Emily Linares and Deborah Blocker Litera

Received: 21 September 2020 | Accepted: 18 September 2021
DOI: 10.1111/flan.12589
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Literacy en français and à la française:

Socializing students to academic literacy
practices in a foreign language
Emily Linares1 | Déborah Blocker2
The Challenge
Developing academic literacy in a foreign language most often means using familiar, L1
practices for textual analysis, only in a new language. What if learners were exposed to
academic practices employed in the target culture? How might academic literacy de-
velopment be reconceived to offer students exposure to foreign approaches to textual
engagement? This article reports on a semester‐long intervention aimed at exposing a
small group of students in a French literature and composition course at UC Berkeley
to two French academic genres.
1
Harvard University, Cambridge,
Massachusetts, USA Abstract
2
University of California, Berkeley, Research on academic socialization has predominately
California, USA focused on the L2 educational experiences of international
Correspondence students. While foreign language (FL) research has
Emily Linares, Harvard University, explored “multiliteracies” and “intercultural learning,”
Cambridge, MA, USA.
literacy in a FL continues to be understood as the use of
Email: emilyzlinares@gmail.com
foreign words and grammar combined with culturally
Funding information familiar reading and writing practices. This article, which
Berkeley Language Center, is conceptual in nature, highlights the potential to socialize
Grant/Award Number: Instructional
Development Research Fellowship
US FL learners to literacy practices from the target culture.
It reports on an upper‐division French literature and
composition course that was redesigned to socialize stu-
dents at UC Berkeley to two French academic genres,
namely, the explication de texte and commentaire composé.
The insights from the present project, which are not
language‐specific and hold relevance for undergraduate
and graduate students alike, encourage critical reflection
Foreign Language Annals. 2021;1–32. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/flan © 2021 ACTFL | 1

2 | LINARES AND BLOCKER
within FL departments on what is—and can be—entailed

by literacy in additional languages.
KEYWORDS
cultural practices, curriculum development, products and
perspectives, text types and genres, writing process
1 | INTRODUCTION
Literacy was long understood as a set of trackable, quantifiable skills, and reading and writing
have only recently come to be regarded as situated social practices (Collins & Blot, 2003, p. 83;
Sterponi, 2011, p. 227). Influenced by sociocultural theory (e.g., Heath, 1983; Scollon &
Scollon, 1981; Scribner & Cole, 1981; Street, 1984), educational researchers came to perceive
literacy development as resulting from socialization to “the cultural norms of a particular social
group” (Lam, 2004, p. 46). With its focus on the acquisition of culturally sanctioned norms
(Baquedano‐López, 1997, p. 29; also see Bernstein, 1974; Schieffelin & Ochs, 1986), the paradigm
of socialization can help us to explore literacy development “as not only the acquisition of a set of
cognitive and motor skills but also cultural apprenticeship into a community's values”
(Sterponi, 2011, p. 227). The conception of literacy as a collection of practices in which individuals
engage (as opposed to something that they do or do not possess) carries important implications for
foreign language (FL) instruction. Specifically, FL literacy finds itself expanded to encompass the
mastery of new words as well as contact with new worlds (Kern, 2000), through practices of
reading and writing specific to the target culture. As this article illustrates, by drawing FL learners'
attention to sociocultural differences in textual analysis, instructors can offer them an additional
form of cultural immersion. FL students' engagement with authentic texts can be enhanced
through socialization to authentic forms of textual analysis from the target culture.
Researchers have documented how second language (L2) learners may experience dis-
sonance when L2 academic practices differ from those to which they were previously trained in
their L1. For example, international students, who have developed literacy practices in their L1,
must navigate unfamiliar academic practices to succeed academically at their host institution
(see, e.g., Kobayashi, 2016; Morita, 2004, 2009; Waterstone, 2008; Zappa‐Hollman, 2007). FL
learners, on the other hand, may only come into contact with unfamiliar academic literacy
practices when studying abroad, and then only should they choose to enroll in general course
offerings, as opposed to those designated for study abroad participants (Duff, 2010; Duff &
Anderson, 2015; Linares, 2021). Despite an emphasis on “multiliteracies” and “intercultural
learning” in recent research, within the US collegiate system, writing in a FL overwhelmingly
appears to be understood as the use of FL words combined with US academic discourse and
academic genres. Students with academic training in the United States who enroll in a French
course can experience success in French‐language coursework by continuing to read and write
according to the academic conventions to which they were previously socialized in English.
This project takes its inspiration from the first author's experiences as an American under-
graduate studying abroad in France and later as a graduate instructor of French as a FL
(Linares, 2021). During study abroad, she had elected to enroll in French literature courses with
local students as opposed to those designed for international students. In this coursework, she
found herself called upon to produce French academic genres that she had never practiced let alone
LINARES AND BLOCKER | 3
heard of during her training as a French major at UC Berkeley. As a graduate student instructor of
French, she later observed that her students, not unlike she herself, unsurprisingly employed the L1
academic conventions in which they had been trained when writing their French compositions.
This observation inspired a reflection on ways to increase FL students' awareness of differences in
academic literacy practices across languages and cultures. In interrogating what it means to develop
academic literacy practices in a FL, this project responds to Cummins's (2005) call for language
researchers and educators—and, we add, students—“to confront and critically reexamine our own
monolingual […] assumptions” (p. 590). Specifically, by means of a pedagogical experiment in FL
socialization, this contribution challenges the belief that academic writing in the FL can—and
should—adhere to L1 conventions. The project is situated at the intersection of the understudied
topic of foreign language academic discourse socialization and pedagogies of multiliteracies.
2 | ACADEMIC LITERACY SOC I AL IZATION
The present manuscript contributes to a body of research on what has been previously referred
to as academic (disciplinary) enculturation (e.g., Berkenkotter & Huckin, 1995; C. P.
Casanave, 2002; C. Casanave & Li, 2008; Prior, 1998), induction or initiation (to an academic
community) (Berkenkotter et al., 1991), academic literacies (Ivanič, 1998; Lea & Street, 1998;
Lillis, 2003), or academic (discourse) socialization (Duff, 2010). Previous research on academic
literacy socialization has focused on the experiences of ESL learners in postsecondary programs
in the United States or Canada. Research on learners' development of academic discourse has
generally taken a product‐ or process‐oriented approach (Morita, 2004). A product‐based ap-
proach, common in English for academic purposes, has been used to identify genre‐specific
conventions that novices are to master. As Morita observes, researchers who focus on linguistic
and rhetorical norms expected of L2 learners often assume “a one‐way assimilation into a
relatively stable academic community with fixed rules and conventions” (p. 574). In contrast,
socialization has more recently offered a theoretical lens for academic discourse research
(Duff, 2010). Language socialization research is based on the premise that “novices' partici-
pation in communicative practices is promoted but not determined by a legacy of socially and
culturally informed persons, artifacts, and features of the built environment” (Ochs &
Schieffelin, 2012, p. 4). Through participation in a community of practice (Lave &
Wenger, 1991; also see Duff & Anderson, 2015), learners ideally come to internalize and
reproduce the practices required “to participate in a competent and appropriate manner in the
discursive practices of a given academic community” (Morita, 2009, p. 444).
Previous research on academic discourse socialization has largely documented the experiences
of ESL international postsecondary students studying in Canada (e.g., Kobayashi, 2016;
Morita, 2004, 2009; Waterstone, 2008; Zappa‐Hollman, 2007) or the United States (e.g.,
Haneda, 2009; Ho, 2011), with less attention to the socializing experiences of FL students. When
socialized into the norms of academic discourse, the linguistic and discursive challenges faced by
L2 and FL learners may go unrecognized: “It is simply expected that most students are already
familiar with the genres required for academic essays or presentations and the criteria for evalu-
ating them, even though these attributes and criteria may vary greatly from one context to the next”
(Duff, 2010, p. 181). Prior socialization in other linguistic and academic contexts may compel
learners to communicate in specific ways that are incompatible with new discursive expectations.
Duff and Anderson (2015) draw attention to the fact that, for learners in study abroad programs,
“[t]he social, cultural, linguistic, and educational differences between students' prior and current
learning contexts, including the classroom discourse and interaction they engage in, can result in
challenges and struggles for students and instructors as well as academic successes” (p. 337). The
degree of similarity between L1‐ and L2/FL‐sanctioned practices can facilitate or complicate
learners' socialization into academic norms in additional languages and the ease with which they
claim membership within academic communities: “How people's (multiple) languages, literacy
traditions, and cultures interact with each other […] allows for a broader understanding of the
potential discordances, similarities, tensions, interactions, and synergies across different contexts
and how these can impact language learning/use” (p. 339).
Both L2 and FL learners' initial position is one of peripherality as newcomers and potential
members of a new academic community of practice (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998). Rather
than understand their position as one of disadvantage, Lave and Wenger (1991) frame peripherality
as “a positive term” that acknowledges “a way of gaining access to sources for understanding through
growing involvement” (p. 37; as cited in Cheng, 2013, p. 13). Learners must be afforded sufficient
legitimacy and opportunities for socialization to gain membership in a community of practice.
Without access “to participate in social relations and production processes to create artifacts,” le-
gitimate participation may be compromised, and “it is highly possible that [learners'] inevitable
stumblings and violations result in neglect and exclusion (Wenger, 1998)” (Cheng, 2013, p. 13).
Given the important stakes for learners of additional languages, Duff and Anderson (2015)
recognize the critical need for more socialization studies centered on a range of disciplines and
academic levels of study. Duff (2010) notes that oral discourse has been “most neglected in
studies of academic discourse” (p. 177) and that little attention has been given to the re-
lationships between oral and written discourse. The present study, with its focus on under-
graduate FL learners' in‐class socialization to both oral and written discourse, contributes to
these gaps in previous research on academic discourse socialization. Additionally, drawing
inspiration from the multiliteracies framework, this project offers one model of how to sensitize
FL students to foreign academic discursive practices outside of a study abroad context.
3 | MULTILITER ACIES
In 1994, the 10 researchers who would become collectively known as the New London Group met in
New London, New Hampshire to envision the future of literacy instruction. The framework that they
developed has been referred to as a Pedagogy of Multiliteracies, Multiliteracies Pedagogy, or Multi-
literacies. The term “multiliteracies” was intended to capture the “multiplicity of communication
channels and media” and “increasing salience of cultural and linguistic diversity” encountered by
learners (New London Group, 2000, p. 5). The Pedagogy of Multiliteracies emerged as formalist
approaches to language study fell out of favor by the end of the 20th century
(Kramsch, 2014a, 2014b). The pedagogical framework is rooted in an understanding of language “as a
set of social practices that constitute an important part of one's identity” (Blyth, 2018 pp. 64–65) and a
conception of meaning‐making as “an active and dynamic process” shaped by the act of designing as
opposed to adherence to static rules (New London Group, 1996, p. 74). The Multiliteracies Pedagogy
proposes a theory of discourse that recognizes the existence of conventions as well as individuals'
agency to creatively manipulate them. The New London Group (1996) outlines three components
that contribute to the production of textual meaning: Available Designs, Designing, and the Rede-
signed, which we briefly summarize here. Available Designs are defined as “resources for meaning:
culture, context and purpose‐specific patterns and conventions of meaning making” (Cope &
Kalantzis, 2009, p. 176). This could, for instance, refer to academic genres (e.g., oral presentation,
argumentative essay, etc.) available in a particular linguistic and cultural context as well as the
approaches to reading and writing that they entail. In turn, Designing captures “[t]he act of meaning:
work performed on/with Available Designs” (p. 176), in other words, “the act of textual interpretation
or textual production” (Blyth, 2018, p. 65). The Redesigned constitutes “the traces of transformation
that are left in the social world” by the design process (Cope & Kalantzis, 2009, p. 177). This “residue”
can encompass both “new Available Designs, or the meaning designer who, through the very act of
Designing, has transformed themselves” (p. 176). As the New London Group (2000) explains:
The outcome of Designing is a new meaning, something through which meaning‐

