Presentation - Discourse Analysis

Jen Theesfeld

Discourse Analysis of Mandy Smith, Page 79

1. What are the essay's main points?

·         “One implication of (the research she has done/agrees with) is that describing what happens in a classroom literacy event requires attention to the moment-by-moment unfolding of the event and how people build on each other’s actions and uses of language” (80).

·         “Since my interest was on how the teacher and students together created learning opportunities, I focused attention on what counted as knowledge and how the teacher and students created opportunities to construct knowledge.

·         In brief, this meant looking for how the teacher and students built on each other’s message units in a way that defined what counted as knowledge in the lesson and on opportunities to extend the knowledge already presented.

·         In some cases, this meant examining how the teacher and students defined what counted as reading and as evidence for an argument or claim” (81).

·         Basically, Smith is looking at how teachers and students react to each other during a classroom discussion and wants to prove that the IRE (interaction, response, evaluation) method is effective because it adapts to the people involved (teacher and students).

2. What theories does it draw from (the authors should mention them straight out)?

·         Theories in sociolinguistic ethnography - Gumperz, 1986; Hymes, 1974

·         Theories in interactional sociolinguistics – Bloome et al., 2005; Green & Wallet, 1981

·         Recent discussions of discourse analysis that bridge the micro and macrocontexts of student lives in and out of classrooms – Bloome & Clark, 2006; Gee, 1996

3. What "moves" does the analysis make (in terms of the particular features of language it focuses on, and the particular frames it uses = micro -macro correlations, socio-historical context, etc)?

·         Interactional Unit 1 – “Warranting claims with evidence from the text is the explicit goal of the lesson”

·         “an extended form of the traditional classroom conversational structure of teacher initiation followed by student response followed by teacher evaluation (IRE).”

·         IRE is adaptable (student and teacher may both adapt)

·         Some criticize IRE (encourages only short responses at best), but the transcripts disprove them – IRE allows “extended response and higher level thinking and argumentation” – shows that most conversational structures are adaptable

·         Conclusion (unit 1) – it is important to find out how teachers and students are adapting conversational structures

·         Interactional Unit 2 – “looking at Interactional Unit 1 in the context of Interactional Unit 2”

·         Rather than a basic IRE, the teacher asks questions to which there may not be only one answer – instead, she asks ambiguous questions that allow the students to gain different perspectives. The teacher solicits claims from the students, but then asks them to provide evidence to back up the claims they have made.

·         Opportunities from Unit 2 requires the examination of unit 3 – it’s important to use the entire conversation to gain from the context, to get a feel for what the subjects are really saying

·         Unit 3 allows questions to be “refracted” – examined and recast in a different way or from someone else’s perspective. The teacher selects a different student for “permission to talk”, providing another set of learning opportunities.

·         However, the student continues her opinion and changes the direction of the conversation without prompting (provides her own evidence and feedback, refers back to the book)

·         The book wasn’t the main focus of the discussion, but merely a “prop for initiating such discussion”

·         Although the student initiates her own conversation, the teacher still validates her and continues with the student’s point – this proves that IRE is adaptable – none of the comments were seen as interruption

·         Line-by-line analysis of this interaction helps research what happens in classrooms and how learning opportunities are created

4. How is this essay organized (name what kind of material is in each section)?

                Smith organizes the essay chronologically, based on the transcript of the classroom conversation. Each section picks apart a particular piece of the conversation. She uses the findings from the first section to build the second, proves the second section by referring back to the first, and then proves the third section by referring back to her findings from the first two sections.  She actually doesn’t analyze 3/4 of the transcript, because she has already proven her point and/or they do not fit her specifications for what she wants to prove.

                She constantly restates her hypothesis in the context of the section of the transcript she is analyzing. By continually referring back to her point and tying it in with whatever she is saying, she makes her adaptation of the transcript more important than the transcript itself.

