019-2020
ALE
4’17’’
VA-Rep
VA-G08
Tuson, J. (2004). Patrimoni natural.
Empúries.
2019-2020
DHCCM
4’42’’
VA-Crit
VA-G09
Pascual, V. (2006). El tractament de les
llengües en un model d’educació
plurilingüe per al sistema educatiu
valencià. CEICE-GVA.
2019-2020
DHCCM
7’01’’
VA-Crit
VA-G10
Salvador, F. (2000). Cómo prevenir las
dificultades de la expresión escrita. Aljibe.
2020-2021
ALE
5’41’’
VA-Crit
VA-G11
Santolària, A. & Ribera, P. (Eds.) (2017).
Escrivim. Seqüències didàctiques per a
l’escola. Bullent.
2020-2021
ALE
4’46’’
VA-Rep
VA-G12
Cuenca, M.J. (2003). El valencià és una
llengua diferent? Tàndem.
2020-2021
DHCCM
5’52’’
VA-Crit
The presentation of the results is organised in two blocks: VA-Rep and VA-Crit, in
which the analysis of four categories is presented:
a) presentation of the reading and its author;
b) content selection;
c) criteria for recommendation;
d) discourse construction
Reproductive video reviews (VA-Rep)
a) Presentation of the reading and its authora) Presentation of the reading and its
author
We begin by introducing the work and its author. When biographical information about
the author is provided, it is reproduced in an encyclopaedic style and the information
selected is general and does not provide interpretative or evaluative tips about the
work reviewed. In order to justify the choice of the book, they refer to its interest
for their teacher training, although this is not properly argued.
The anchoring of the discourse in academic coordinates often shows the inexperience
of the reviewers. In VA-G01, the reviewer refers to the subject in which the activity
is framed. Instead of naming the issues and reasons, it refers to the blocks of the
subject matter, which makes it difficult to understand the message.
¿Por qué he escogido este libro? Muy fácil, básicamente por su autora. Tras la lectura
obligatoria que tuvimos en el primer bloque [...], descubrí en Emilia Ferreiro a una
gran especialista de la cual es posible enriquecerse. [...] trata una temática que
se relaciona muy bien, sobre todo con el bloque 1, y que se puede solapar con los
dos siguientes bloques (VA-G01).
The only example where the assumption of the mediating role leads to a successful
realisation is found in VA-G02: those who may be interested in the topic are identified
and the purpose of the book is mentioned. One evidence of his interpretation is the
reference to what will not be found in the book, information of interest to a hypothetical
reader.
Está destinado a profesores y alumnos del ámbito de [...], aunque cualquier persona
interesada en [...] puede estar interesada en el contenido de este libro. El objetivo
de este libro no es constituir una metodología para docentes o futuros docentes sino
ser una aportación a la investigación de los procesos de composición escrita en lengua
dos (L2), especialmente cuando esta lengua [...] (VA-G02).
b) Content selection
In the VA-Rep, the selection of content and its exposition is evidence of the reviewers’
lack of mastery of the subject. Faced with the difficulty of dealing with an academic
text on a specialised subject, they detail the structure and give a faithful summary
of the content, constructed linearly, sometimes as a simple enumeration of the topics
covered (VA-G01, VA-G07, VA-G11). However, most video reviews include very long summaries,
lacking in the selection of relevant ideas (VA-G02, VA-G03, VA-G04, VA-G06, VA-G11,
VA-M04), to the detriment of the evaluative aspects typical of this genre. In all
cases, the time devoted to summaries takes up most of the video review.
It is not common for reviewers to adopt be critical of the work, which does not prevent
them from occasionally adopting their own voice through strategies such as the selection
and commentary of ideas or examples, reference to bibliographical references presented
in class and subtle attempts to elaborate on the content, exemplified in the following
excerpt. While it is true that the VA-G07 reviewer uses her own criteria to select
proposals from the book, she devotes little space to critically analysing them, and
when she does, the analysis is inconsistent. The use of intertextuality is an example
of failed attempts to elaborate content.