makers remake themselves […] But it is neither a simple reproduction (as the myth
of standards and transmission pedagogy would have us believe), nor is it simply
creative (as the myths of individual originality and personal voice would have us
believe). As the play of cultural resources and uniquely positioned subjectivity, the
Redesigned is founded on historically and culturally received patterns of meaning.
At the same time it is the unique product of human agency: a transformed
meaning. And, in its turn, the Redesigned becomes a new Available Design, a new
meaning‐making resource. (p. 23)
To offer a concrete illustration of these components, let us consider the academic genre of
the doctoral dissertation (i.e., an Available Design), which involves discipline‐specific conven-
tions. Designing refers to a doctoral student's analysis of data and the process of writing a
dissertation. The Redesigned refers to both (a) the transformed Available Design and (b) the
meaning designer (i.e., the graduate student), who has been changed by the experience of
designing (i.e., producing a dissertation). The genre of the dissertation will emerge shaped by
both the “historically and culturally received patterns of meaning,” in other words, the context
of socialization, as well as the learner's “uniquely positioned subjectivity” (p. 23). The student,
in turn, will have developed new perspectives and tools for meaning making, which they will
carry over to new research contexts (Figure 1).
A Multiliteracy approach to FL instruction has the potential to sensitize students to FL‐
specific genres as new Available Designs. Turpin (2019) recognized that instructors of Spanish
as a FL could employ a Multiliteracies Pedagogy “to teach their students to write according to
F I G U R E 1 Meaning‐making in the multiliteracies framework [Color figure can be viewed at

wileyonlinelibrary.com]
the academic conventions of a university in Mexico City, Buenos Aires, or Madrid” (p. 55). She
suggested that the comparison of “models of academic essays from the U.S. and other Spanish‐
speaking countries could highlight the culturally‐situated nature of textual conventions and
prepare students to meet the academic requirements of study abroad” (p. 55). However, in her
study, which was carried out in a Spanish Advanced Grammar and Composition course, Turpin
focused on the genre of TripAdvisor restaurant reviews. One could problematize the use of
“global” platforms such as TripAdvisor to teach a standard national language and culture that
has been “globalized.” The use of global genres such as this may limit FL students' opportunity
to critically reflect on the “culturally‐situated nature of textual conventions” and reinforce their
ability to rely on familiar discourse practices.
4 | PROJEC T DESIGN
This study was carried out over the spring 2020 semester at UC Berkeley. Participants consisted
of students (n = 9) enrolled in one focal section of a course on reading and writing in French. The
course, taught entirely in French, serves as the gateway to all upper‐division coursework in the
department. It introduces students to a vast array of literary genres and styles of writing, and
works across time (from the 16th to the 20th century), grouping texts thematically, so as to allow
for the investigation of both literary issues and cultural topics during class discussions, and in the
students' written work. The two central learning goals of this bridge‐class are (1) to develop the
students' capacities for literary and cultural analysis within French Studies, so as to prepare them
for higher‐level upper‐division classes in French, by training them to carefully read and fruitfully
analyze a variety of different texts and (2) to develop the students' composition skills in French,
so as to allow them to express their thoughts with clarity, depth and nuance, in the TL, when
taking classes in French (whether in the United States or during time abroad).
The changes made to the original syllabus, which the instructor had successfully taught for
about 10 years, were as minimal as possible. The three original thematic textual groupings (the
first on social conflict, the second on gender and identity issues, and the third on traveling and
the apprehension of alterity) were preserved. However, some texts within each theme were
changed. In particular the instructor added a few short 19th century poems on poverty and
inequality into the first section of the class, to better support the initiation of her students to the
explication de texte and the commentaire composés, which can be easier to grasp, at first, when
working on short and relatively self‐contained texts, such as sonnets or prose poems. The
instructor also replaced the study of Molière's L'Ecole des femmes with the reading of two full
parts of Simone de Beauvoir's Les Mémoires d'une jeune fille rangée, during the section of the
class devoted to the study of gender and social identities. This change was implemented to
encourage greater autonomy in the students' reading, at a time when the instructor was hoping
that her students would feel comfortable selecting their own textual excerpts when preparing
an explication de texte to present in front of the class.
Finally, the instructor redesigned the syllabus to incorporate experimentation with the two
French academic genres being introduced. An extensive exposure to the explication de texte was
achieved by building in an opportunity for a student or a group of students to present an oralized
explication de texte almost every time a reading was scheduled for class discussion, and encouraging
students to react to it. Two opportunities were also created for the students to write a commentaire
composé, with one being mandatory (Composition #2) and the other optional (Composition #4). A
shortened version of the redesigned syllabus can be found in Appendix E.
The aim was not to insist on generic prescriptivism and student mastery of generic con-
ventions. Rather, the course redesign was intended to expose them to alternative approaches to
textual analysis (i.e., new Available Designs) from the target language/culture and to offer
students the opportunity to experiment with their implementation (through designing, i.e.,
producing analyses in speech and writing). The course instructor (the second author) is a
professor from France who completed her PhD at the Sorbonne and subsequently taught at
universities in France and the United States.1 The research project carried out in this context
was twofold: it primarily involved (a) course design, the development and implementation of
one model of how to expose students to target language academic genres, and, to the extent
possible, (b) the evaluation of outcomes for participants.
4.1 | French academic genres
The explication de texte and commentaire composé were selected for incorporation into the
traditional course program both due to their widespread use in French schooling and because
they were, among the academic genres practiced in French institutions (such as le résumé‐
discussion, la dissertation or l'écriture d'invention), those which were best suited to the goals of
the bridge‐class being taught, which aims to develop students' capacity to read literary texts in
French and discuss them analytically through cogent writing in the target language. These
academic genres were also chosen in light of their structural ties to each other in French
academic culture: the commentaire composé, a carefully structured and thematically con-
structed textual analysis, was indeed developed as the written counterpart of the explication de
texte, in which students engage in a detailed linear analysis of a literary text. The connection
between the genres in the class being taught was intended to increase student confidence in
employing generic conventions in the target language, by fostering cumulative progress when
they were practiced in association—thereby modeling French practices but with a slightly
different purpose. Following a description of the components of each genre, we offer an ex-
planation of the procedures used to socialize student participants to the generic conventions.
4.1.1 | Explication de texte
The explication de texte originates in the praelectiō (i.e., practice of reading aloud to others), a
didactic tool for future orators in the 16th century Jesuit schools (Bombart, 2010).2 After
acquiring sufficient mastery of Latin, future orators were trained to attend to the content (i.e.,
moral lesson contained in texts) and rhetoric (i.e., “matériaux linguistiques et stylistiques
exploitables” [linguistically and stylistically exploitable material], Rosellini, 1999, p. 32) of
ancient texts. In its prototypical form, the praelectiō consisted of five steps: (1) reading aloud
and contextualizing a text; (2) providing a word‐by‐word paraphrase, ideally in simplified Latin;
(3) reflecting on the grammatical and rhetorical rules illustrated therein; (4) presenting the
main discursive features required to understand the text; (5) reflecting on the esthetically
pleasing quality of certain Latin phrasings (Bombart, 2010). The eventual practice of studying
isolated passages contributed to the conception of a text as an artefact (Rosellini, 1999, p. 31).
Included on the baccalauréat exam3 for the first time in 1840, the explication de texte required
students to home in on selected passages, attending to both their form and content
(Bombart, 2010).
What does it mean to “explain a text?” In its current form, and as presented within the
course, an explication de texte constitutes a structured oral reading performance. In preparing
for an explication, a student is given or identifies a passage to subject to analysis. The passage,
which must represent a coherent unit for analysis, could constitute an entire text (e.g., in the
case of a poem) or an excerpt (usually of no more than 25–30 lines) of a more extended work.
The performance takes the form of a monologue lasting about 20 min in which the student
presents their analysis. After reading the passage aloud, the student situates it within the larger
work and within literary history more broadly. The presenter then announces the predominant
theme and traces the movement of the passage (i.e., the sequence of developments it exhibits).
Following this initial orientation for listeners, the presenter announces their problématique,
that is, the particular issue or question that the student in question will explore through the
explication. The problématique represents the aspect of the passage that piques the reader's
interest (“c'est la forme que prend la curiosité du lecteur devant ce passage” [it's the form that
the reader's curiosity takes before the text], Ministère de l'Éducation nationale et de la Jeunesse,
2019). In formulating this focus, the student considers questions such as: What is unique about
what this text says or does? How does it contribute to the larger work? What makes this passage
intriguing, or disappointing, or satisfying, or frustrating? How does it move (or disturb) the reader?
For example, a problématique may ask “Why does the text end in this way?” or “What does the
author wish to communicate to us in describing the thoughts of a character in this way?” In the
linear analysis that follows, the student performs a detailed textual analysis that serves to justify
the interest of the problématique, and illustrates how and why the text produces the effects that
it does.
4.1.2 | Commentaire composé
As previously mentioned, the commentaire composé is designed to be the written materi-