5. What is this kind of discourse analysis good for? or - what kind of questions can it answer?

                Smith wants to prove that IRE is an ideal teaching method. Her discourse analysis focuses only on how the conversation proves what she wants to say, and ignores ways which it does not. This type of discourse analysis is good for discussing new ideas, such as controversial or new teaching methods, which are better explained in the context of the environment in which they would be used. If worded correctly, I would assume that this type of discourse analysis could answer any kind of question regarding discourse. It’s like a lawyer calling someone to questioning at a trial – by asking certain questions, they can make a person admit to something they didn’t do, or didn’t want to admit to, or provide evidence that would otherwise have been kept secret. Smith only wants to prove one thing, so she ignores a large part of the transcript to describe something she is interested in. I think that this type of analysis is necessary sometimes, but would probably be questioned by other researchers quite a bit because it is so particular to the person’s ideology and is so obviously biased.

Blog 8

Ch        OK so let's go back to your schools and tell me a little bit about what they were like.  So what was your, you know, talk about, about what the school was like what the building was like, what the kids were like, and how it made you feel about learning, particularly reading and writing.  SO let's start with Roosevelt

L          Number 10 school is more like in an urban area. Minorities, you know.  Hispanic and black people.  And you know, a lot of bad kids a lot of gangs, so my block where I used to live, it was, you know I  couldn't go to the corner, cause it was, you know, a bunch of gangs, so it was really like, the 10 school, I don't know, like your friends[J1], you have to watch who they were, because, you know, it was really dangerous so

Ch        even when you were little? 78 (sounds surprised)

L          (matter of factly) yeah, {street name?} downtown, that's where the danger is, back in the day, now it's a little better, but thank god my teachers were always really good.  I was, I started kindergarten in the ESL program, you know they like teach you English, since I grew up in a Spanish speaking house and you know, at first I had a hard time reading and writing, but then first grade I took a test, so I could be in an all English class, and you know the test was all reading and asking questions, and you have to write it all, like a picture prompt, and I passed it.  So, second grade was a all English class, and it was, you know, it was easy for me.  I can say I didn't struggle too much, reading and writing.  With math it's another story , but English, is O - I was doing OK with it.

Ch        (Laughing) math is another story

L          Yeah. 

Ch        So how did you feel, what was the test like?  Were you scared when you took   87 what was

L          Oh yeah.  I was so scared.  I was like, Ma I'm not going to pass it, I know I'm not, cause you know I was taking it with a lot of friends, and they were integrated, so they go - you know you can't really study, yeah, they practice everything in class but it was like my first time taking an actual like test, you know, that you have to {words} for an hour, I was like oh my god, it was really like nerve shocking, but I guess I did good, cause I passed it.

Ch        Do you remember taking the test

L          Actually not, I really don't.  I remember like the next, what was like [J2] next month when they got the results.  I got a letter like, you're moved to a new room, and I had no idea.  I'm like, I have a new teacher it's bad and I already have friends in my old class, so when I walked in I remember it was like Mr. Marshall, and I didn't know anyone, and I'm like oh - that's what I get for passing the test. 

Ch        laughing

L          I have no friends (97)

Ch        Did your friends pass it

L          No.  I had like one boy that I knew, but as my close friend, Paula, she was also Colombian, she didn't pass it and she stayed in ESL until like 4^th grade.

Ch        What was that like for you.

L          Well I guess, you know [J3] it was a new experience, I met a lot of friends I still talk to now in the class, so you know, for the better.

S          OK so you met a lot of friends you still talk to now in the new class.

L          Yeah, in the new class. I got a new group of friends.  It was good[J4] .

---

[J1][Pink]A big concern of hers is her friends – in her neighborhood, in school, in her new class, etc. She represents herself as someone who does not want to be alone/desires to be part of a group. She relates everything she says to her friendships that surrounded or involved in each situation.

