Co-text and critical reading for international postgraduates in Australia

References

• Abednia A, Crookes GV. 2019. Critical literacy as a pedagogical goal in English language teaching. In: Gao X (ed.), Second handbook of English language teaching. Cham: Springer. pp. 255–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02899-2_14
   Google Scholar
• Acocella I. 2012. The focus groups in social research: Advantages and disadvantages. Quality and Quantity 46: 1125–1136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-011-9600-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adami E, Pinto SR. 2019. Meaning (re-)making in a world of untranslated signs: Towards a research agenda on multimodality, culture, and translation. In: Boria M, Carreres Á, Noriega-Sánchez M, Tomalin M (eds), Translation and multimodality. London: Routledge. pp. 71–93. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429341557-4
   Google Scholar
• Allwood J. 2003. Meaning potentials and context: Some consequences for the analysis of variation in meaning. In: Cuyckens H, Dirven R, Taylor JR (eds), Cognitive approaches to lexical semantics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 29–66. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219074.29
   Google Scholar
• Bangani S. 2021. The fake news wave: Academic libraries’ battle against misinformation during COVID-19. The Journal of Academic Librarianship. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2021.102390
   Google Scholar
• Barbour R. 2007. Doing Focus Groups. London: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849208956
   Google Scholar
• Boroumand L. 2020. Iranians turn away from the Islamic Republic. Journal of Democracy 31(1): 169–181. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2020.0014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3(2): 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
   Google Scholar
• Chenzi V. 2020. Fake news, social media and xenophobia in South Africa. African Identities 19(4): 502–521. https://doi.org/10.1080/14725843.2020.1804321
   Google Scholar
• Cousin G. 2010. Positioning positionality: The reflexive turn. In: Savin-Baden M, Howell Major C (eds), New approaches to qualitative research: Wisdom and uncertainty. London: Routledge. pp. 9–18.
   Google Scholar
• Creswell J. 2009. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd edn). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Cutting J. 2008. Pragmatics and discourse: A resource book for students (2nd edn). New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Dehghan E, Glazunova S. 2021. ‘Fake news’ discourses: An exploration of Russian and Persian discourses. Journal of Language and Politics 20(5): 741–760. https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.21032.deh
   Google Scholar
• Dehghani R. 2012. Ferdowsi’s condemning attitudes toward women and flattering poems in praise of Sultan Mahmood. http://dr-rd.blogfa.com/1390/03
   Google Scholar
• Denzin NK, Lincoln YS. 2011. The sage handbook of qualitative research (4th edn). London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Dezuanni M. 2021. Revisiting the Australian Media Arts curriculum for digital media literacy education. The Australian Educational Researcher 48: 873–887. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-021-00472-6
   Google Scholar
• Downes L, Brosseuk D. 2021. The sophisticated literacy practitioner and the global pandemic. The Australian Educational Researcher 49: 347–365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-021-00450-y
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Duff D. 2006. Beyond generalizability: Contextualization, complexity, and credibility in applied linguistics research. In: Chalhoub-Deville M, Chapelle CA, Duff P (eds), Inference and generalizability in applied linguistics: Multiple perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamin. pp. 65–95. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.12.06duf
   Google Scholar
• Fairclough N. 2013. Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language (2nd edn). London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315834368
   Google Scholar
• Foucault M. 1972. The Archaeology of Knowledge. London: Tavistock.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault M. 1975. Discipline and punish: The birth of prison. New York: Vintage Books.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault M. 1979. The history of sexuality (Vol. I): An introduction. New York: Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault M. 1980a. Two lectures. In: Gordon C (ed.), Power/Knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972–1977. New York: Pantheon Books. pp. 78–108.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault M. 1980b. Truth and power. In: Gordon C (ed.), Power/Knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972–1977. New York: Pantheon Books. pp. 109–133.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault M. 1982. The subject and power. Critical Inquiry 8(4): 777–795. https://doi.org/10.1086/448181
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foucault M. 1988. Technologies of the self. In: Martin LH, Gutman H, Hutton PH (eds), Technologies of the self: A seminar with Michele Foucault. Amherst: The University of Massachusetts Press. pp. 16–49.