alization of the oralized explication. The central characteristic of this exercise is its “composed”
nature, which calls for the articulation of a carefully constructed reasoning designed to illu-
minate the text at hand in a progressive yet holistic manner. In the introduction, the writer
situates the text, specifies the genre and theme of the passage, presents the problématique, and
announces the structure that the analysis will take. The body of the commentaire takes the form
of two to three lines of analysis (termed “axes”) that the author pursues in support of the
problématique. These lines of analysis are to be organized from the most obvious to the most
complex, so as to progressively unveil the reader's complete understanding of the text. The
commentaire ends with a summary of the main points and an expansion of some kind. The
expansion could entail, for instance, a comparison (parallelism or opposition) with another text
of the same literary genre or with the literature and culture of another country, or a broader
commentary on cultural history.
It is also important to stress that while many French students are first socialized to the
explication and the commentaire, as well as to the dissertation, in high‐school, when they
prepare for the baccalauréat, these three genres are currently practiced throughout the higher
education system in a variety of forms, with specific adaptations for each humanistic discipline.
For instance, when studying history, philosophy, law, geography, sociology, and political sci-
ence at a French university, one practices the commentaire de document, which is a carefully
contextualized close reading of a document, modeled, when done in writing, on the com-
mentaire composé. The commentaire de document can also be performed orally, in a linear
manner, on the model of the explication de texte. In these various disciplines, students are also
asked to write dissertations from a prompt usually based on a quotation, as they could be in
French literature classes. Finally, one should underscore that teachers are recruited in France's
national education system (through exams known as the CAPES and the agrégation) largely
based on how well they perform on these various types of exercises, with the dissertation being
practiced in written form and the explication de texte or commentaire de document being
produced orally, in front of the jury, as a way to display how the future teacher might perform
such an analytic reading in front of a class.
Variations of the academic genres taught in French high schools exist at all levels of the
French academic system until l'agrégation, and in most humanistic disciplines. Furthermore,
the system reproduces itself constantly because of the role these exercises play in the yearly
selection of teachers. This means that, by introducing FL students to the explication de texte and
the commentaire composé, or the dissertation, in the French classes they take in American
institutions, one can help those students who will then go on to study in French universities
familiarize themselves with exercises which they will probably encounter, in a variety of dif-
ferent forms, until the end of the MA (in French: Master 1 and Master 2). As such, these
exercises can function as an initiation to the scholarly practices of French academic culture
more generally.4
4.2 | Socialization to the French genres
In introducing students in this course to French academic genres, the course instructor pro-
vided them access to new Available Designs. If we revisit the Multiliteracies framework for
meaning making, we can understand the French genres as resources that can be made available
to students of French as a FL through socialization (Figure 2). In discussing the history of the
explication de texte, the focal instructor of the upper‐division French course drew a parallel
between its historical significance as a tool for the analysis of Latin as a FL and its usefulness
for students of French as a FL. She also underscored in her presentation that the aim in
exposing students to this exercise was not to insist on their mastery of French academic
practices but to equip them with alternative approaches to literary texts and sensitize them to
the fact that literacy practices vary across languages and academic contexts. As the instructor
explained during an interview: “They're not going to produce the same exercise but some
version of it that's theirs” (Instructor interview, March 2020).
Beginning the second week of the semester, students were assigned readings about the
explication de texte genre (Appendix A). They read about the history of the exercise
(Bombart, 2010; Rosellini, 1999), which has existed in some form for 500 years in France. They
then examined and discussed the guidelines for the exercise published by the French Ministry
of Education, to which both teachers and parents in France will turn for guidance with these
academic practices. Both authors collaborated on a worksheet (Appendix B) summarizing the
components of an explication de texte along with the time that students should dedicate to each
of them in their performance. Working in pairs or small groups, students practiced filling in
each section of the worksheet using excerpts from the various texts that they read, as if they
would eventually perform an explication de texte. During the fourth week of the semester, the
instructor performed an explication de texte for the class and explained the preparatory activities
that had led to the final product. As part of this explanation, the instructor showed students
how she had annotated the text using comments and a color‐coded key for thematic content
(Figure 3).
Following this initiation to the French genre, students began performing explications in
pairs (a modification to the genre as practiced in the target culture, where students work in
isolation to prepare for the exercise and present their work) or individually. In preparing and
performing their explications, students were designing meaning through the application of the
Available Design.
Students' socialization to the commentaire composé genre looked similar; they read how‐to
guides and examined models (Appendix C). They were again provided with a worksheet
F I G U R E 2 Meaning‐making with FL genres. FL, foreign language [Color figure can be viewed at
wileyonlinelibrary.com]
F I G U R E 3 Instructor's annotations of the poem “Les Yeux des Pauvres” in preparation for her explication
de texte [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
(Appendix D) summarizing the components of the exercise and given opportunities to fill it out.
In producing the first draft of their commentaire, students designed meaning on two levels:
They produced an interpretation of a literary passage and produced an iteration of the Available
Design (i.e., the French genre of the commentaire composé). Their instructor provided them
with feedback on their draft and, at times, even modeled how students could revise their
individual written production. For instance, when students expressed uncertainty about how to
revise their introduction, the instructor rewrote it for them. As she explained:
Some of them showed me their introduction and said, “What can I do?” or “How
can I change it?” […] Sometimes […] I will take their introduction and rewrite it
and say, “Ok. So here's an example of what I would do with your introduction. You
can use it or you can not use it.” But they say when I ask them afterwards that
that's helpful because they can see where to go and how‐ what it means to es-
sentially fix an introduction. And I think that that's unusual for them to have that
but that they appreciate it, they see that it's kind of a way of supporting them and
making them grow. (Instructor interview, March 2020)
Once the commentaires were returned to students, the instructor dedicated a class session to
a discussion of general tendencies (in terms of grammar as well as the reproduction of the
French genre) within the class. Anonymized portions of students' commentaires were projected
to facilitate a collective reflection on the extent to which they reproduced the generic con-
ventions of the commentaire composé, as students understood them, and to collectively devise
possible revisions.
What emerged from students' process of designing textual analysis constitutes the rede-
signed: (a) the Available Designs and (b) the FL learners themselves. The Available Designs
(i.e., French genres), removed from their traditional contexts of use (i.e., French and Franco-
phone educational institutions), found themselves transformed through their implementation
in US FL classrooms. The student participants in turn became equipped with foreign tools and
perspectives for literary analysis.
A variety of methods were employed for data collection and analysis. The first author
carried out classroom observations and produced fieldnotes as well as transcriptions of portions
of classroom discussions. She also conducted pre‐ and post‐surveys with student participants
(n = 5), interviewed student participants (n = 7), interviewed the course instructor three times
during the semester, and examined students' production of the oral and written French aca-
demic genres. The next section summarizes the outcomes of the course interventions in terms
of reported student confidence working with the genres and the redesigned that emerged from
this project in FL academic socialization.
5 | FINDINGS
5.1 | Reported confidence producing the French genres
Five students completed both the pre‐ and post‐survey. The survey asked students to report
their confidence producing each genre on a scale of 1–5 (1 = not at all confident; 2 = slightly
confident; 3 = moderately confident; 4 = very confident; 5 = extremely confident). Although the
explicit aim of the study was not the “mastery of French genres,” we chose to assess the level of
TABLE 1 Students' average reported confidence producing the French genres

Presurvey Postsurvey
Explication de texte 2.2 3.8
Commentaire composé 2.2 3.6
student confidence in handling the French genres (as opposed to awareness of generic con-
ventions) due to our interest in students' experience of (re)designing. We sought to ascertain
their confidence putting the genres into practice, and not simply learning about them, in a US
context. An increase in average confidence greater than 1 point was observed for both French
genres (Table 1).
End‐of‐semester interviews with students suggested that the increase in confidence was
likely even larger than indicated by the survey results. During these interviews, all seven
students noted that they had not understood what an explication de texte or commentaire
composé entailed when completing the presurvey. At best, their previous coursework had made
them aware of the existence of the genres, but they did not have any prior experience practicing
either genre.
5.2 | Assessing outcomes through the lens of the redesigned
Within the Multiliteracy framework, the Redesigned enables us to evaluate outcomes in terms
of new perspectives and tools afforded to FL learners. Student end‐of‐semester interviews were
employed to assess the following:
1. How were students impacted as a result of the intervention?

2. What applications beyond the focal French class did students envision for the tools that they
had developed?
5.2.1 | The redesigned: New perspectives
Theme identification analysis revealed four perspectives that students had gained through their
socialization to the French academic genres: (a) accountability, (b) depth of analysis, (c) at-
tention to historical context, and (d) experience vocalizing an analysis.
The expectation that students prepare and perform at least one explication de texte made
them more accountable for course readings. As they identified and analyzed their passage,
students remained aware of the need to share their findings with their classmates. One student
recalled how “going through the text even and knowing I'll have to tell this to a bunch of
people” had improved the quality of the analysis. In contrast to a typical class session, in which
students could be invited to comment on any aspect of the assigned readings, the explication
carried an expectation of accountability for a passage in its entirety. As another student
commented:
When you're reading a text for class there's no requirement of how in‐depth you
have to get […] But when you're given like the responsibility to do like a full
explication de texte, you really are in charge of like covering all the points and
getting into each them, each phrase of the text.
In other words, this exercise trained students in a more active form of textual engagement
and the production of an exhaustive analysis that accounted for a passage in its entirety.
For both the explication de texte and commentaire composé, students found themselves
attending to greater detail. In the words of one student, “This method sort of forces you to get
the most out of each passage as possible.” For students in the class, this meant no longer
choosing a limited number of aspects of the text to focus on but aiming for exhaustivity and
cohesion in their analysis. Another student became aware of the need to revise her approach
(i.e., to be what she deemed less American) after receiving feedback on the first draft of her
commentaire:
[I]n the commentaire you have to go into super specific depth, with examples, and
with multiple nuances. And I think [the first version of my essay] just kind of
ended up looking more like an American way of writing an analysis. And obviously
((laughter)) that wasn't the goal of the paper so I understand why it was wrong.
I just kind of had to adapt my thinking and my habits.
This student experienced dissonance as her previous socialization to essay‐writing con-

ventions differed from expectations for the French genre: “I kept automatically reverting to
thesis and then three body paragraphs and not really separating it out like you do with the
commentaire.” By returning to the handout she was able to ensure that all components of the
commentaire were accounted for: “So then I went really by the handout and really detailed my
outline which made it a lot easier to write the paper.”
While their training in the French genres required students to zoom in on textual detail, it
also compelled them to situate passages in a broader context (i.e., the larger work in which the
passage appeared as well as literary/cultural history more broadly). Students articulated the
novelty of attention to context:
I kind of liked the format we were given in that you had to like introduce the text
and go into the historical background […] I thought that was pretty cool ‘cause I
don't normally do that when I'm writing essays.
I guess it was slightly different from the way I would approach writing an essay […]
It was especially interesting to sort of dive deeper into the context at the time of the
publication of the text and more about the author. That helped me to understand
what I was reading a lot better.
Lastly, the explication de texte additionally offered students the novel experience of voca-
lizing a literary analysis. All interviewed students reported that previous presentations in
language courses—both FL and L1—had never required them to deliver an oral analysis of a
text. One student reflected, “I feel what's not practiced a lot like going from high school and
stuff is being able to present yourself orally, even in English.” The content of the explication
also differed from that of other oral presentations that students had delivered previously. As
one interviewee explained:
I did [do presentations in other French classes] but the presentations were dif-
ferent. They weren't about literary analysis if that makes sense. It was maybe about
history or you know culture or something like that. And most of them were more—
I guess they weren't as heavily weighted, they were more like fun assignments, you
know, extra credit that kind of thing.
In producing oral presentations on cultural topics in the past, students reported reliance on
visual supports. One student observed, “In all my other French presentations I feel like it'd be
like something more like we'd create a PowerPoint and use that to supplement the presenta-
tion. But this was like purely oral.” This exercise, in contrast, required students to perform a 20‐
min monologue through which they conveyed their reading of a text.
5.2.2 | The redesigned: New tools
All students who participated in the end‐of‐semester interview (n = 7) could envision appli-
cations of these French academic practices in coursework involving other media or languages.
In particular, they mentioned the analytical tools that they had developed through their en-
gagement with both French genres. One student commented that she had already drawn on the
analytical tools required by the French genres in her non‐French coursework:
Even just the other day I guess we were talking about a photograph or a photoessay in
one of my other classes and I definitely was sort of using those same analysis methods
that I would use in writing something or talking about something in French.
Another student reflected on the usefulness of attention to historical context in situating a