[J2] [Green] She says “like” when she is talking about something she feared – the word appears with greater frequency when she described the conversation she had with her mother and when she moved into the new classroom. While proud of herself for passing the test, she is modest about her achievement and downplays it – saying “like” is her pause that makes the story less important. The word "like" occurs 18 times in L's part of this interview. 16 of those occurrences take place during the time where she is telling her story, and only 2 when she is speaking confidently about the present. While I recognize that "like" is a common colloquial, it seems that for L it goes beyond her regional dialect/word use and uses it specifically when she feels as though she is exposing her emotions or is not representing herself as strong and outgoing (seemingly her normal facade).

[J3][Yellow] She says “you know” when she is talking about her inadequacy and her emotions. (15 times in this interview.) Her hesitation (agency) shows that she feels apprehensive to tell her story. Despite being an outspoken person, she is somewhat shy talking about something that shows imperfection.

[J4] [Underline] She ends all of her statements with short, succinct little statements that take away the gravity of many of her situations. Despite the bad situation, she always notes that good came out of it. All of her problems are always solved by the end of the paragraph.

Blog 7

1) In class, we learned the main parts of discourse analysis: Identify, Classify, Count. We talked about the four children and what their actions and words really meant, and what we can learn from them. We discussed the power hierarchy, who had power and why, and how the children represent themselves. Discourse analysis gives us an opportunity to learn from actions rather than just the words. It also gives us an opportunity to analyze subtext, tone, and meaning in writing and communication. Dr. Chandler said something that I really liked - to paraphrase, "unless you take the time to be conscious of the ideology you subconsciously write, you may be presenting an ideology you don't even subscribe to".

2) I think that the most difficult thing about studying discourse analysis is the way it is discussed. For me, it seems like I have to continually remind myself what the terminology means as we are discussing things and as I read about them. The text and the discussions are very "jargon-y", so despite the fact that I understand the meaning of the words being used, they are more difficult to understand because of their context. Does that make sense? For example, Bloome says, "discourse analysis studies need to acknowledge both micro level and macro level processes" and I have to read that as "[the study of language use] needs to acknowledge both [one on one conversation] and [group or community conversations]." I suppose that as I become more familiar with the terminology, it will be much easier, but for now it can be very confusing.

3) I actually liked that we were re-assigned the same reading after discussion this week. Talking about the chapters as a class gave some insight about discourse analysis that I didn't have the first time through. The second reading was much clearer (although still a little confusing,) and I feel like I got more out of it. I like the idea of revisiting the same information after discussion.

Blog 6

Discourse is the use of language and methods of communicating within a community. Discourse analysis is the study of these communications in order to gain a deeper understanding of the way people communicate or of the community. As the Bloome book points out, "many authors of discourse analysis studies either do not specify their definition of discourse or discourse analysis or give vague definitions. They assume an unarticulated shared understanding of underlying constructs and a logic-of-inquiry." In my 4 years as an English major, I have heard the word "discourse" defined about 100 different ways. This can be a bit confusing, and this particular text doesn't seem to be a whole lot of help. Thankfully, I know we will go over it in detail in class, which will help me understand a little better.


I might use discourse analysis as a research method if I wanted to find what styles of teaching have the most profound and lasting effect on students. As a future professor, it is important for me to know how the language I use is interpreted by my students so that I can alter my discourse to have the most impact. As a student, I am already doing this type of research. With each new semester, I am presented with new professors whose methods of discourse I consciously or subconsciously analyze, and by the end of the semester (or sometimes far earlier,) I am able to decide what I liked and didn't like about their teaching methods. From that information, I can decide what I think I should or shouldn't do when I am teaching. I also must pay attention to the comments of my classmates, and observe their concerns. Do they find a professor boring or interesting? Are the things the professor talks about relevant? Is the information presented clearly? All of these questions, and many more, help me decide the effectiveness of the professor's discourse, and will one day be the same questions that my students ask.

