Discourse Communities

– Swales (1990)

– common goals (Sw1)

– common language

characteristic genres (Sw2)

specific lexis (Sw3)

– communication practices

mechanisms for intercommunication (Sw4)

information & feedback (Sw5)

threshold level of members (Sw6)

• Gee: Discourses

J. Gee, "What is literacy?", 1987, p. 1: By "a

discourse" I will mean: a socially accepted

association among ways of using language, of

thinking, and of acting that can be used to identify oneself as a member of a socially meaningful group or

"social network". Think of a discourse as an "identity

kit" which comes complete with the

appropriate costume and instructions on how to act and talk so as to take on a particular role that others

will recognize.

J. Gee, l990, p. 143: A Discourse is a socially accepted association among ways of using language, of thinking,

feeling, believing, valuing, and of acting that can be used to identify oneself as

a member of a socially meaningful group or 'social network', or to

signal (that one is playing a socially meaningful role.

literacy = control over secondary Discourse

• Community Definition

– 1. Common ways of talking and acting--”identity kit”

a. representational devices (vocabulary--

Sw2)

b. ways of acting (genres, forms--St4, Sw3)

c. physical objects (St1)

d. interpretive strategies (personal appearance--

Gee)– 2. Characteristic participation

structures

a. Communication channels (two-way)

b. Activity structures

c. Dialogue function

d. Locus of expertise

e. Power relations

– Implications

roles

communication patterns (IRE)

silences

– 3. Common ideology

a. Beliefs (Gee)

b. Knowledge status

c. Diversity of beliefs

d. Values (standards) (Gee)

e. Purpose (Sw1)

• Boundary objects (Star, 1989)

– repositories (St1)

– ideal types, e.g., species (St2=Sw3)

– coincident boundaries (St3)

– standardized forms (St4=Sw2)

• Exclusion/inclusion (Gee, 1989)

– => resistant to internal criticism--centripetal (G2)

– => defined in opposition to other discourses--centrifugal (G3)

– => certain concepts, values, viewpoints at expense of other; marginalize other viewpoints (G4)

– related to distribution of social power & hierarchy (G5)

– no outside discourse position

– inherently ideological; set of values about relationships between people and the distribution of social goods (money, power, status)

• Theory of splitting (Star, "onions", 1991)

multiple membership--simultaneously in and out

(Hubbard & Randall, Shape of red)

maintaining the high tension zone

cost of membership in multiple areas

multivocality and translation

• Other Discourse Issues

– Analysis of new technology

– Evolution of discourse communities

– How individuals enter into

• Linguistic Utopias

Mary Louise Pratt, “The linguistics of writing”

– Verbal practices associated with women (connected to powerlessness or domestic sphere)

Planting suggestions in the minds of other people

so that they think they thought of it themselves

Speaking to one person in such a way that another

might hear and be affected in the desired

fashion

In academic writing, gradually building up

evidence toward the main point rather than stating it at the beginning and

then backing it up

Storytelling as a way of communicating values (to

children, for example)

Gossip as a means of supporting and surveilling each other, and as a form of power over men, who fear this secret network

Talking often repetitively with one another for the

purpose of maintaining a shared world (small talk)

Talking to subjects who don’t know language at all (babies, animals, plants,

TV sets, the walls)]– marginalization of speech forms associated with women and women’s spheres

– imagined ocmmunity

• Discourse Theory Challenges

Inner

Outer

Knowledge

Epistemology Rhetoric

Social Relations

Community Ideology

• Scollons: Learning as Cultural Crisis

• Pedagogical Responses

Inner

Outer

Knowledge

Meaningful goalsContext of Criticism

Social Relations

Legitimate Peripheral Participation

Recognition of contention

• Responses to Challenges

– Meaningful goals

– Empowerment through critique

Gee: resistant, meta-level, Mushfake

Wineburg study

Engstrom: context of criticism

Boomer: radical v progressive teaching

Rethinking Columbus

– Learning communities

Lave & Wenger: LPP

Gabelnick et al: college models

Graff: canon debate into curriculum

– Recognition of contention

culturally-appropriate practices: Tharp &

Gallimore; Mason & Au; Moll

Delpit criticism

not reducing difference to mismatch

• Questions about Learning Communities

How can we understand individual learning in a

social context?

What role does/could/should community play in

learning?

How can we make educational discourse communities into more

effective learning communities?

• Learning Community Charts

Participation Structures

Model

Activity structure

Dialogue

function

Locus of expertise

Power

relations

Ideology

Model

Knowledge

status

Diversity

of beliefs

Values

(standards)

Purpose

Standard Teaching

temporal;

standard sequence

to transmit knowledge

value asymmetry

monotonic asymmetry;

seek complete

Standard Teaching

pre-established

heterodoxy -> orthodoxy

pre-set; global

learning as explicit goal--thematized; cognitive

emphasis

Learning Community

spatial;

heterarchical

process of learning

recognize difference;

seek balance

value complementarity;

expect limits

Learning Community

socially constructed

heterodoxy + orthodoxy

emergent; local

learning incidental;

affective; holistic

• Standard teaching model

(2/3 rule)

– Participation Structure

Organization: time segmented; sequenced

Dialogue: to transmit knowldege

Expertise: assume monotonic asymmetry;

seek complete

Power: value asymmetry

– Ideology

Knowledge status: pre-established

Diversity of beliefs: heterodoxy -> orthodoxy

Values (standards): pre-set; global

Purpose: learning as explicit goal; thematized;

cognitive emphasis• Learning community model

– Participation Structure

Activity structure: spatial; heterarchical

Dialogue function: process of learning

Locus of expertise: value complementarity; expect

limits

Power relations: recognize difference; seek

balance– Ideology

Knowledge status: socially constructed

Diversity of beliefs: heterodoxy + orthodoxy

Values (standards): emergent; local

Purpose: learning incidental; affective;

holistic