text, as required by the French genres:
Yeah I kind of liked the format we were given in that you had to like introduce the
text and go into kind of the historical background that it shows up in and even if
you're analyzing a passage from a larger text to like give context of where it shows
up in the larger text? I thought that was pretty cool ‘cause I don't normally do that
when I'm writing essays so I might start doing that a little bit more in my
introductions.
Students also regarded the format of the commentaire as an Available Design with appli-
cations in other contexts. One student characterized the essay structure as a potential brain-
storming tool for compositions in other classes:
I think it was a good way for me to even break it down in my head even if I weren't
to like present it that way? It just helped me work through the analysis on my own.
A classmate could envision using the commentaire composé structure in English language
classes to ensure comprehensive analysis:
I definitely could see it applying to classes that I'm going to have to take, which are
English composition, English writing just because I think the format of it is really
comprehensive and doesn't really allow for you to skip parts of analysis, which I
think I can sometimes tend to do when I'm just following a regular 5‐paragraph
American form essay. So I could see myself implementing it in other courses.
The instructor also noticed that her students steadily developed new vocabulary as well as
new rhetorical skills in the target language, when practicing the academic genres in which they
had been socialized. In the context of this initial experimentation, these developments were
seen as fringe benefits, but, in future iterations of the class, more emphasis will be put on the
acquisition of specialized vocabulary and the rhetoric of literary analysis in the target language,
if only because the mastering of these elements allows for a deeper acculturation to the genres
proposed for redesign. Indeed, both exercises require general linguistic and literary knowledge
(drawing on rhetoric, narratology, esthetics, and even philosophy) as well as notions of pro-
sody, semantics, syntax, and stylistics to be mobilized with some ease. To assist her student in
mastering these technical terms, concepts and phrasings in the target culture, the instructor
plans to ask her future classes to collectively design a small lexicon offering a list of useful
vocabulary, concepts and rhetorical structures, and examples of their possible use. The class
could periodically add to this lexicon as the semester progressed, as issues or new terms came
up, with the instructor providing counsel, references or edits.
Finally, the instructor found that when she introduced her students to the explication de
texte and the commentaire composé, these new exercises—while requiring a number of cultural
adjustments on the part of the students—engaged students more and increased their motiva-
tion to learn about France and reflect on cultural interactions more generally. In part, this
outcome may have been a mirror‐response to the instructor's own involvement in the ex-
periment: the experimental nature of the class made it very exciting to teach, keeping the
instructor engaged at all times, with a heightened attention to her students' needs. But both
authors also noticed that students appeared excited with the class for their own reasons: they
genuinely liked that it was structured to enable an in‐depth initiation to a foreign culture
through its oral and written academic practices, and enjoyed being systematically and re-
flexively exposed to these cultural differences in an academic setting. Not only did the class
have them working at their edge and largely in discovery mode for the entire semester, but the
daily discovery of alterity, associated with the possibility to learn to negotiate its pitfalls in a
classroom setting, constantly captured their curiosity and attention, and was motivating
for them.
For, when challenged to think of the French academic exercises offered to them in the class
in terms of cultural acculturation and appropriation, the students found themselves reflecting
daily on the nature of cultural differences and the question of how to bridge or negotiate them
in a foreign culture. The class therefore became a place to experiment with how to think, talk
and write (about literature) in another culture, thereby giving the students a taste of what
cultural immersion might feel like if they ever chose to study abroad, but in a contained and
structured setting. Because the class was redesigned as a way to help the students adapt to
foreignness and encouraged the students to find their own strategies to do so, it offered them
not only a place to learn how to approach French culture from within, but, more generally, a
space to reflect on how to become engaged and empathic citizens in a multicultural world. In
this way, the class both motivated students to continue to take classes in French language,
literature and culture (most students in class went on to take upper‐division classes the fol-
lowing semester), and incited them to think of the development of multiple literacies in a
variety of cultures as a set of skills they should actively cultivate in college and beyond. By
comparison, the same class taught as it traditionally had been for ever a decade, with little or no
introduction to French academic genres, usually produced less enthusiasm for pursuing French
and did not create a reflexive space to interrogate cultural differences and devise ways to
negotiate them, most probably because the use of American academic exercises meant that the
students' relationship to French culture was far more removed, subdued, and elusive.
5.3 | Limitations
This study carried some limitations. First, only a small number of students completed the
course. This does not constitute a significant limitation, however, given the primary aim of the
present study, which is conceptual rather than empirical in nature. While future classroom‐
based ethnographic studies can further refine our understanding of the outcomes of FL
academic socialization, this project validated the pursuit of such research. Some degree of self‐
selection bias constitutes another limitation, with enrollment fluctuating during the first
2 weeks of the semester. While it was not possible to ask students who dropped the course
about their motives, the inclusion of foreign academic genres could have been a possible factor
in their decision, because the acculturation process requested of them through the redesigning
of French academic genre was presented to them as a challenge, and could have led to some
anxieties regarding how well they might ultimately perform in the class. Additionally, that all
students performed their explication de texte on Zoom due to COVID‐19 and the shift to online
instruction mid‐semester altered the course in ways that cannot be measured. All interviewed
students did comment that they found the experience of performing an explication preferable,
with multiple students describing the online modality as less intimidating. Finally, there is a
possibility for some degree of response bias since the first author carried out both the classroom
fieldwork and interviews with students and the course instructor.
6 | DISCUS SION: A CCEPTABILITY O F STUDENTS '

DESIGNS
During a mid‐semester interview, the course instructor reflected on the benefit that FL aca-
demic socialization had afforded learners:
I'm thinking that there is a benefit for them to be introduced to this other cultural
way of reading… They're understanding something about how culture addresses
textuality. And that's different. But that's valuable… I mean [in the explications] I
thought that what they were doing in two voices was very creative. It would never
have been accepted as such in France, but it worked…. (Instructor interview,
March 2020)
Students may well emerge from the course as more skilled readers and writers, however, as
their instructor recognized, the acceptability of their Available Designs will be contextually
dependent. As indicated in Figure 2, the genres to which learners are socialized are necessarily
transformed through their application. In other words, students developed working under-
standings of explications de texte and commentaires composés and these differed from the genres
as practiced in France. That students produced explications in pairs and via Zoom further
transformed the original Available Designs. Although the Available Designs that emerged
would have been unacceptable in French academic institutions, they represented valuable
analytical frameworks that enabled FL students to attend to greater textual detail. Moreover,
should learners someday elect to enroll in literature courses with local students during study
abroad, they will have access to additional opportunities for socialization through exposure to
models and feedback from Francophone peers and instructors.5 Students' experimentation and
increased confidence with different approaches to reading and writing through their partici-
pation in this course supports their potential membership in TL academic communities.
Although this project focused explicitly on undergraduate students of French as a FL,
additional audiences are positioned to benefit from socialization to target language academic
literacy practices. It is not unheard of for graduate students in some world language programs
to complete all of most of their seminars in English. Even when they attend seminars con-
ducted in the target language, the genres that they are expected to employ are generally those
specific to a US academic context (the graduate term paper or the US conference paper and not,
for instance, the exposé oral, commentaire composé, explication de texte, etc.). Graduate students
in world language departments may pursue opportunities for socialization in target‐language
academic conventions by attending academic conferences or participating in university ex-
changes. However, world language programs can also support their socialization to the target
culture by offering them exposure to unfamiliar target language genres and providing oppor-
tunities for students to experiment with their use. The aim, for undergraduate and graduate
students alike, consists in sharpening awareness of alternative approaches to academic literacy
by designing with foreign available designs.
Given the less significant emphasis on essay conventions in US language courses, we can
surmise that students' application of the new Available Designs would be well received in both
French and non‐French university coursework. As participants pay closer attention to histor-
ical contexts of textual production and take their analysis “into super specific depth, with
examples, and with multiple nuances,” they develop the skills of more attentive readers and
writers. The aim was never to transform FL students into Francophone students who reproduce
practices in strict adherence to prescriptive French norms but to sensitize learners to differ-
ences in academic literacy across languages/cultures and to equip them with new approaches
to reading and writing.
7 | B E Y O N D A C C E P T A B I L I TY : C ON C L U S I O NS A ND
F U T U R E D I R E C TI O N S
Aside from questions of acceptability, students' exposure to genres from the target language/
culture challenged their understanding of what it means to develop literacy in a FL. Through
socialization, students were sensitized to literacy as more than a combination of foreign words
and familiar conventions but as practices that vary across languages and cultures. This project
demonstrated the potential for a different form of cultural immersion in our FL programs—
namely, for immersion into academic literacy practices, which can offer students new per-
spectives and tools as critical readers and writers. As the course instructor stated, “I'm thinking
that there is a benefit for them to be introduced to this other cultural way of reading […] They're
understanding something culturally about how culture addresses textuality. And that's differ-
ent. But that's valuable […] it should make them better readers in upper‐division classes, more
thoughtful readers, which is definitely one of the goals […] It's giving them power to read”
(Instructor interview, March 2020). Students can be socialized to an understanding of “foreign”