Blog 5

If I were to continue with the writing project that we began in class, the first thing I would do is start a freewrite about the subject (my sister, who I haven't spoken to in years.) I have already done some clustering, but I would have to take each individual piece of the cluster and break it down further. I would interview my mom and my aunt to get their perspective on our relationship and what we were like together growing up so that I could talk about it some in the essay. I would probably also go to my mom's house and sit in my sister's old bedroom and reflect upon our childhood together. I write better when I just kind of start writing and then re-read, and add things in here and there as I think of them. I am generally a creative writer, so this type of writing comes easiest to me. I always have my best friend, Shannon, read my writing before I turn it in, so I would send it to her when I thought I was "done" to get her opinion, and since I have known her for 15 years, she could probably add some perspective of her own. After Shannon's opinion, I might have my mom read the piece as well, and then I could go back and edit it again to add anything the two of them suggested. I think that this particular project would take a lot of reflection. Since it is very painful for me, I don't think about it often, so I would need to spend a lot of time thinking about it and trying to find a deeper meaning.

I think that ultimately, my focus and/or purpose for the piece would be to demonstrate to the reader the importance of honest communication and of family. I could probably do some research about family discourse and relationships, and include my findings in my writing, also.This piece would be difficult for me in the same way it was for Pope in "Teacher Training", and I think that my writing process would be very similar to hers. I am not sure, however, that I'd ever actually be comfortable writing this story. :(

Senior Seminar ideas

Project #1: I may continue writing the piece I started for my creative writing class.  Since it is an autobiographical reflection piece, I would likely look through my old journals and any old writing I did. Although I remember most of what I want to say about the times I am talking about, I am probably forgetting a lot, so this type of research would likely be helpful. I may also interview my mom and some of my lifelong/close friends to gather their perspective on the events, as well as see if they have any stories that I've since forgotten. It would also be helpful for me to write as much as I can about the subject and reflect on it, as I may help myself remember some more details that way. I don't think I'd have an issue writing this piece, other than the fact that it's kind of emotional and could become difficult for me to reflect upon in that respect.

Project #2: Continue writing a fiction piece I started last semester. Since this is a fiction piece, the research I would have to do would be for background/setting within the story. The book is based on religion, albeit loosely, so it would be important for me to make sure any statements I make are not based on assumptions. I am planning on taking a theology/religious studies class next semester for this purpose. Additionally, I can do some textual analysis on biblical and historical texts. Perhaps I could also get some ideas by going to a church service and observing religious people in that element. Based on the sample syllabus for senior seminar, I assume it's acceptable to write a fiction piece? Am I better off working with something more scholarly?

Project #3: I could do something like writing about the pedagogy of teachers in inner city classrooms. I could read books written by other teachers and professors to find out what research has been done on this subject and compare their opinions. I could do ethnographic studies of children who live in low income areas, with single parents, or are on welfare. Then, I could interview teachers who work in inner city classrooms and ask their ideas on what it means to be a teacher in their situation and what they think are important things to teach/methods of teaching. My concern with this topic or similar would basically be that I'm not terribly interested in it. Should my senior seminar be based on something that I enjoy, like creative writing, or something that better reflects what I have gained from college thus far? I understand that I need to be doing research, but what type of research should I be doing? I am also worried that if I choose this type of project, I would be disinclined to finish it because I would lose interest in it rather quickly.

Autobiography

Lucy Grealy wrote Autobiography of a Face to share her story about finding a sense of self after many years of being more concerned about her image. The disfiguring cancer she suffered as a child caused her to feel ugly and different, but years of scorn and loneliness eventually taught her who she really was. Although it is the story of her life, Grealy really tells the story of her face - losing part of her face, undergoing many surgeries on her face, and then learning to appreciate what's behind her face.

Grealy did a lot of self-reflection to write this book. Since it is an autobiography, she may have done a self-interview, perhaps sitting down and writing as many memories as she could pertaining to her facial disfigurement, cancer, and emotions during the time of her surgeries. She may have gone through old journals to collect some of this information, as well as perhaps interviewing family members for their points of view. She may also have analyzed some texts pertaining to the type of cancer she suffered or some of the treatments she underwent to ensure that her accounts of those situations were completely factual and not just based on her memory.