Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Using discourse analysis in CHAT .
Presented by:Shaun KempISCAR Conference Oral Session 42Date of Presentation:Thursday 2nd October 2014 2.20pm-2.40pm
Presentation structure
Background Methodological Questions Literature Review/Theoretical framework Methodology issues and solution Results of discourse analysis Discussion of discourse analysis Issues of discourse analysis Further research
Audience warning!
Not an extensive review of discourse in CHAT
Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) defined as Engeström’s Y. (1987) Third generation activity system incorporating expansive learning (but this will not be discussed)
Not an in depth explanation of Q method Cautionary tale… Feel free to go to another oral
presentation (come back in 20 minutes!)
Background - research as illustrative case study
Local language planning at a Victorian Government School
Object was a problem solving space Whether or not to introduce Chinese
language learning into the school curriculum
Discourse mainly minutes and policy documents over a ten year period (2004 to 2014)
Also interviews with 36 decision makers (stakeholders)
A model of development phases and contradictions of an expansive transformation of a collective activity system (adapted from Engeström 1987) (Mäkitalo, 2005, p.101)
Yes, activity theory and expansive learning were used as a theoretical framework!
But discourse in co-configurations was used to help identify contradictions, discourse analysis to understand outcome!
Research methodological questions
Two methodological questions addressed here:
. How to use discourse to determine how
the specific issues mediated over the process? (narrative – see poster 41)
How to use discourse to determine which mediated paths were critical in a decision outcome? (discourse analysis)
Why discourse analysis?
Lo Bianco (2005) suggested the best way forward on theories on language planning is to study how discourse operates in problem identification systems and how the issue of different participants’ ideology impacts on the discourse.
Lo Bianco (2001) used discourse analysis to identify nature of ideology in blue /red divide with the nature of discourse around Official English debate in USA (Non CHAT framework)
A problem for CHAT and discourse analysis?
The problem that Lo Bianco (2010) recognises and which has been also an issue for activity theory is how to analyse the discourse. Lo Bianco mentions an issue bought up by Wells (2007): the difference between language use as mundane (e.g. transactional) and ideological (i.e. performativity).
CHAT discourse 1-genre
Wu’s (2005) work in categorizing education discourse into a process of problem solving linking genre and rationality—or discourse conventions and purpose
Wells (2007) also ties genre to the activity theory but uses examples which are illustrative for local language planning. Genre provides the template for sequential outcome of the shared goal. For language planning in a school, committee meetings are a normal tool mechanism for decision-making or constitutive discourse.
Middleton (2010) who also uses discourse analysis in an activity system. Middleton tries to link the question “Why this utterance now?” with the question, “Why this action now?”
CHAT discourse 2 – discursive manifestations
Engeström and Sannino (2011) looked to create a methodological framework based on activity theory by which they found four types of discursive manifestations, namely dilemmas, conflicts, critical conflicts and double binds, which could be identified by specific linguistic cues
Methodological issue
Such a methodological framework would be effective in a theory for language planning to identify contradictions
Framework only works within a Change Laboratory system where transcripts/video of the conversations that go on in meetings can be made.
In this case study, such transcripts do not exist (ethics!).
No similar research on discursive markers in historical written documents such as committee meetings nor discursive markers for research interviews in a CHAT context.
Why Q method?
Lo Bianco (2001) suggests that by defining discursive manifestations you can explore the subjectivity of discourse, and specifically how a person’s beliefs or ideology is linked to persuasive discourse.
Dryzek and Berejikian (1993) use Q method in conjunction with political discourse analysis derived from the work on argument and theory by political philosopher Stephen Toulmin (2003), to construct an overall “concourse” or “big picture” of discourses that represents the totality of arguments on an issue in political debate.
What is Q method ? (inverted factor analysis)
Change is tied to questions of values and beliefs
Q methodology(Stephenson 1953): Takes a picture of views and beliefs of different groups at a point of mediated action
Brings out rich factors via concourse (interviewing people, commentaries from other documents)
Develops points of interest from the data (discourse)
Q method (Stephenson (1953))
Collecting the breadth of the discourse. Sampling from the concourse to get a representative and
manageable set of statements from the concourse. This is the Q set.