language not as words and grammar for the expression of L1 academic cultural conventions
(e.g., through the production of US academic essay), but as a means to participate in the design
of target language academic genres. As Kramsch (2013, p. 68) asserts, a postmodernist per-
spective transforms culture from an entity into a discourse, a shift in perspective that promotes
cultural immersion as socialization: “Native and non‐native speakers are likely to see their
cultural horizons changed and displaced in the process of trying to understand others, or, as
Clifford Geertz said, in trying to ‘catch “their” views in “our” vocabularies’” (Geertz, 1983,
p. 10). This understanding of culture as a “dynamic discursive process” is sustained by the
multiliteracies framework adopted in this project. While students' prior socialization will still
shape their discourse in the target language, they can gain important insights into the academic
culture discursively constructed and mobilized by members of the target language community.
It is incumbent that we as educators “confront and critically reexamine [the] monolingual
[…] assumptions” (Cummins, 2005, p. 590) at work in our individual pedagogical approaches as
well as the broader language programs of which we are a part. By only exposing our students to
FL words and grammar (as opposed to providing them additional contact with unfamiliar
academic and nonacademic practices of reading and writing from the target culture), we limit
the opportunities for cultural immersion and reflection that we offer them. In line with the
2007 report issued by the American Modern Language Association Ad Hoc Committee on
Foreign Languages, ideally, FL students “learn to comprehend speakers of the target language
as members of foreign societies and to grasp themselves as Americans—that is, as members of a
society that is foreign to others” (p. 237). Through FL literacy development, students can come
to see that the practices of reading and writing to which they were socialized in their L1 are not
universal. Literacy socialization need not be limited to upper‐division literacy coursework but
can be introduced early on in students' FL studies. For instance, instructors of first‐year French
can already present learners with target culture genres such as the curriculum vitae (which in
France includes a photograph and such information as age, place of birth, marital status, and
number of children) or informal and formal letters (with specific conventions such as formulaic
openings and closings).
The enterprise of academic literacy socialization is not without pedagogical challenges.
Students with nonliterary interests or less training in close reading exercises may have less
interest in exposure to foreign generic conventions. As the instructor recognized, on the one
hand, the course as restructured to involve the formulaic French genres can favor students who
are more skilled at conducting closer analysis. On the other hand, however, this project can be
seen as advancing academic equity: since no student participants had previous experience with
the French academic genres, there was a level playing field as socialization to unfamiliar genres
was made explicit to the benefit of all student participants. Moreover, the small number of
students enrolled in this course enabled the instructor to provide personalized socialization.
The course instructor frequently sat with students individually or in small groups as they
worked to analyze passages using the provided handouts. She was also available for con-
sultation by e‐mail as presenters attempted to identify a passage for their explication and she
helped students who solicited her assistance to rewrite portions of their commentaires.
Having been educated in France through the completion of her doctoral studies, the course
instructor was intimately familiar with the genres introduced in the course. As a professor in a
US French department, however, many years had passed since she had last trained students in
French academic genres. She experienced the challenge of reactivating her prior experience as
both a student and instructor within the French academic system.6 Nonnative instructors of
French interested in carrying out FL socialization face different challenges. They could require
their own socialization to French academic practices in workshops led by instructors trained in
Francophone institutions. Increased exchanges between Francophone and non‐Francophone
colleagues have the potential to enrich understandings of differences in training and approach
among FL faculty. As Kramsch (1993) writes, “dialogue with others, native and nonnative
speakers” is where individuals “discover which ways of talking and thinking they share with
others and which are unique to them” (p. 27). Non‐nativeness should by no means compromise
instructors' ability to explore French genres with students. If “[n]on‐native language teachers
have the advantage of having learned the language the way their students do” (Kramsch, 2013,
p. 58), the same can be argued for French genres. Provided that emphasis continues to be
placed on exposure to alternative practices of reading and writing, as opposed to mastery of
generic conventions, nonnative instructors do not find themselves at a significant pedagogical
disadvantage. To the contrary, in discussions with students they can share in an understanding
of the relative foreignness presented by target language practices and discuss what new tools
and perspectives they seek to gain through their implementation. Through pedagogical inter-
ventions such as those carried out for this project, students and instructors, native and non-
native alike, can benefit from a different form of cultural immersion in FL programs and
challenge our assumptions of what it means—and what it can mean—to develop literacy in
a FL.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This study was supported by an Instructional Development Research Fellowship from the UC
Berkeley Language Center. We would like to thank Drs. Rick Kern and Mark Kaiser for their
support of this project, and we extend our gratitude to the student participants for their
contributions.
ORCID
Emily Linares https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1445-974X
ENDNOTES
1
The second author has also published a separate testimonial essay, analyzing in more detail her experience of
the redesign of this class from her multicultural perspective, see Blocker (2021).
2
Erasmus outlines the principles of the praelectiō in his De Ratione Studii (1512).
3
The baccalauréat is a French examination that students are required to take upon the completion of their
secondary studies. The exam has recently been considerably transformed. For details, see the web site of the
French Ministry of Education: https://www.education.gouv.fr/le-nouveau-baccalaureat-3098. Both a written
examination in French literature and an oral one subsist to this day at the end of la classe de première (11th
grade).
4
A detailed account of debates over the continued use of explication de textes and other related academic genres
in French culture was not included in this article. We did not deem that discussion immediately useful since
the genres remain very widespread in France academic culture, in spite of these polemics. It was precisely due
to their broad adoption that we elected to incorporate these genres in in the first place.
5
Charbonneau (2008) observes how study abroad can confront students with different academic traditions and
render them acutely aware of their own perceived foreignness in a new academic context.
6
See Blocker (2021) for additional details on these challenges.
REFERENCES
Baquedano‐López, P. (1997). Creating social identities through “Doctrina” narratives. Issues in Applied
Linguistics, 8(1), 27–45.
Berkenkotter, C., Huckin, T., & Ackerman, J. (1991). Social contexts and socially constructed texts: The
initiation of a graduate student into a writing re‐ search community. In C. Bazerman, & J. Paradis (Eds.),
Textual dynamics of the professions: Historical and contemporary studies of writing in academic and other
professional communities (pp. 191–215). University of Wisconsin Press.
Berkenkotter, C., & Huckin, T. N. (1995). Genre knowledge in disciplinary communication: Cognition/culture/
power. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bernstein, B. (1974). Class, codes, and control: Theoretical studies towards a sociology of language. (Vol. 1):
Routledge/Kegan Paul.
Blocker, D. (2021). Experimenting with the teaching of academic genres in the target culture: A reflexive
testimony on my collaboration with Emily Linares. L2 Journal, 13(1), 69–79.
Blyth, C. (2018). Designing meaning and identity in multiliteracies pedagogy: From multilingual subjects to
authentic speakers. L2 Journal, 10(2), 62–86.
Bombart, M. (2010). Explication de texte. In P. Aron, D. Saint‐Jacques, & A. Viala (Eds.), Le Dictionnaire du
Littéraire (pp. 209–211). Presses universitaires de France.
Casanave, C., & Li, X. (2008). Learning the literacy practice of graduate school: Insiders' reflections on academic
enculturation. University of Michigan Press.
Casanave, C. P. (2002). Writing games: Multicultural case studies of academic literacy in higher education.
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Charbonneau, D. (2008). Se découvrir étranger: la confrontation avec une autre tradition académique. In G.
Zarate, D. Lévy, & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Précis du plurilinguisme et du pluriculturalisme (pp. 201–204).
Éditions des archives contemporaines.
Cheng, R. (2013). A non‐native student's experience on collaborating with native peers in academic literacy
development: A sociopolitical perspective. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12, 12–22.
Collins, J., & Blot, R. (2003). Literacy and literacies: Text, Power, and Identity: Cambridge University Press.
Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2009). “Multiliteracies”: New literacies, new learning. Pedagogies: An International
Journal, 4, 164–195.
Cummins, J. (2005). A proposal for action: Strategies for recognizing heritage language competence as a learning
resource within the mainstream classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 89(4), 585–592.
Duff, P. (2010). Language socialization into academic discourse communities. Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics, 30, 169–192.
Duff, P., & Anderson, T. (2015). Academic language and literacy socialization for second‐language students.
In N. Markee (Ed.), Handbook of classroom discourse and interaction (pp. 337–352). Wiley‐Blackwell.
Geertz, C. (1983). Local knowledge. Basic books.
Haneda, M. (2009). Enculturation into discourses by East Asian students in a graduate TESOL program. TESL
Canada Journal, 27(1), 64–84.
Heath, S. B. (1983). Ways with words: Cambridge University Press.
Ho, M. (2011). Academic discourse socialization through small‐group discussions. System, 39, 437–540.
Ivanič, R. (1998). Writing and Identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. John
Benjamins.
Kern, R. (2000). Literacy and language teaching: Oxford University Press.
Kobayashi, M. (2016). L2 academic discourse socialization through oral presentations: A Japanese
undergraduate student's learning trajectory in study abroad. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 72,
95–121.
Kramsch, C. (1993). Context and culture in foreign language teaching: Oxford University Press.
Kramsch, C. (2013). Culture in foreign language teaching. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 1(1),
57–78.
Kramsch, C. (2014a). Language and culture. AILA Review, 27, 30–55.
Kramsch, C. (2014b). Teaching foreign languages in an era of globalization. Modern Language Journal, 98(1),
296–311.
Lam, W. S. E. (2004). Second language socialization in a bilingual classroom. Global and local considerations.
Language Learning and Technology, 8(3), 44–65.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.
Lea, M., & Street, B. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in
Higher Education, 23, 157–172.
Lillis, T. (2003). Student writing as “academic literacies”: Drawing on Bakhtin to move from critique to design.
Language and Education, 17, 192–207.
Linares, E. (2021). What does it mean to develop academic literacy practices in a foreign language? L2 Journal,
13(1), 64–68.
Morita, N. (2004). Negotiating participation and identity in second language academic communities. TESOL
Quarterly, 38, 573–603.
Morita, N. (2009). Language, culture, gender, and academic socialization. Language and Education, 23(5),
443–460.
New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational
Review, 66(1), 60–92.
New London Group. (2000). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. In B. Cope, & M. Kalantzis
(Eds.), Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures (pp. 9–37). Routledge.
Ochs, E., & Schieffelin, B. B. (2012). The theory of language socialization. In A. Duranti, E. Ochs, & B. B.
Schieffelin (Eds.), Handbook of Language Socialization (pp. 1–21). Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Prior, P. (1998). Writing/disciplinarity: A sociohistoric account of literate activity in the academy. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Rosellini, M. (1999). Les Mots sans guère de choses: La “Praelectio”. Langue Française, 121, 28–35.
Schieffelin, B. B., & Ochs, E. (Eds.). (1986). Language socialization across cultures: Cambridge University Press.
Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. (1981). Narrative, literacy, and face in interethnic communication: Ablex.
Scribner, S., & Cole, M. (1981). The psychology of literacy: Harvard University Press.
Street, B. (1984). Literacy in theory and practice: Cambridge University Press.
Sterponi, L. (2011). Literacy socialization. In A. Duranti, E. Ochs, & B. B. Schieffelin (Eds.), Handbook of
language socialization (pp. 227–246). Wiley‐Blackwell.
Turpin, K. (2019). Training foreign language learners to be peer responders: A multiliteracies approach. L2
Journal, 11(1), 35–60.
Waterstone, B. (2008). “I hate the ESL idea!”: A case study in identity and academic literacy. TESL Canada
Journal/Revue TESL du Canada, 26(1), 52–67.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press.
Zappa‐Hollman, S. (2007). Academic presentations across post‐secondary discourse socialization of non‐native
English speakers. Canadian Modern Language Review, 63(4), 455–485.
How to cite this article: Linares, E., & Blocker, D. (2021). Literacy en français and à la
française: Socializing students to academic literacy practices in a foreign language.
Foreign Language Annals, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12589
A P P E N D I X A : R E SO U R C E S EM P L O Y E D T O F A M I L I A R I Z E S T U D E NT S
W I T H T H E EXPLICATION DE T EXTE
• https://cache.media.eduscol.education.fr/file/FRANCAIS/95/7/RA19_Lycee_GT_2-1_FRA_
ExplicationLineaire_1160957.pdf
ExplicationLineaire-exemple_1160866.pdf
• Rosellini, M. (1999). Les Mots sans guère de choses: La “Praelectio.” Langue Française,
121, 28–35.
• Bombart, M. (2010). Explication de texte. In P. Aron, D. Saint‐Jacques, & A. Viala (Eds.), Le

