Kleiman Social

Lopes underbrush (1998) places that the independent model eliminates the social life of the citizen and, for consequncia, separates the language of partner-history. What it represents to say that the individual does not exist socially beyond the necessary cognitivos limits for the reading of a text. If it does not consider everything what it is related to its existence as to be social, as if this did not influence and/or it was not excellent for the processes that involve its letramento. When pupils in alfabetizao process, the example of Valtemir, pupil of 3 series of the school of the Escoval Farm, say in them: ' ' The school is important in my life because it to me reads teaches it and escrev. People lack reading and without sab escrev we cannot be arguem in vida' ' , its you speak are impregnated by an independent conception of letramento, that is, he is ' ' natural' ' for them if to feel inferiorizados, therefore the hegemonic speech, of the privileged classrooms, affirms that not to know to read and to write in agreement the pertaining to school culture he is ' ' mancha' ' , ' ' grass daninha' '. In opposition to the independent model, the ideological model of letramento (STREET, 1995) considers the writing and the reading as ' ' practical on to the culture and the structures of being able of one sociedade' ' (KLEIMAN, 2003). As Kleiman (2001), the ideological model establishes that practical of letramento social and they are culturally determined e, therefore, they assume meanings and specific functionings of the contexts, social institutions and spheres where if they develop. For Kleiman (op.cit., p.21), the ideological model does not estimate … a causal relation between letramento and progress or civilization, or modernity, therefore, instead of conceiving a great divider between verbal groups and scholars, it estimates the existence and investigates the characteristics, of great areas of interface between practical you pray and scholars.