The Q set is presented to the participants and they rank the statements in order. This is the Q sort. The ranking scheme in Q goes from a –5 (Most strongly disagree with the statement), –4, –3, –2, –1, 0, +1, +2, +3, +4, +5 (most strongly agree with the statement).
The statistical correlation of gestalt Q sorts. (Done by a statistical software package).
The statistical identification of factors. This looks at the grouping of participants who have a similar perspective.
The statistically derived ranking of each factor. The interpretation of the theoretical rankings for the factors. The attachment of a label to each factor or viewpoint.
Q method and discourse analysis
The Q set was selected on an overriding theoretical basis as determined by Dryzek and Berejikian (1993); that is, the Q set did fulfil a discourse theoretical requirement in order to determine not only what were the issues but also what was the rhetoric of the statements that were selected by the participants.
Political Discourse Matrix
Source: Dryzek and Berejikian (1993) as cited in Lo Bianco (2001)
Verb classification
The classification of the verb types are definitive (concerning the meaning of terms), designative (concerning questions of fact), evaluative (concerning the worth of something that does or could exist), and advocative (concerning something that should or should not exist).
Discourse features classification
Ontology – Ontological concerns are fundamental; they are about the assumptions about the nature of the world
Agency – the statement is advocating for or against
Motivation- the statement is about motivation on the issue
Naturalness- the statement looks at the relationships among entities.
Verb-discourse features
Statements categorized by the intersection between the verb statement on the left side (the rows, defining, designating, evaluating, advocating) and the discourse features on the right (the columns, ontology, agency, motivation,
Cell 1 Defining OntologyCell 2 Defining AgencyCell 3 Defining MotivationCell 4 Defining Naturalness
Cell 5 Designating OntologyCell 6 Designating AgencyCell 7 Designating MotivationCell 8 Designating Naturalness
Cell 9 Evaluating OntologyCall 10 Evaluating AgencyCell 11 Evaluating MotivationCell 12 Evaluating Naturalness
Cell 13 Advocating OntologyCell 14 Advocating AgencyCell 15 Advocating MotivationCell 16 Advocating Naturalness
Example - Cell one
Cell One looks at argument that defines ontology or the nature of the world.
Ontological concerns are fundamental; they are about the assumptions about the nature of the world. This cell is defining “What is there to know about Chinese language planning?”
It is possible to argue that ontology is defined as shared subjectivity.
Cell 10 - Evaluating Agency
Statement 47. “The Confucius Institutes are propaganda vehicles for the Chinese Communist Party and not analogues of other cultural Institutions. (Alliance Francaise, Goethe Institute).”
Of the four statements in this cell two use positive verbs towards Chinese language, two negative verbs.
Verb statement analysis crib sheet
Factor A Defining Designating Evaluating Advocatingpositive 2 8 3 2
negative 3 4 2 6
Factor B
positive 2 4 7 2
negative 3 6 2 4
Factor C
positive 2 2 4 7
negative 6 4 1 4
Discourse Analysis crib sheet
Factor A Ontology Agency Motivation Naturalnesspositive 5 3 6 5
negative 4 4 2 4
Factor B
positive 6 2 3 3
negative 5 3 3 4
Factor C
positive 7 3 3 2
negative 2 4 4 5
Political discourse analysis
At the +3,4,5 and -3,-4,-5 extremes Factor A (Viewpoint 1)- Defining-
Naturalness and Agency Factor B (Viewpoint 2)–Evaluating-
Naturalness and Ontology Defensiveness or weighing up Factor C (Viewpoint C)- Advocating-
Agency and Ontology Defensiveness
Discourse analysis
The ideology of decision makers’ Factor A is that they are strongly optimistic supporters of Chinese. Their discourse was more fact defining than argumentative. This individual viewpoint does align itself directly with the official storyline of the narrative of the government/administration.
Policy as discourse
Bonacina-Pugh’s (2012) “ policy as discourse” is what people think should be done.
The importance of the Q sorts is that they present three distinct viewpoints from the decision makers. “Policy as discourse” aligned with one viewpoint
The noteworthy aspect is that it shows the form of discourse that is used by these different viewpoints was different.