Dictionnaire du Littéraire (pp. 209–211). Paris, France: Presses universitaires de France.
APPENDIX B: EXPLICATI ON D E T EXTE WORKSHEET
FICHE SYNTHÉTIQUE POUR VOUS AIDER À PRÉPARER UNE EXPLICATION D'UN

TEXTE LITTÉRAIRE
(à PARTIR DE LA DESCRIPTION ET DE L'EXEMPLE FOURNIS PAR LE SITE
EDUSCOL)
1. Éléments de contexte pour préparer votre Auteur:

introduction: Titre:
2 mn Date:
Passage (pages, n° du poème dans une série, lignes ou
vers, s'il y a lieu):
1. Situer le passage dans le livre ou dans la
collection (pour un poème):
2. Situer le passage dans l'histoire littéraire (registre,
genre, courant littéraire, période, etc.):
2. Thème du texte: «ce qui donne son unité au Quel est l'objet du passage? Qu'est‐ce qui donne au
passage choisi: (…) ce dont il parle (un passage sa cohérence et a permis le découpage que
personnage, un événement, une idée…) et la forme le professeur ou vous‐même avez effectué pour
choisie pour en parler» délimiter cet extrait?
1 mn
3. Parcours ou mouvement du texte: Décrivez la structure du passage, soit le développement ou

2 mn les différentes parties du texte: quelles sont les
différents moments de cet extrait, les étapes successives
de l'action présentée ou de la réflexion énoncée?
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
4. Piste de lecture ou problématique: «…c'est la «Qu'est‐ce que ce texte dit (ou fait?) d'original ou de
forme que prend la curiosité du lecteur devant ce singulier ? À quoi sert‐il dans l'œuvre ? pourquoi
passage…» intrigue‐t‐il (ou déçoit‐il !), ou satisfait‐il (ou frustre‐
Partez ici de ce qui vous a étonné dans le texte—de ce t‐il !), ou émeut‐il (ou écœure‐t‐il !) le lecteur ?»
qu'il a de spécifique ou même d'unique. Par. ex.: Pourquoi ce texte se termine‐t‐il de cette
1 mn manière? Qu'est‐ce que l'auteur veut nous faire
comprendre sans le dire en décrivant ainsi
l'attitude et les pensées du personnage?
5. Explication linéaire: Qu'est‐ce qui vous permet de valider votre piste de

«[Affinez] cette impression première, cette curiosité lecture? Sont attendus ici:
initiale, en explicitant ce qui attire l'attention du ▪ Une analyse argumentée qui suit le mouvement
lecteur au fur et à mesure de sa lecture, et en du texte
expliquant pourquoi l'attention est ainsi attirée. »
L'idée est d'expliquer en détail pourquoi et comment ▪ Des remarques qui analysent la forme et le fond
le texte produit sur vous les effets que vous relevez de près—et rendent compte d'une lecture
et décrivez. personnelle du texte
10 mn max. ▪ Une attention précise aux choix formels du texte
(images, comparaisons allégories, sonorités,
figures de rhétorique, temps verbaux, tonalités et
registres, maniement de l'ironie, etc.)
▪ La construction d'un propos qui progresse de
façon logique
▪ La capacité à mobiliser sa culture littéraire de
façon pertinente pour soutenir l'explication du
texte proposée
6. Conclusion(s): Répondez ici à la question posée par vous en résumant
1 mn toutes vos remarques et en les synthétisant en
quelques phrases. Vous pouvez aussi, pour finir,
ouvrir votre réflexion, en suggérant des liens avec
d'autres textes ou avec thèmes ou questions voisines.
APPENDIX C: RESOURCES EMPLOYED T O F AMILIARIZE STUDENTS

W I T H T H E C O M M E N T A I R E C O M P O SÉ
• http://maupassant-lyc.spip.ac-rouen.fr/IMG/pdf/Le_commentaire_de_textemethodex.pdf
• https://www.bac-l.net/docs/88f238f3a10f903ee7673a6653174f12-methodologie-du-
commentaire-de-texte-bac-francais-premiere.pdf
• https://www.annabac.com/annales-bac/baudelaire-les-yeux-des-pauvres-petits-poemes-en-
prose
APPEN D I X D : C O M M E N T A I R E C O M P O SÉ WORKSHEET
FICHE DE MÉTHODE POUR PRÉPARER VOTRE COMMENTAIRE COMPOSÉ

CETTE FICHE EST À REMPLIR APRÈS AVOIR FAIT UNE LECTURE ANALY-
TIQUE DÉTAILLÉE DU TEXTE.
1) NATURE ET THÈME DU TEXTE:

2) VOTRE PREMIÈRE IDÉE DE PROBLÉMATIQUE:
3) VOS AXES DE LECTURE:
—AXE 1:
—AXE 2:
—AXE 3 (ÉVENTUELLEMENT):
1) LE PLAN DE VOTRE COMMENTAIRE

I—TITRE DE LA PREMIÈRE PARTIE:
Formulez l'idée générale de la partie.
A—Titre de la sous‐partie
Lister les exemples à commenter.
Transition?
B—Titre de la sous‐partie
Transition?
C—Titre de la sous‐partie (éventuellement)
Transition avec la partie suivante?
II—TITRE DE LA SECONDE PARTIE:
A—Titre de la sous‐partie
Transition?
B—Titre de la sous‐partie
Transition?
Transition avec la partie suivante?
III—TITRE DE LA TROISIÈME PARTIE (ÉVENTUELLEMENT):
A—Titre de la sous‐partie (éventuellement)
Transition?
B—Titre de la sous‐partie (éventuellement)
Transition?
2) RÉAJUSTEZ/REFORMULEZ VOTRE PROBLÉMATIQUE POUR QU'ELLE CORRE-
SPONDE AU MIEUX À VOTRE PLAN
6) RÉDIGEZ L'INTRODUCTION DE VOTRE COMMENTAIRE

Voici les étapes essentielles (une quinzaine de lignes):
a) situer le texte à commenter:titre de l'œuvre dont il est extrait, auteur, contexte historique
et culturel
b) spécifier le genre et le thème du texte
c) présenter le projet de lecture (= la problématique)
d) annoncer le plan en indiquant les axes (ou parties)
7) RÉDIGEZ LA CONCLUSION DE VOTRE COMMENTAIRE
Il faut ici:
a) répondre à la problématique, en synthétisant ce qui a été dit durant le commentaire (3 ou 4

phrases)
b) si vous le pouvez:proposer une comparaison avec un autre texte du même genre littéraire ou
du même thème (parallélisme ou opposition entre les textes, à expliquer), ou effectuer une
ouverture vers l'histoire culturelle, l'histoire des idées, ou même la littérature et la culture
d'un autre pays.
A P P E N D I X E : R E D E S I G NE D C L A S S S YL L A B U S , S H O W I N G TH E
INTEGRATION OF T HE E X P L I C A T I O N D E T E X T E AND T HE
C OM M E N T AI R E C OM P OS É
FRANÇAIS 102: LIRE & ECRIRE EN FRANÇAIS (SECTION 1)

PRINTEMPS 2020
Description du cours:
Prenant la suite des cours de langue (Français 1 à 4) ce cours vise à vous permettre de mieux
lire, penser et écrire en français. À cette fin, on conduira en classe l'étude de courts textes (le
plus souvent des «classiques») groupés autour de trois problématiques («Travail, inégalités,
pauvreté»; «Identités sexuelles, identités sociales»; «Voyages:exotismes, altérités, ailleurs»).
Ces textes, dont la longueur et la difficulté deviendront progressivement plus grande, serviront
de base aux travaux écrits des étudiants.
Ce cours se fixe un triple objectif:
1) Il s'agit d'abord de vous conduire à vous exprimer, aussi bien à l'oral qu'à l'écrit, dans le
français le plus correct possible. À cette fin, des rappels de grammaire seront faits fré-
quemment dans ce cours, aussi bien lors de l'analyse des textes que lors de la correction des
examens et devoirs. De ce premier point de vue, le but est de vous servir de vos lectures pour
améliorer vos capacités linguistiques.
2) Le second objectif de ces lectures conduites en commun—et celui auquel nous consacrerons
l'essentiel de notre temps en classe–est de vous mettre en situation de produire, à l'oral
comme à l'écrit, des analyses de plus en plus fines et sophistiquées des textes abordés, en
cultivant aussi bien vos capacités pour l'analyse stylistique que votre savoir‐faire en matière
de contextualisation historique. Les discussions qui auront lieu en classe autour des textes
sont ainsi d'abord destinées à développer vos capacités d'interprétation et vos stratégies
d'analyse en français, afin de vous préparer aux exigences des cours de niveau plus avancé.
3) À titre expérimental—et en étroite collaboration avec Emily Linares, qui est une
spécialiste de la pédagogie des langues étrangères, récemment diplômée du Ro-
mance Languages and Literatures Docotoral Program, à UC Berkeley—ce cours
s'efforcera aussi de vous former à la pratique de deux genres discursifs académi-
ques spécifiquement français,l'explication de texte (à l'oral) et le commentaire
composé (à l'écrit). Le but de cette initiation est de vous introduire à la manière
dont les textes littéraires sont étudiés et commentés en France, afin que vous
puissiez rentrer plus directement en contact avec la culture et les modes de pensées
français, et bénéficier ainsi, dès le FR 102, d'une forme d'immersion culturelle plus
profonde. Cette initiation sera aussi très utile à ceux d'entre vous qui comptent par
la suite étudier en France, dès lors que l'explication de texte et le commentaire de
texte constituent en réalité —avec quelques variations disciplinaires mineures—
des éléments centraux de toute la culture académique française, en littérature mais
aussi en droit, en histoire, en sociologie, en médiologie ou en sciences politiques.
Nous nous initierons à l'explication de texte dans les trois premières semaines du
cours, puis la pratiquerons régulièrement en classe, comme exercice oral declose‐
reading, individuellement ou par groupes de deux. Nous écrirons aussi deux com-
mentaires composés, le premier (obligatoire) lors de la composition 2 et le second
(optionnel) lors de la composition 4.
Si vous participez activement aux discussions en classe et présentez au moins une ex-
plication de texte devant la classe, ce cours améliorera sans doute votre capacité à vous ex-
primer oralement en français. Mais ce n'est pas son objectif premier. Le but est avant tout
d'apprendre à lire, à réfléchir et à vous exprimer à l'écrit en français d'une manière gramma-
ticalement correcte et solidement argumentée, tout en vous initiant aux exercices académiques
français les plus culturellement répandus. Si vous désirez avant tout parfaire votre français oral,
il serait préférable de choisir un cours de conversation.
Textes au programme:
La plupart des textes que nous lirons ce semestre sont accessibles sur le site bCourses de ce
cours. Il vous faudra seulement ce livre, dont nous allons étudier les 3e et le 4e parties in
extenso:
—Simone de Beauvoir, Mémoires d'une jeune fille rangée, Paris, Gallimard (1958), 2007 pour
la collection Folio. Le département de français fournira un exemplaire du livre à tous les
étudiants inscrits avant le 10 mars.
s.
Évaluation des étudiants: compositions, examens et participation:
Il sera demandé aux étudiants de rendre quatre compositions. La première sera de deux
pages, la seconde de trois pages, la troisième de quatre pages et la dernière de cinq pages. Les
trois premiers devoirs seront tous corrigés deux fois, les étudiants étant chargés d'intégrer les
corrections proposées dans la seconde version. La note conservée sera la seconde des deux
notes: elle sera plus haute que la première si les corrections ont été effectuées avec soin, mais
plus basse si la correction du devoir par l'étudiant n'a pas été suffisamment attentive. La
quatrième composition ne sera corrigée qu'une fois: elle vise à mesurer les progrès faits par
l'étudiant pendant le semestre dans l'acquisition d'un français écrit plus fluide et plus correct.
Ces quatre compositions formeront ensemble 60% de votre note finale (soit 10% pour la pre-
mière, 15% pour les deux suivantes et 20% pour la dernière).
Il y aura deux examens en classe (l'un au milieu, l'autre à la fin du semestre), d'une durée
d'une 1h20mn. Ces épreuves soumettront à votre analyse un texte, en vous posant des questions
de compréhension et d'analyse. Elles comporteront aussi un bref essai. Pour l'examen de mi‐
semestre, il s'agira de deux textes que nous aurons lus en classe ensemble (vous traiterez l'un de
ces textes au choix). L'examen final vous proposera au contraire tant un texte que nous aurons
étudié ensemble qu'un texte inconnu de vous, mais se rapportant de manière étroite à l'une des
thématiques que nous aurons abordées dans le semestre (vous traiterez là aussi l'un de ces
textes au choix). L'usage d'un petit dictionnaire unilingue sera autorisé dans les deux cas. Ces
deux examens entreront pour 20% dans votre note finale (soit 10% chacun). Par ailleurs,
chaque étudiant devra obligatoirement présenter à l'oral une explication de texte sur
un texte de 20 à 25 lignes, ayant choisi le texte à étudier pour le jour où elle/il s'est
inscrit(e). À cette fin, veuillez passer me voir dans mon bureau la semaine avant votre
explication de texte, si vous avez besoin d'aide, ou m'envoyer un email indiquant le
passage de votre choix au moins 3 jours avant votre explication en classe. Cette pre-
mière explication de texte représentera 5% de votre note finale. Tout(e) étudiant(e)
qui le désire pourra ensuite, jusqu'à épuisement des places disponibles, se réinscrire
pour faire une autre explication —et recevoir ainsi des points supplémentaires, allant
jusqu'à 10% de sa note finale (extra credit).
Enfin chaque étudiant se verra attribuer une note de participation qui intégrera une
évaluation de son niveau moyen de préparation et s'efforcera de refléter tout autant la
fréquence que la pertinence de ses contributions à la discussion. Cette note de participation