   Google Scholar
• Freebody P. 2003. Conducting and analysing interviews. In: Freebody P (ed.), Qualitative research in education. London: Sage. pp. 132–174. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849209670.n7
   Google Scholar
• Gerring J. 2007. Case study research: Principles and practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goldman L. 2016. Silence one story and another is born: Experience of censorship in Iran and the UK in 2010. In: O’Leary C, Sanchez DS, Thompson MM (eds), Global insights on theatre censorship. New York: Routledge. pp. 79–92.
   Google Scholar
• Griffiths P, Cummins C. 2017. An introduction to English semantics and pragmatics (2nd edn). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hall LA, Piazza SV. 2008. Critically reading texts: What students do and how teachers can help. The Reading Teacher 62(1): 32–41. https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.62.1.4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hook D. 2007. Foucault, psychology and the analytics of power. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230592322
   Google Scholar
• Howard PN. 2011. Reply to Evgeny Morozov’s review of ‘The Digital Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Information Technology and Political Islam’. Perspectives on Politics 9(4): 900. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592711004853
   Google Scholar
• Hyatt D. 2005. A Critical literacy frame for UK secondary education contexts. English in Education 39(1): 43–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-8845.2005.tb00609.x
   Google Scholar
• Janks H. 2010. Literacy and power. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Janks H. 2018. Text, identities, and ethics: Critical literacy in a post-truth world. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 62(1): 95–99. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.761
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jansen C, van Nistelrooji M, Olislagers K, van Sambeek M, de Stadler L. 2010. A fire station in your body: Metaphors in educational texts on HIV/AIDS. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 28(2): 133–139. https://doi.org/10.2989/16073614.2010.519102
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kamrava M, Hassan-Yari H. 2004. Suspended equilibrium in Iran’s political system. The Muslim World 94(4): 495–524. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1478-1913.2004.00071.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khote N. 2018. Translanguaging in systemic functional linguistics: A culturally sustaining pedagogy for writing in secondary school. In: Harman R (ed.), Bilingual learners and social equity: Critical approaches to systemic functional linguistics. Cham: Springer. pp. 153–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60953-9_8
   Google Scholar
• Kim SJ, Cho H. 2017. Reading outside the box: Exploring critical literacy with Korean preschool children. Language and Education 31(2): 110–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2016.1263 314
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King N. 2004. Using templates in the thematic analysis of text. In: Cassell C, Symon G (eds), Essential guide to qualitative methods in organizational research. London: Sage. pp. 256–270. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446280119.n21
   Google Scholar
• Lauwo MS. 2018. Power, literacy, engagement, and polyphonic identities: Translanguaging in a Tanzanian community library. Southern African linguistics and Applied Language Studies 36(2): 133–146. https://doi.org/10.2989/16073614.2018.1495569
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leander KM, Burriss SK. 2020. Critical literacy for posthuman world: When people read and become with machines. British Journal of Educational Technology 51(4): 1262–1276. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12924
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luke A. 2018. Regrounding critical literacy: Representation, facts, and reality. In: Alvermann DE, Unrau NJ, Sailors M, Ruddle RB (eds), Theoretical models and processes of literacy (7th edn). New York: Routledge. pp. 349–361. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315110592-21
   Google Scholar
• Martin JR, Unsworth L, Rose D. Forthcoming. Condensing meaning: Imagic aggregations in secondary school science. In: G. Parodi (ed.), Multimodality: From corpus to cognition. London: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• May T. 2011. Social research: Issues, methods and process (4th edn). New York: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Merriam SB. 2009. Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Mohammadi AN. 2019. Meaning potentials and discourse markers: The case of focus management markers in Persian. Lingua 229: 102706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2019.06.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore T. 2016. Manoeuvring through the maze of methodology: Constructing the research-ready embodied RHD student. In: Danaher P, Dervin F, Dyer C, Kenny M, Harreveld B, Singh M (eds), Palgrave studies in education research methods. London: McMillan Publishers. pp. 73–88.