La primera se llama [...] y es una actividad que he elegido porque la he relacionado
con un artículo de Montserrat Fons y Montserrat Correig [...]. En este artículo ellas
hablan sobre diferentes tópicos que perduran en la escuela en el proceso de enseñanza
y aprendizaje de la lectoescritura, y uno de estos es el hecho que se cree que la
copia favorece el desarrollo de la habilidad escritora. [...] lo que proponen es realizar
otro tipo de actividades que no sean tan mecánicas para favorecer el desarrollo de
las habilidades motrices necesarias para escribir (VA-G07)
.
c) Criteria for recommendation
The fact that the slogan includes the final evaluation of the work, the recommendation
and the invitation to read it, leads all reviewers to try to include this final section,
either to fulfil the academic task or because they adopt the requested role of mediation.
In all cases, the assessment and recommendation is usually related to the usefulness
of the book for initial training or teaching practice, but most are poorly substantiated
or lack justification.
Creo que este libro puede ser muy útil para cualquier docente que trabaje en un centro
en el cual convivan dos lenguas. Por tanto, lo recomendaría a todos mis compañeros
de aula y a todos mis futuros compañeros docentes de la Comunidad Valenciana (VA-G02).
Video reviews that conclude with a final assessment contain a recommendation (VA-G02,
VA-G03, VA-G04, VA-G07, VA-G11, VA-M04), usually implicit. Others encourage the reading
of the book without assessing it or justifying the recommendation properly (VA-G01,
VA-G06). In VA-G04, the reviewer, who does not assess the book until the last seconds
of the video review, assumes the role of mediator for the first time and critically
evaluates the usefulness of the book for teacher training:
Como utilidad para la docencia, no me parece que sea un libro que se puede utilizar
plenamente, quiero decir, creo que es un libro que está más destinado para otros ámbitos,
como la lingüística, pero sí que se pueden extraer algunas ideas interesantes para
aplicarlas en nuestra futura tarea, que al fin y al cabo es enseñar. Como el hecho
de [...]. (VA-G04)
d) Discourse construction
The construction of the discourse depends on the understanding of the mediating purpose
of the video review and the mastery of the subject matter, which is manifested in
the selection of content. In these inexperienced video reviews, the reviewers’ effort
to be faithful to the content and to show the careful reading they have conducted
can be seen, which translates into a synthesis of the sections, respecting the order
of the work. Discourse arrangement responds to the criterion of addition or additive
packaging, which brings these reviews closer to a linear summary of the content.
For example, in VA-G06, the work is summarised chapter by chapter, highlighting those
aspects that are considered to require more attention and which are spoken about in
an inexpert lexicon. Linearity is identified in the use of the additive connection.
By highlighting the following fragment shows that the author is placed before the
chosen book as someone who is going to learn about a subject he does not know, like
the recipients of the video review, which prevents any elements of critical evaluation:
Este capítulo es la base del libro, por tanto, hay que poner mucha atención y conocer
cómo es el sistema de lectura ya que una vez conozcamos este sistema podremos encontrar
fácilmente los problemas de lectura y así pautar una rehabilitación y tener un proceso
favorable (VA-G06)
.
However, in VA-G07 the content is selected, but its arrangement fails to overcome
linearity, as there is no common thread or contrast between them. This is evidenced
by the use of ordering connectors with an addition value and other packaging formulas,
such as the adjective “other”. Even so, brief attempts at interpretation and assessment
can be identified when the didactic value of the content is appealed to by referring
to its methodological bases. The lack of a theoretical background does not allow us
to argue or construct solid explanations.
Y, por último, otra que se llama “Propuesta”, en la que los alumnos son los encargados
de elaborar el menú del comedor de la escuela de un día de la semana. Ellos son completamente
protagonistas y volvemos a recordar la importancia que tiene que ellos estén involucrados
en la tarea (VA-G07)
.
Critical video reviews (VA-Crit)
a) Presentation of the reading and its author
In the VA-Crit the selective look at the contents is done by clearly adopting the
position of mediator. Typical features of elaborate reviews can be observed: they
select the most important facts about the author, always in the service of the critical
presentation of the reviewed work, producing a logical and natural transition between
the brief presentation of the author and that of the book.
Y para comenzar [...] os hablaré un poco del autor, [...] que es catedrático de Lengua
Castellana, inicia en los años ochenta una larga trayectoria de renovación didáctica
de la enseñanza de la lengua, especialmente en lo relativo a los talleres literarios,
y toda esa experiencia que él adquiere [...] va a ser la base sobre la cual construye
este libro donde, mezclando un poco teoría y práctica, nos va a ir relatando sus intentos
más exitosos por crear [...]. Y eso va a ser un poco la premisa, digamos, del libro
(VA-M02).