entrera pour 15% dans le décompte de la note finale.
Conseils pour la préparation de vos travaux écrits:
Il s'agit de compositions brèves mais il vous faudra néanmoins leur accorder beaucoup de
temps et de soins, car il s'agit d'écrire un essai soigneusement pensé et bien structuré, qui
exprime avec correction et élégance des propos réfléchis et illustrés d'exemples pertinents. Dans
l'évaluation de ce travail, l'accent sera mis sur quatre choses: 1) la rigueur de la réflexion sur le
problème choisi, 2) la finesse des analyses textuelles proposées, 3) le développement, sur la
question choisie, d'un point de vue original que l'étudiant puisse revendiquer pleinement
comme le sien et surtout 4) la correction de l'expression écrite et, plus généralement, la lisibilité
de l'ensemble du devoir. Voici quelques conseils pour travailler efficacement dans ce cadre:
1) Je vous suggère de construire d'abord le plan écrit de votre démonstration (en précisant les
exemples destinés à illustrer votre point de vue). Soyez tout particulièrement attentifs à la
logique de votre propos et efforcez‐vous de construire un argumentaire clair, précis et
démonstratif.
2) Utilisez ensuite le dictionnaire bilingue puis le dictionnaire unilingue pour chercher et
vérifier tous les mots‐clés et expressions dont vous risquez d'avoir besoin.
3) Dans un troisième temps, rédigez votre premier jet.
4) Dernière étape:une fois votre premier jet écrit et avant de me rendre votre devoir, vérifiez
soigneusement, dictionnaires et grammaire en main, tous les points suivants:
– pour le vocabulaire: les faux amis et les anglicismes en tout genre,

– l'orthographe et les accents (si vous ne mettez pas les accents votre français écrit devient
rapidement incompréhensible:apprenez de plus à les insérer dans le texte avec votre ordi-
nateur car je refuserai de corriger tout devoir où les accents ont été systématiquement omis
ou figurent à la main),
– la correction des genres utilisés (pour les noms et les articles),
– les accords (pour les articles, les adjectifs et les participes passés),
– l'emploi des modes (indicatif, subjonctif ou conditionnel) des verbes,
– la cohérence des temps verbaux (alternance de l'imparfait et du passé composé dans un texte
au passé, usages du présent et des futurs, alternance des temps et des modes dans les
hypothétiques),
– la conjugaison des verbes en prêtant une extrême attention à l'auxiliaire (être ou avoir?) et
aux règles de l'accord du participe passé,
– l'usage des prépositions avec les formes verbales (penser de ≠ penser à) et avec les noms (le
moyen de, la motivation pour),
– emploi et déclinaison des pronoms relatifs, des pronoms d'objet direct et d'objet indirect.
Relisez‐vous donc toujours très soigneusement et usez de tous les ouvrages de référence
susceptibles de vous aider.
PROGRAMME DES SÉANCES:

SEMAINE 1:
Mardi 21 janvier 2020: Introduction.
1) Présentations.
2) Les trois principaux objectifs de ce cours.
3) Outils et méthodes de travail.
4) Travaux pratiques: comment se servir efficacement d'un dictionnaire pour mieux lire et
écrire en français?
Jeudi 23 janvier 2020: Travail, inégalités, pauvreté

A préparer: lecture et analyse d'Albert Camus, Les Muets, dans L'Exil et le royaume, Paris,
Gallimard, Folio, 1972, p. 63‐71(jusqu'à «près de lui»).
SEMAINE 2:
Mardi 28 janvier 2020: Travail, inégalités, pauvreté
A préparer: lecture et analyse d'Albert Camus, Les Muets, dans L'Exil et le royaume, Paris,
Gallimard, Folio, 1972, p. 71 à 80.
Jeudi 30 janvier 2020: Séance d'introduction à l'explication de texte (1): l'exercice
dans ses formes actuelles et une première explication de texte faite en commun en
classe sur lesMuetsde Camus.
A préparer: Étudier très attentivement les pages suivantes, tirées du site officiel du Min-
istère de l'Éducation Nationale français, Eduscol (https://eduscol.education.fr):
—Deux documents qui proposent à la fois une définition de l'explication de texte et un
exemple de réalisation de cet exercice:
ExplicationLineaire_1160957.pdf
ExplicationLineaire-exemple_1160866.pdf
NB: Après avoir discuté de ces textes, nous ferons en classe un exercice collectif d'ex-
plication de texte sur Les Muets de Camus. Pensez à apporter votre texte !
Affichage sur bCourses des sujets du 1er devoir (2 pages).
SEMAINE 3:
Mardi 4 février 2020: Séance d'introduction à l'explication de texte (2): l'histoire de
l'exercice dans la culture française et un second exercice fait en classe surLes Muets.
A préparer: Lire attentivement ces deux brèves histoires de l'explication de texte:
—Michèle Rosselini, «Les Mots sans guère les choses: la praelectio», Langue Française, n°
121, février 1999, p. 28‐35, accessible ici: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41558899 ou sur
bCourses.
—Mathilde Bombart, article «Explication de texte» dans le Dictionnaire du littéraire, sous la
direction de Paul Aron, Denis Saint‐Jacques, Alain Viala, Paris, PUF, 2002, accessible sur
bCourses.
NB: Après avoir discuté de ces textes, nous ferons en classe un second exercice collectif
d'explication de texte sur Les Muets de Camus. Pensez à apporter votre texte!
Jeudi 6 février 2020: Travail, inégalités, pauvreté