   Google Scholar
• Naghi HA. 2012. The analysis of the roles of women in Shahnameh. Woman and Culture 3(9): 59–81. http://jwc.iauahvaz.ac.ir/article_523330_5627d971df8c263cf3fe687fb654e45d.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Norén K, Linell P. 2007. Meaning potentials and the interaction between lexis and contexts. Pragmatics (IPrA) 17 (3): 387–416.
   Google Scholar
• Novianti N. 2021. Introducing critical literacy to pre-service English teachers through fairy tales. Journal of Literary Education 4: 196–215. https://doi.org/10.7203/JLE.4.21026
   Google Scholar
• Nowell LS, Norris JM, White DE, Moules NJ. 2017. Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 16(1): 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olin-Scheller C, Tengberg M. 2017. Teaching and learning critical literacy at secondary school: The importance of metacognition. Language and Education 31(5): 418–431. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2017.1305394
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pandya JZ. 2019. In the weeds: Critical literacy conversation with Allan Luke. Curriculum Inquiry 49(2): 191–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/03626784.2019.1584732
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peters R. 2005. Crime and punishment in Islamic law: Theory and practice from the sixteenth to the twenty-first century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Petré P. 2015. Grammaticalization by changing co-text frequencies, or why [BE Ving] became the ‘progressive’. English Language and Linguistics 20(1): 31–54. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674315000210
   Google Scholar
• Radden G, Köpcke K, Berg T, Siemund P, eds. 2007. Aspects of Meaning Construction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.136
   Google Scholar
• Rahbari L, Longman C, Coene G. 2019. The female body as the bearer of national identity in Iran: A critical discourse analysis of the representation of women’s bodies in official online outlets. Gender, Place & Culture 26(10): 1417–1437. https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369X.2018.1555147
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reijnierse WG, Burgers C, Krennmayr T, Steen GJ. 2020. The role of co-text in the analysis of potentially deliberate metaphor. In: Biase-Dyson CD, Egg M (eds), Drawing attention to metaphor: Case studies across time periods, cultures and modalities. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. pp. 15–38. https://doi.org/10.1075/ftl.5.02rei
   Google Scholar
• Rivasjonoob News. 2017. Freedom and security, peace, and improvement, 6 May. http://rivasjonoob.ir/?p=45418
   Google Scholar
• Rivetti P. 2021. Party politics in Islamic Republic of Iran. In: Cavatorta F, Storm L, Resta V (eds), Routledge handbook on political parties in the Middle East and North Africa. London: Routledge. pp. 137–149.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson OC. 2014. Sampling in interview-based qualitative research: A theoretical and practical guide. Qualitative Research in Psychology 11(1): 25–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2013.801543
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogers R, Wetzel MM, O’Daniels K. 2016. Learning to teach, learning to act: Becoming a critical literacy teacher. Pedagogies: An International Journal 11(4): 292–310. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554480X.2016.1229620
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saldana J. 2016. The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd edn). London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Scholtz D. 2019. Visual and non-literal representations as academic literacy modalities. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 37(2): 105–118. https://doi.org/10.2989/16073614.2019.1617173
   Google Scholar
• Shahi A, Abdoh-Tabrizi E. 2020. Iran’s 2019-2020 demonstrations: The changing dynamics of political protests in Iran. Asian Affairs 51(1): 1–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/03068374.2020.1712889
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shi Y. 2020. Talking about evidence during argumentation. Discourse Processes 57(9): 770–792. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2020.1777498
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shokouhi H, Zaini A. 2022. Cultural and politico-religious challenges impacting critical reading of text for Iranian postgraduates in Australia. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 45(1): 76–97. https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.19082.sho
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sim J, Waterfield J. 2019. Focus group methodology: Some ethical challenges. Quality & Quantity 53: 3003–3022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-019-00914-5
   Google Scholar
• Simmons AM. 2016. Supporting critical literacy in high school English by using systemic functional linguistics to analyse fantasy, canonical, and notification texts. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies 13: 183–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427587.2016.1152475
   Google Scholar
• Simmons AM. 2018. Students use of SFL resources on fantasy, canonical, and non-fiction texts: Critical literacy in the high school EAL classroom. In: Harman R (ed.), Bilingual learners and social equity: Critical approaches to systemic functional linguistics. Cham: Springer. pp. 71–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60953-9_4
   Google Scholar
• Stake RE. 2005. Qualitative case studies. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (eds), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd edn). Thousand Oaks: Sage. pp. 443–466.