Policy as practice
Bonacina-Pugh’s (2012) “policy as practice” is what people actually do.
Thus the practice indicates which of the ideologies or factors have been successful in overcoming other people’s viewpoints.
The discourse analysis may help understand which discourse was successful in becoming practice (with the CHAT framework background. See poster 41!).
Discourse analysis discussion
As indicated by discourse analysis, the defining verbs of the government’s policy as text do not necessarily succeed over the advocating ontology of the concerned teachers. So the form of government language policy discourse and that of local teachers appears different.
Local outcome “policy as practice” Chinese not introduced.
Issues with Q method discourse analysis
Presents only one microgenetic window on the object
Banna (2013) used multiple Q sorts over time
Still needed use of narrative (Swain M., Kinnear P. & Steinman L. (2011)) to explain expansive learning over the ten year period
Narrative exposed a flaw of this discourse analysis
Issues with this discourse analysis
Issue of finding the hidden truth has been theorized and addressed by Rom Harré and positioning theory (Berman et al., 1999; Harré & Moghaddam, 2003)
A position is a metaphorical place in a workplace or conversation (Redman & Fawns, 2010). This theory works on a mutually determining triad of position, speech acts, and storyline.
Cover stories discourse
The cover story tends to be the narrative given by the teacher to the outside world. It presents a position of where the teacher is representing the school in the light of the administration’s view of how the school theoretically is operating in line with school policies. As such, it tends to be “rhetoric of conclusions”.
Sacred stories discourse
The sacred stories tend to be mostly unnoticed and hard to define, but they are the stories which teachers use with other teachers within the school itself. It becomes the moral orientation of the teacher in which the theoretical knowledge of the teacher is transformed into practice.
Secret stories discourse
The secret stories are the most difficult for the researcher to get information on, and future research on this area related to local language planning would be beneficial.
Being a secret without the interaction of reflective professional discussion can lead to a very inward belief system, which may be, for instance, racist.
Further research
This research showed that a move to introduce Chinese would have an effect on other languages’ student numbers and thus on the “secret story” of the fear of unemployment (It was in the concourse).
The politically acceptable discourse to maintain the hegemony was the “cover story” (that students must study a foreign language which is not their community language). How to use discourse analysis to distinguish which story is which and which story they are acting on?
How to use discourse analysis on silence?
Bibliography Dryzek, J.S and Berejikian ,J. (1993) Reconstructive Democratic Theory
American Political Science Review 87(1) 48-60. Engeström, Y. 1987. Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical
approach to developmental research. Retrieved 23 September 2003, from http://communication.ucsd.edu/MCA/Paper/Engeström/expanding/toc.htm
Engeström, Y.(2011) From design experiments to formative interventions Theory Psychology 21: 598
Engeström, Y & Sannino, A. (2010) Studies of expansive learning: Foundations, findings and future challenges Educational Research Review 5 (2010) 1–24
Lo Bianco, J. (2005). Including discourse in language planning theory. Directions in applied linguistics. P. Bruthiaux. Clevedon, Multilingual Matters: 255-264
Lo Bianco, J. (2001). Officialising language: A discourse study of language politics in the United States. Research School of Social Sciences. Canberra, The Australian National University. PhD thesis.
Stephenson (1953) The Study of Behaviour: Q Technique and it’s Methodology
Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2011). Discursive manifestations of contradictions in organizational change efforts: A methodological framework. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 24(3), 368-387
Bibliography, cont. Collins, C. (2008). 'Discourse' in cultural-historical perspective: Critical discourse
analysis, CHAT, and the study of social change. In B. van Oers, W. Wardekker, E. Elbers & R. Van der Veer (Eds.), The transformation of learning: Advances in cultural-historical activity theory. (pp. 242-272). New York, NY US: Cambridge University Press.