A préparer: lecture et analyse de Victor Hugo, «Pour les pauvres» dans les Feuilles d'Au-
tomne et «Le Mendiant», dans les Contemplations p. 10‐12.
Travaux dirigés en classe, par petits groupes, pour travailler à l'élaboration d'une
explication de texte sur l'un des deux poèmes.
A RENDRE: premier jet du 1er devoir (2 pages).
SEMAINE 4:
Mardi 11 février 2020: Correction du 1er devoir et révisions de grammaire.
Jeudi 13 février 2020: Travail, inégalités, pauvreté
A préparer: lecture et analyse de Charles Baudelaire, «Le Mauvais vitrier» et «Les Yeux des
pauvres» dans Le Spleen de Paris (IX et XXVI) p. 9‐10 et p 27‐28 des extraits proposés sur le site
litteratura.com.
Explication de texte à préparer sur «Les Yeux des Pauvres» de Charles Baudelaire.
Travaux dirigés en classe, par petits groupes, pour travailler à l'élaboration d'une
explication de texte du poème. Je vous proposerai aussi un exemple d'explication de
texte à la française, en l'oralisant devant vous (pour vous donner une idée de comment
l'explication peut se mettre en œuvrein situ.)
SEMAINE 5:
Mardi 18 février 2020: Travail, inégalités, pauvreté
A préparer: lecture et analyse de Charles Baudelaire, «Assommons les pauvres» dans Le
Spleen de Paris (XLIX), p. 48‐49 des extraits proposés sur le site litteratura.com et «La Haine du
pauvre» de Stéphane Mallarmé, dans les Poèmes de Jeunesse et dont le texte est accessible en
ligne ici: https://www.poesie-francaise.fr/stephane-mallarme/poeme-haine-du-pauvre.php
Explication de texte à préparer sur «La Haine du pauvre» de Stéphane Mallarmé.
Nom de l'étudiant ou des étudiants:
A RENDRE: version corrigée du 1er devoir.
Jeudi 20 février 2020: Introduction à l'exercice du commentaire composé.
A préparer:
1) Lire avec soin les deux présentations méthodologiques indiquées ci‐dessous sur le com-
mentaire composé et prendre en note toutes les remarques qui vous viennent à l'esprit en les
lisant:
— http://maupassant-lyc.spip.ac-rouen.fr/IMG/pdf/Le_commentaire_de_
textemethodex.pdf
— https://www.bac-l.net/docs/88f238f3a10f903ee7673a6653174f12-methodologie-du-
commentaire-de-texte-bac-francais-premiere.pdf (pour lire ce document vous devez vous
inscrire sur le site mais l'inscription est simple — et surtout elle est gratuite).
2) Lire aussi très attentivement cet exemple de commentaire composé entièrement rédigé sur
«Les Yeux des Pauvres» de Charles Baudelaire: https://www.annabac.com/annales-bac/
baudelaire-les-yeux-des-pauvres-petits-poemes-en-prose
En classe, nous discuterons des «méthodes» présentées dans les pages que vous
avez lues et de l'exemple donné, et travaillerons ensemble à faire un plan de com-
mentaire composé sur «La Haine du pauvre». S'il reste du temps, nous tenterons aussi
d'écrire une introduction. Pensez à apporter votre texte!
Affichage sur bCourses des sujets du 2nd devoir (un commentaire composé au
choix, de 3 pages).
À partir de ce moment dans le cours, c'est vous qui devez choisir, dans le cours des
extraits, proposés les passages de 20 à 30 lignes sur lesquels vous souhaitez faire une
explication de texte. Ce choix vous confère plus d'autonomie dans l'analyse du texte, et
vous donne la possibilité de faire porter notre lecture collective de celui‐ci sur les
questions ou thématiques qui vous intéressent le plus. Veuillez m'informer de votre
choix par email avec 72 heurs d'avance —et j'en informerai la classe entière. Si vous
avez des difficultés pour choisir un extrait, n'hésitez surtout pas à me contacter.
SEMAINE 6:
Mardi 25 février 2020: Identités sexuelles, identités sociales
A préparer: lecture et analyse de Mme de Lafayette, La Princesse de Montpensier, dans
Romans et Nouvelles, édités par Émile Magne, Paris, Garnier Frères, 1958, p. 3‐21, jusqu'à «c'est
peu de choses pour vous satisfaire».
Explication de texte à préparer surLa Princesse de Montpensier. Nom de l'étudiant
ou des étudiants:
Jeudi 27 février 2020: Identités sexuelles, identités sociales
A préparer: lecture et analyse de Mme de Lafayette, La Princesse de Montpensier, dans
Romans et Nouvelles, édités par Émile Magne, Paris, Garnier Frères, 1958, p. 21‐33.
A RENDRE: premier jet du 2nd devoir (commentaire composé de 3 pages).
Explication de texte à préparer surLa Princesse de Montpensier. Nom de l'étudiant
ou des étudiants:
SEMAINE 7:
Mardi 3 mars 2020: Correction du 2nd devoir et révisions de grammaire.
Jeudi 5 mars 2020: Identités sexuelles, identités sociales
A préparer: lecture et analyse d'Honoré de Balzac, Sarrasine, dans La Comédie humaine,
édition publiée sous la direction de Pierre‐Georges Castex, Paris, Gallimard, 1976‐1981, 12 vol.,
t. 6, p. 1044‐1063, jusqu'à «je ne vois encore ni Mariana ni son petit vieillard».
Explication de texte à préparer surSarrasine. Nom de l'étudiant ou des étudiants:
SEMAINE 8:
Mardi 10 mars 2020: Identités sexuelles, identités sociales
A préparer: lecture et analyse d'Honoré de Balzac, Sarrasine, dans La Comédie humaine,
édition publiée sous la direction de Pierre‐Georges Castex, Paris, Gallimard, 1976‐1981, 12 vol.,
t. 6, p. 1063‐1076. Explication de texte à préparer surSarrasine. Nom de l'étudiant ou des
étudiants:
À RENDRE: version corrigée du 2nd devoir (commentaire composé).
Affichage sur bCourses de l'examen blanc de mi‐semestre à préparer pour le 12
mars (mock‐exam).
Jeudi 12 mars 2020: Révisions et discussion de l'examen blanc de mi‐semestre
(mock‐exam), en préparation de l'examen de mi‐semestre du 17 mars.
SEMAINE 9:
Mardi 17 mars 2020: EXAMEN DE MI‐SEMESTRE.
Jeudi 19 mars 2020: Identités sexuelles, identités sociales
A préparer: Simone de Beauvoir, Les Mémoires d'une jeune fille rangée, édition au pro-
gramme, 3e partie, p. 225‐274 (jusqu'à «cette idylle était inscrite au ciel.»).
Explication de texte à préparer surLes Mémoires d'une jeune fille rangée. Nom de
l'étudiant ou des étudiants:
Affichage sur bCourses des sujets du 3e devoir (4 pages).
SEMAINE 10:
23 au 27 mars 2020: VACANCES DE PRINTEMPS
SEMAINE 11:
Mardi 31 mars 2020: Identités sexuelles, identités sociales
gramme, 3e partie, p. 274‐320 (jusqu'à «le seul nom qui lui convînt: le bonheur.»).
L'examen de mi‐semestre vous sera rendu ce jour‐là. Nous n'en ferons pas de
correction formalisée en classe. Mais je vous invite à venir me voir durant mes heures
de bureau pour toute question.
Jeudi 2 avril 2020: Identités sexuelles, identités sociales
A préparer: Simone de Beauvoir, Les Mémoires d'une jeune fille rangée, édition au
programme, 3e partie, p. 320‐369.
A RENDRE: premier jet du 3e devoir (4 pages).
SEMAINE 12:
Mardi 7 avril 2020: Correction du 3e devoir et révisions de grammaire.
Jeudi 9 avril 2020: Identités sexuelles, identités sociales
gramme, 4e partie, p. 373‐422 (jusqu'à «elles racontaient indéfiniment ma joie.»).
SEMAINE 13:
Mardi 14 avril 2020: Identités sexuelles, identités sociales
gramme, 4e partie, p. 422‐473.
A RENDRE: version corrigée du 3e devoir.
Affichage sur bCourses des sujets du 4e devoir (dont un commentaire composé, 5
pages maximum).
Jeudi 16 avril 2020: Voyages, exotismes, altérités, ailleurs
A préparer: A préparer: lecture et analyse de Michel de Montaigne, Les Essais, «Au lecteur» et
«Des Cannibales» dans Montaigne's Essays and Selected Writings, a bilingual edition, translated
and edited by Donald Frame, St Martin's Press, New‐York, 1963, p. 2‐3 et p. 78‐98, jusqu'à «la
témérité de leur imposture».
Explication de texte à préparer sur «Des Cannibales». Nom de l'étudiant ou des
étudiants:
SEMAINE 14:
Mardi 21 avril 2020: Voyages, exotismes, altérités, ailleurs
A préparer: lecture et analyse de Michel de Montaigne, Les Essais, «Des Cannibales» dans
Montaigne's Essays and Selected Writings, a bilingual edition, translated and edited by Donald
Frame, St Martin's Press, New‐York, 1963, p. 98 à la fin. Formulez au brouillon des réponses
aux questions proposées sur bCourses.
Explication de texte à préparer sur «Des Cannibales». Nom de l'étudiant ou des

étudiants:
Jeudi 23 avril 2020: Voyages, exotismes, altérités, ailleurs
A préparer: lecture et analyse de Voltaire, Le Monde comme il va: vision de Babouc écrite par
lui‐même, dans Romans et contes, édition établie par Frédéric de Deloffre et Jacques Van de
Heuvel, Paris, Gallimard, 1992, p. 45‐62.
Explication de texte à préparer surLe Monde comme il va.Nom de l'étudiant ou des
étudiants:
Affichage sur bCourses d'un examen blanc à préparer pour le mardi 28 avril.
SEMAINE 15:
Mardi 28 avril 2020: Discussion de l'examen blanc de fin de semestre.
Jeudi 30 avril 2020: EXAMEN FINAL.
SEMAINE 16:
4 au 8 mai 2020: SEMAINE DE RÉVISION
Mardi 5 mai 2020: Je suis disponible entre 9h30 et 11h00 dans mon bureau pour vous aider
avec votre quatrième devoir (définition du sujet, argumentation, usages des exemples, gram-
maire et expression, etc.).
Vendredi 8 mai 2020: A RENDRE: première et unique version du 4e et dernier
devoir. Veuillez mettre votre dernier devoir sous forme papier dans mon casier avant
16h00 ce jour‐là.

Emily Linares and Deborah Blocker Litera

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Emily Linares and Deborah Blocker Litera

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Received: 21 September 2020 | Accepted: 18 September 2021

Literacy en français and à la française:

Emily Linares1 | Déborah Blocker2

Foreign Language Annals. 2021;1–32. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/flan © 2021 ACTFL | 1

within FL departments on what is—and can be—entailed

2 | ACADEMIC LITERACY SOC I AL IZATION

The outcome of Designing is a new meaning, something through which meaning‐

F I G U R E 1 Meaning‐making in the multiliteracies framework [Color figure can be viewed at

4.1 | French academic genres

4.1.1 | Explication de texte

4.1.2 | Commentaire composé

As previously mentioned, the commentaire composé is designed to be the written materi-

4.2 | Socialization to the French genres

5.1 | Reported confidence producing the French genres

TABLE 1 Students' average reported confidence producing the French genres

5.2 | Assessing outcomes through the lens of the redesigned

1. How were students impacted as a result of the intervention?

5.2.1 | The redesigned: New perspectives

This student experienced dissonance as her previous socialization to essay‐writing con-

5.2.2 | The redesigned: New tools

Another student reflected on the usefulness of attention to historical context in situating a

6 | DISCUS SION: A CCEPTABILITY O F STUDENTS '

(Instructor interview, March 2020). Students can be socialized to an understanding of “foreign”

• Bombart, M. (2010). Explication de texte. In P. Aron, D. Saint‐Jacques, & A. Viala (Eds.), Le

APPENDIX B: EXPLICATI ON D E T EXTE WORKSHEET

FICHE SYNTHÉTIQUE POUR VOUS AIDER À PRÉPARER UNE EXPLICATION D'UN

1. Éléments de contexte pour préparer votre Auteur:

3. Parcours ou mouvement du texte: Décrivez la structure du passage, soit le développement ou

5. Explication linéaire: Qu'est‐ce qui vous permet de valider votre piste de

APPENDIX C: RESOURCES EMPLOYED T O F AMILIARIZE STUDENTS

FICHE DE MÉTHODE POUR PRÉPARER VOTRE COMMENTAIRE COMPOSÉ

1) NATURE ET THÈME DU TEXTE:

1) LE PLAN DE VOTRE COMMENTAIRE

6) RÉDIGEZ L'INTRODUCTION DE VOTRE COMMENTAIRE

a) répondre à la problématique, en synthétisant ce qui a été dit durant le commentaire (3 ou 4

FRANÇAIS 102: LIRE & ECRIRE EN FRANÇAIS (SECTION 1)

fréquence que la pertinence de ses contributions à la discussion. Cette note de participation

– pour le vocabulaire: les faux amis et les anglicismes en tout genre,

PROGRAMME DES SÉANCES:

Jeudi 23 janvier 2020: Travail, inégalités, pauvreté

Jeudi 6 février 2020: Travail, inégalités, pauvreté

Explication de texte à préparer sur «Des Cannibales». Nom de l'étudiant ou des

You might also like