   Google Scholar
• Stevens LP, Bean TW. 2007. Critical literacy: Context, research, and practice in the K-12 classroom. London: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452204062
   Google Scholar
• Sullivan MC. 2019. Libraries and fake news: What’s the problem? What’s the plan? Communications in Information Literacy 13(1): 91–113. https://doi.org/10.15760/comminfolit.2019.13.1.7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Supreme Leader Office at Qazvin Islamic Azad University. 2017. https://nahad.qiau.ac.ir/index.aspx?key=docs&id=1459
   Google Scholar
• Thompson S, de Klerk V. 2002. Dear reader: A textual analysis of magazine editorials. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 20: 105–118. https://doi.org/10.2989/16073610209486301
   Google Scholar
• Tracy SJ. 2020. Qualitative research methods: Collecting evidence, crafting analysis, communicating impact (2nd edn). New Jersey: Wiley Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Tsiplakou S, Ioannidou E, Hadjioannou X. 2018. Capitalizing on linguistic variation in Greek Cypriot education. Linguistics and Education 45: 62–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2018.03.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verschuren PJM. 2003. Case study as a research strategy: some ambiguities and opportunities. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 6(2): 121–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645570110106154
   Google Scholar
• Wasserman H. 2020. Fake news from Africa: Panics, politics, and paradigms. Journalism 21(1): 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884917746861
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webb J. 2009. Understanding representation. London: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446213131
   Google Scholar
• Wee SJ, Kim KJ, Lee Y. 2019. ‘Cinderella did not speak up’: Critical literacy approach using folk/fairy tales and their parodies in an early childhood classroom. Early Child Development and Care 189(11): 1874–1888. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2017.1417856
   Google Scholar
• Widdowson HG, ed. 2004. Text, Context, Pretext: Critical issues in discourse analysis. Malden: Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470758427
   Google Scholar
• Widdowson HG. 2011. Context and co-text. In: Hogan PC (ed.), The Cambridge Encyclopaedia of the Language Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 221–222.
   Google Scholar
• Wright J, O’Flynn G, Welch R. 2018. In search of the socially critical in health education: Exploring the views of health and physical education preservice teachers in Australia. Health Education 118(2): 117–130. https://doi.org/10.1108/HE-11-2016-0060
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoon B. 2016. Critical literacies: Global and multicultural perspectives. New York: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-943-1
   Google Scholar
• Zaini A. 2018. Word processors as monarchs: Computer-generated feedback can exercise power over and influence EAL learners’ identity representations. Computers & Education 120: 112–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.01.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zaini A, Mazdayasna G. 2015. The impact of computer-based instruction on the development of EFL learners’ writing skills. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 31(6): 516–528. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12100
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zaini A, Ollerhead S. 2019. Reverse contrastive rhetoric in expository writing: Transfer and power relations at work. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 37(1): 41–61. https://doi.org/10.2989/16073614.2019.1609364
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zaini A, Shokouhi H. Forthcoming. Power dynamics and pragma-cultural sources of unsourced evidentiality in Persian. Pragmatics (IPrA).
   Google Scholar