Wu, Z. (2005). Teachers' Knowing in Curriculum Change: A Critical Discourse Study of Language Teaching. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Middleton, D. (2010). Identifying learning in interprofessional discourse: the development of an analytic protocol. In H. Daniels, A. Edwards, Y. Engeström, T. Gallagher & S. R. Ludvigsen (Eds.), Activity theory in practice : promoting learning across boundaries and agencies (pp. 90-104). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Sannino, A. (2008). From Talk to Action: Experiencing Interlocution in Developmental Interventions. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 15(3), 234-257. doi: 10.1080/10749030802186769
Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Bonacina-Pugh, F. (2012). Researching "Practiced language policies": Insights from Conversation Analysis. Language Policy, 11(3), 213-234.
Redman, C., & Fawns, R. (2010). How to use pronoun grammar analysis as a methodological tool for understanding the dynamic lived space of people. In S. Rodrigues (Ed.), Using analytical frameworks for classroom research: collecting data and analysing narrative
Use of expansive learning as activity theory as a theory for language planning
Engeström, Y. & Sannino, A. (2010) Studies of expansive learning: Foundations, findings and
future challenges Educational Research Review 5:1-24Expansive learning as cycles of learning actions “The expansive cycle of learning actions has
been used as framework of interpretation in studies of
relatively large-scale and lengthy processes of transformation.” p10
Expansive learning
Sequencing of learning actions in an expansive learning cycle( Engestrom, 1999, p.384)
A model of development phases and contradictions of an expansive transformation of a collective activity system (adapted from Engeström 1987) (Mäkitalo, 2005, p.101)
Research method I: Case study
Case studies involve the exploration in depth of a program, an event, an activity or a process. This makes them ideal for activity theory research (Cross 2009). The case study is in the form of a narrative (Swain , Kinnear & Steinman 2011)
Narrative inquiry also encompasses discourse analysis via Positioning Theory Clandinin, D. &Connelly, F.(1996)
Research method II : Q methodology (inverted factor analysis)
Change is tied to questions of values and beliefs
Q methodology(Stephenson 1953): Takes a picture of views and beliefs of different groups at a point of mediated action
Brings out rich factors via concourse (interviewing people, commentaries from other documents)
Political Discourse Matrix via Dryzek and Berejikian (1993)
Results - Expansive learning narrative
1- The first action is that of questioning, criticizing or rejecting some aspects of the accepted practice and existing wisdom. In this phase the contradiction is made apparent as it is this that drives the questioning.
Second contradiction
“During the course of the review it was accepted that a key purpose of studying a language is to provide an opportunity to learn about another culture.” Directions Committee minutes May 2008
4. A result – status quo (default)
‘In the absence of overt or explicit detailed planning, teachers make recourse, through underlying beliefs and values, to patterns of behaviour that reflect past accommodations of past policies, sometimes contradicting the broad policy altogether. Thus ideology operates as “default” policy.’(Lo Bianco 2004 p750)
The unstated contradictions
Three viewpoints (Ideology) 1.”Yes we can” – There is a government push for
Chinese. We have many Chinese Heritage students. Chinese can be learnt let’s do it!”
2. ”Wary engagement” – China and the Chinese Heritage community, we are worried about their influence but understand it and wish to embrace but what about its impact on others?
3. “Threatened”- I like Chinese, its influence here is over exaggerated but we are under threat. LOTE should be used to expose new cultures.
Significance of research
Political discourse analysis
At the +3,4,5 and -3,-4,-5 extremes Yes we can- Defining-Naturalness and
Agency Wary –Evaluating-Naturalness and
Ontology Defensiveness or weighing up Threatened- Advocating-Agency and
Ontology Defensiveness
Verb Discourse Analysis
Yes we can Defining Designating Evaluating Advocatingpositive 7 4 2 4
negative 4 1 2 4
Wary
positive 4 1 5 4
negative 2 4 4 3
Threatened
positive 0 5 3 7
negative 3 2 3 5
Political Discourse analysis
Yes we can Ontology Agency Motivation Naturalness
positive 4 3 4 4
negative 4 6 1 4
Wary Ontology Agency Motivation Naturalness
positive 5 4 1 3
negative 4 2 3 5
Threatened Ontology Agency Motivation Naturalness
positive 3 1 5 6
negative 4 7 1 3
Practical Ontology Agency Motivation Naturalness
positive 2 4 5 4negative 5 4 2 4Confident Ontology Agency Motivation Naturalness
positive 6 2 3 4negative 5 3 3 3Status quo Ontology Agency Motivation Naturalnesspositive 7 3 3 2negative 2 4 3 5
Practical Defining Designating Evaluating Advocating
positive 1 7 3 2negative 2 4 2 6Confident Defining Designating Evaluating Advocating
positive 2 4 6 2negative 3 6 2 4Status quo Defining Designating Evaluating Advocatingpositive 2 2 4 7negative 3 4 1 4
Further research areas
Methodology for language planning theory – Discourse analysis vs. discursive markers and emotive analysis.