They rank recipients by means of two basic strategies: the reference to the perspective
from which the work is written and its relation to the purpose of the video review
(VA-G08, VA-G09, VA-G10, VA-G12, VA-M01, VA-M02, VA-M05), and the reference to the
way of reading envisaged by the author and its exemplification (VA-G05, VA-M03). An
example of the first strategy is found in VA-M01:
Para este libro el presupuesto de partida no es enseñarnos a mejorar nuestras capacidades
retóricas ni oratorias sino entender cuáles son las investigaciones que se han dado
en retórica desde el apartado clásico y mejorar nuestros conocimientos teóricos acerca
de esta disciplina. Es decir, si buscamos un volumen que nos enseñe a hablar mejor
en público [...] este no es nuestro libro. Será nuestro libro si queremos profundizar
de manera teórica y entender los conceptos por los cuales se sustenta la retórica
clásica (VA-M01).
An example of the second strategy is VA-M03. The reviewer, after introducing herself,
the book and the coordinating author, quickly takes on the role of mediator, advising
readers on how to read the chosen work:
En cuanto a la estructura del libro, encontramos un primer capítulo en el que se hace
una introducción sobre precisamente cómo leer el libro, ya que está pensado para leerse
no necesariamente de inicio a fin, sino que está pensado para que el docente salte
de capítulo en capítulo y se dirija directamente al contenido que le interesa, al
artefacto digital [...] sobre el que quiere investigar para ponerlo en práctica o
simplemente ampliar su conocimiento (VA-M03).
b) Content selection
In all VA-Crits, contents are subject to selection, and only the relevant contents
are chosen in order to evaluate the work according to the interests of the target
audience. Instead of lengthy summaries or ambiguous syntheses, ideas or contributions
from the works reviewed are selected according to their value for teaching, given
that the reviewers recognise themselves as trainee teachers and read to learn and
to train, and through their video reviews they address other members of the professional
community they are entering during their Bachelor’s or Master’s studies.
In VA-M02, in terms of outline and content, reviewers create their own discourse on
the basis of the central ideas of the work. These ideas were previously identified
and introduced in their reviews, developing them and contributing, for all of them,
their vision as reviewers.
La pregunta es clara, ¿no? Cómo convertir el aula en ese espacio [...] del que nos
habla el autor. Bueno, pues para ello nos va mostrando cómo aborda contenidos específicos
de enseñanza, concretamente [...]. Y lo verdaderamente interesante de esta obra es
que él incorpora en los capítulos [...] un diario de clase, [...] las reflexiones,
las propias actividades y los resultados de estas y cómo los alumnos interaccionan
entre ellos, y así nosotros, como lectores, podemos conocer cuál ha sido la respuesta
de los alumnos ante [...] los diferentes proyectos [...] (VA-M02)
The book under review contains a selection of didactic proposals for the classroom.
However, unlike the VA-Rep of similar works, the VA-Crit avoids the presentation of
a selection of activities, one after the other. They draw out the key ideas common
to all of them and clearly foreground the author and his approach.
c) Criteria for recommendation
The recommendation criteria in VA-Crits tend to reflect the assessments already made
in the presentation of the work and the author and in the structure and content. In
this example (VA-M01) the reviewer insists on the cases in which it would not be advisable
to read the book:
[...] sí que lo recomendaría, pero si bien es cierto no lo recomendaría como un tratado
para aprender oratoria, no lo recomendaría en cualquier caso para mejorar nuestra
manera de hablar, lo recomendaría si y solo si queremos informarnos acerca de [...]
para después encontrar cualquier otro manual que nos ayude con nuestras motivaciones
a la hora de aprender a dar una clase, por ejemplo, que eso sí que sería útil. Entonces
lo recomendaría si queremos esto. Si queremos aprender a hablar no es un volumen para
hacerlo (VA-M01).
Although all VA-Crits have a closing in which a final assessment of the work is made
and a recommendation to peers is made, the evaluation of the book is conducted in
the different parts of the book. The assessment is made explicit when the interest
of the book is underlined, when the author’s expertise is highlighted or also, as
in the following example, when the suitability of the contributions for the classroom
is evaluated:
Se complementa esta lectura guiada con la búsqueda de información recopilada en una
wiki sobre personajes mitológicos que tomarán la palabra en el lamento amoroso, lo
que constituye una hábil solución al problema de la dificultad que presenta escribir
este tipo de textos (VA-M05).
d) Discourse construction
Unlike VA-Reps, the construction of discourse in VA-Crits moves away from linear order.