Factor A: Strongly optimistic supporter Julie Gillard has signalled the Asian century (9) and so
Chinese is increasingly important on the world stage (24), China is providing helpful non-political cultural institutes like the Confucius Institute to support language learning (47). Given these influences we are hopeful that interest in the study of Chinese will grow (31) as Chinese is not a dry language of rote memory (33). Despite the introduction supported by the LOTE faculty, overall (55), we recognise that at this time the introduction of Chinese is not supported in the school as the school has a policy of not supporting community languages (56), perhaps also because of the concern of teachers losing their job, but this is not a reason to block the introduction of Chinese (64).
Cell Two
Cell Two consists of arguments that define degrees of agency (be they autonomous or restricted). Viewpoints relating to this cell might be Marxist where social classes have agentive power or political liberals might see that individuals have power.
Cell Three
Cell Three consists of statements which define the kinds of motives that these participants’ objects might have. This is important given the relationship of objects or a specific issue to create motivation. In some instances motivation might be self-interest, in others it might be social pressure.
Cell Four
Cell Four looks at the relations among issues or entities (Are teacher decision makers in the same social space as administration? In Chinese heritage culture, are students and parents always involved in conflict over the interest in Chinese?). The classification of the verb types are definitive (concerning the meaning of terms), designative (concerning questions of fact), evaluative (concerning the worth of something that does or could exist), and advocative (concerning something that should or should not exist).
Evaluating Agency
Cell 10 Statement 47. ‘The Confucius Institutes
are propaganda vehicles for the Chinese Communist Party and not analogues of other cultural Institutions. (Alliance Francaise, Goethe Institute).’
Expansive learning as an application of activity theory Engeström, Y. & Sannino, A. (2010)
Activity system as a unit of analysis Contradictions as a source of change
and development Agency as a layer of causality Expansive learning as boundary
crossing and network building Expansive learning as distributed
and discontinuous movement Discourse (meetings) as double
stimulation
Hegemony in expansive learning and discourse analysis The research by Vainio, J. (2012) has tried
to link hegemony with the activity theory concept of contradiction and, furthermore, used a form of discourse analysis in order to determine when changes to hegemony do occur.
Idealised narrative
There are two ways to present the discourse analysis. Firstly, linking the Q statements together, we can form the idealised narrative for both decision makers and students’ groups as done by Lo Bianco (2001a) . This is done by only using the very high and low scores (+5, –5) for each of the discourses for each of the factors identified by the Varimax software sort.
Discourse and co-configuration
It seems from Lo Bianco (2001a) that rhetoric does little to shift one side of the argument to the other. Rhetoric appears to create a self-fulfilling policy of agreement to the common sense of each ideology.
Q-sorts
Secondly, Table 5 looks at the ideal Q sorts given by the software for two separate Q sorts for the decision makers and the students, as for the previous discourse analysis and analyses them according to the similarities and differences in the positive and negative verb kinds that feature in each ideology. Table 6 does a similar discourse analysis but on discourse features. Table 5 and Table 6 are a structured form of crib sheet analysis (Watts & Stenner, 2012).This analysis aims to determine what are the underlying features of rhetoric and argumentation involved in each ideological discourse, at the +3, 4, 5 and –3, –4, –5 extremes (Lo Bianco, 2001a)
CHAT and discourse analysis
It seems similar Lo Bianco (2001) that rhetoric does little to shift one side of the argument to the other. Rhetoric appears to create a self-fulfilling policy of agreement to the common sense of each ideology. Discourse analysis allows identification of ideology