Reviewers create their own structure according to their critical understanding of
the work and always with the awareness of the mediating purpose of their video review.
This structure is conditioned by the interests that have guided the selection of the
book, generally related to the reviewers’ educational background, as can be seen in
the beginning of VA-M05.
La escasez de modelos para elaborar programaciones es uno de los problemas principales
en la formación del profesorado. Ante este hecho, los docentes han tenido que recurrir
a la lectura de referentes teóricos que compartieran su manera de concebir la enseñanza.
En este sentido, el autor de este libro [...] siempre ha sido uno de esos referentes
(VA-M05).
In VA-Crits, discourse construction shows the linguistic decisions that shape the
“author’s voice”, such as the grammatical person or the use of modal verbs accompanied
by greater syntactic complexity in the elaboration of discourse, in line with the
greater depth of reasoning.
The choice of the grammatical person shows how the reviewer places himself before
his addressees in order to offer his critical view of the work. The use of the inclusive
first-person plural shows an awareness of discursive community, of addressing a community
of peers (trainee teachers) to which one belongs and with which one shares knowledge.
Thus, in VA-G05 the reviewer recommends her peers (“we can get ideas”) and appeals
to shared knowledge such as “that time of change” (she refers to the New School),
“meaningful learning” or “active role”, which she does not explain why they belong
to the formative baggage of the discursive community she is addressing. The adoption
of the author’s voice and the engagement with the community of peers are signs of
the configuration of the professional teaching identity, a differentiating fact with
respect to the VA-Rep, whose authors have not yet managed to detach themselves from
their identity as students.
The critical vision of reviewers requires a more syntactically complex elaboration
of the discourse because they need to give reasons for their interpretation and evaluation
of the work. Far from additive links, syntactic constructions such as “not... but”,
adversatives and conditionals, causals, and the use of negation, causal and concessive
structures appear alongside modal verbs (I think, I think, it seems to me that...).
Cabe destacar que estas propuestas no son una simple descripción de una serie de actividades,
sino que están acompañadas por una reflexión teórico didáctica que las justifica (VA-M05).
Está claro que en las aulas no se puede seguir fielmente lo que propuso Freinet, entre
otras cosas porque [...] No obstante, creo que se puede aprender mucho de los principios
que propusieron estos pedagogos en esa época de cambio (VA-G05).
In short, the critical vision of these reviewers is clearly shown in the discourse
construction choices they make. They take responsibility for the interpretation of
the text, aware of their role as mediators who are part of a particular discourse
community. This translates into greater syntactic elaboration, in the service of the
value they intend to convey to their peers.
Discussion and conclusions
In this article we have delved into the characterisation of academic video reviews,
a less common format in the classroom than video reviews of literary texts and from
which it differs in substantial aspects (). It is a topic that is still under-researched, but with great potential for teaching.
The video reviews analysed show the long way to go in the academic literacy of our
students. According to , university education has the responsibility to introduce them to the forms of reasoning
and discursive conventions of their speciality. Our didactic proposal shows a way
of assuming this responsibility in relation to the readings of the disciplines studied.
Video reviews, as a way of participating in a discursive community of peers, allow
for a socialising vision of academic reading, placing reviewers as readers and authors
of their video reviews and as recipients of the reviews of their peers.
This socialising vision underpins the four categories of analysis (presentation of
the reading and its authorship, content selection, recommendation criteria and discourse
construction), and the resulting two main types: VA-Rep and VA-Crit. VA-Reps tend
to be devoid of the evaluative character that would define them. In them, much of
the time is spent summarising the content, because the reviewers do not take on the
role of mediators or engage in the critical function of the video reviews, except
in the final recommendation. On the other hand, VA-Crits are defined by the adoption
of a critical stance, which entails the abandonment of the reproductive strategy of
content for that of knowledge transformation (). We found two key elements in the change of strategy: the appropriation of the rhetorical
situation (understanding of the genre and the communicative purpose attributed) and
the students’ reading knowledge and experience.
The stage of education and the derived academic reading experience differentiates
between Bachelor’s and Master’s degree readers. Our undergraduate students produce
their video reviews at the beginning of the 3rd year, with a double challenge: to read about subjects they do not know about and
to elaborate knowledge about them to share with their peers. The lack of mastery of
the subject matter leads them, in general, to produce linear summaries of the works,
faithful to their structure and content. However, some features of mediation can also
be observed in the VA-Reps. Reviewers try to assume the mediating purpose of the video
review, they take into account the circumstances that frame the production of the
genre and are guided by the purpose of sharing readings among peers, but in many cases
they are not capable of analysing in depth and critically assessing the content of
the work for their addressees, other teachers in training. This explains why in all
the categories analysed, aspects of transition from VA-Reps to VA-Crits are observed,
which support the didactic interest of the proposal, because they show the learning
path from the inexperienced to the expert. The foregoing is related to , when they state that university education seems to influence the conviction of the
need to be a reader. Our didactic proposal seeks to make students perceive this need
and assumes the responsibility that corresponds to us as trainers.
We agree with and Shanahan (2012, cited in ) that academic literacy does not develop spontaneously, but in situated ways in contexts
of learning and use, with explicit and mediated interventions from across disciplines.
In line with , but within the framework of academic reading, increasing students' experience as
reviewers provides greater depth of disciplinary knowledge and forces them to develop
more complex linguistic resources. Video enables new social scenarios also for academic
reading.
Notes
[1] The sample data are detailed in Results. Table 4 presents the proposed typology of
academic video reviews. The code used indicates whether the academic video reviews
(VA) come from subjects of the Bachelor’s Degree in Teaching (VA-G) or the Master’s
Degree in Secondary Education (VA-M) and their numbering (VA-G01, VA-M01, etc.).
[2] Translation (from Catalan into Spanish) by the authors.
[3] Translation (from Catalan into Spanish) by the authors.
[4] Translation (from Catalan into Spanish) by the authors.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Erlbaum.
3
Carlino, P. (2005). Escribir, leer y aprender en la universidad. Una introducción a la alfabetización
académica. FCE.
4
Cassany, D. (2021). Crítica de la (lectura) crítica. Articles, 88, 7-13.
5
Cerrillo, P., Larrañaga, E., & Yubero, S. (2003). Libros, lectores y mediadores. En
P. Cerrillo, & S. Yubero (Coord.), La formación de mediadores para la promoción de la lectura (pp. 229-236). Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha, CEPLI.
6
Colomer, T., & Munita, F. (2013). La experiencia lectora de los alumnos de Magisterio.
Lenguaje y Textos, 38, 37-44.
Ibarra, N., & Ballester, J. (2016). Booktrailer en Educación Infantil Primaria. Digital education review, 30, 76-93.
9
Ibarra, N., & Ballester, J. (2017). De literatura, cine, publicidad e internet: relatos
digitales y booktráilers en la formación de docentes. @tic. Revista d’innovació educativa, 19, 47-54. https://doi.org/10.7203/attic.19.11006
10
Izcara-Palacios, S.P. (2014). Manual de investigación cualitativa. Fontamara.
Li, D. (2022). A review of academic literacy research development: from 2002 to 2019.
Asian-Pacific journal of second and foreign language education, 7(5), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-022-00130-z
13
Martí, A. (2020). Compartir lecturas mediante videorreseñas. Una práctica innovadora
en la formación de maestros. En R. Roig-Vila (Ed.), La docencia en la Enseñanza Superior. (pp. 1248-1258). Octaedro.
14
Martí, A., & Garcia, P. (2020). Did@tics. Projectes de llengua i literatura per a l’aula de secundària. Bromera.
15
Martí, A., Reig, A., & Rodríguez-Gonzalo, C. (2021). La videorreseña y la creación
de comunidades lectoras en la formación inicial de docentes. Tonos Digital, 41, 1-28.
16
Martí, A., Reig, A., & Rodríguez-Gonzalo, C. (2022). Las videorreseñas y la formación
de maestros como mediadores de literatura infantil. En A. Asiáin-Ansorena & M. V.
López-Pérez (Coords.), Multimodalidad y didáctica de las literaturas (pp. 177-198). Graó.
17
Paladines-Paredes, L.V., & Aliagas, C. (2021a). Booktuber: lectura en red, nuevas literacidades y aplicaciones didácticas. EDMETIC, 10(1), 58-72. https://doi.org/10.21071/edmetic.v10i1.12234
