Britt and Subrina gave their presentation on Livingstone (thank you).
They set up important discussions about how to organize an essay, the ethics of ethnographic research; methodologies & methods and how to DO ethnographic research.
Organization: we noticed that Livingstone used her data to set up discussions, challenge assumptions, and as "examples" rather than as a basis for a theoretical frame to answers to the questions she was asking. Rather - she drew from existing theory + research to answer questions(contradictions to expectations) posed by her research. She moved back and forth between data + writing by other theorists => with other theorists.
Ethics: In our discussion to discover what assumptions/values (methodology) Livingstone brought to her essay, we spent some time talking about decisions that researchers - particularly ethnographers - need to make with respect to whether their commitment is to their research (providing a clear, well documented answer => discovering the "truth") or whether it is to their subjects - or some combination of commitments in between. You raised important questions and concerns. While in some sense - the answers will be unique to each of you, though there are rules for working with Human Subjects, based on requirements for medical research, and if you do a project associted with Kean that you hope to publish - you will be required to take training.
Methodology: We identified Livingstone's methodology by comparing her assumptions about "truth" and what counts as knowledge, her ethics, values and objectives, and her methods to the methodologies we have talked about so far. Subrina suggested that she used a social constructivist approach since she allowed that there were multiple truths, she uses qualitative methods, and she used observation + analysis in light of larger cultural stories/formations - and that was our best answer.
Methods: We talked about what she needed to "do" to conduct ethnography. You should have a good list in your notes!
You need to document: setting, characters (people), actions/interactions = in descriptive language ( no conclusions/inferences)
For Thursday, November 3
Send a copy of your DA essay as an attachment.
Blog 13: post the draft for you DA essay
Read Alsop (p. 111)
Come to class prepared to take part in an the ethnographic exercise (group participation in solving a brainteaser)
Monday, October 31, 2011
10.31 Livingstone presentation
Overview of Internet Literacy: Young People's Negotiation of New Online Opportunities by Sonia Livingstone
Main focus: Contemporary youth are stereotyped as the "internet generation" - individuals who are "native" to the internet and know how to use it. Through an ethnographic study of exactly how young people in the U.K. actually use the internet - Livingstone takes apart this stereotype by asking:
Main focus: Contemporary youth are stereotyped as the "internet generation" - individuals who are "native" to the internet and know how to use it. Through an ethnographic study of exactly how young people in the U.K. actually use the internet - Livingstone takes apart this stereotype by asking:
- what do young people really know/do in terms of internet literacies?
- what do they need to know/be able to do in order to be fully literate?
- and whose responsibility it is to ensure that young people become competent in the internet literacies necessary for full participation in government (citizenship), the economic sector (in their jobs), and for their own personal fullfillment?
What young people know. Her answer to the first question is that young people's use of the internet is generally uncritical and is often more focused on making interfaces work/using the internet rather than on more critical and creative use of the internet. She attributes limitations in knowledge & creative use to: faults in interface design, family assumptions & values (and resulting patterns for use & restriction) and the need for users to participate as active subjects (111).
What young peole need to learn (p. 114)
basic level : use hardware/ interfaces (dependent on interfaces, software and technical providers)
intermediate level: critical reading of online materials (dependet on education + other learning environments "accountable for gate-keeping practices, well-resourced curricula and information resources")
ambitious level: become producers/participants in the creation of internet content (requires societal support)\
Whose responsibility + what to do (conclusions 115-117)
Livinstone see these as policy/regulator decisions that will balance responsibilities between government, providers, and users.
Questions:
What information did the ethnographic provide for this project?
What kind of information was collected?
How was it collected?
How did Livingstone interpret this data?
10.27 Notes from visual analysis
1. Overall Focus
“to explore how children construct meaning from visual images in complex narratives in order to create strategies that will develop critical literary skills”
2. Theories;
method = visual analysis
Method= annotates spread
Select image from book, subjects annotate images with questions and comments
3. Moves
Annotate the images
Analysis = reporting what annotations were
Applied classification system that reflected levels of thinking
· Experiential
· Interpersonal
· Compositional
· Interpretive
· Other
Hypothesis: there is a sequential move from the experiential level to other levels in the construction of meaning
4. Organization
Intro: overview of main point
Background:
Research subjects
Other sutides
About the text:
Summary of story + how author went about storytelling
Method
Spread method description (but do not include method for classifying annotations)
Data analysis
Present classification categories
Present results by level + comment
Used tables
Discussion + conclusions
5. Gathering information about images also information about how subjects interpret the image
Could provide psychological information
Development of collaborative thinking
Idea generating prompt
How different groups interact with images
Great exercise using the method from the article!
Visual analysis is related to discourse analysis
Because it depends heavily on notion of intertextuality.
ð How texts and Images interact
ð Meaning depends on image + cultural associations with that image, personal experiences, conventions associate with the image
Placement, size, juxtaposition, texture, color, lighting, implied movement
Associations with particular images
Two kinds of discourse analysis
Discourse Anlaysis 1 =Deals with text (image itself), concern with HOW an interpretation (truth) is created
Discourse Analysis 2 =Deals with the creation of a subject or a way of seeing
Monday, October 24, 2011
10.24 Discussion of presentations for the rest of the methods + DA Workshop
We started class by straightening out the calendar (we are a day behind because we took
some extra time with discourse analysis. The plan is to double up visual analysis and
ethnography. We will start with visual analysis on Thursday. On Monday - the plan is both to
finish visual analysis and to begin Ethnography (so Britt & X should be ready).
We then talked through what exactly you were expected to do in your methods
presentations. The expectation is that you will talk through the points listed below (with
respect to your sample article) and then engage the class in using/doing strategies + skills
associated with your method.
The overall format of the presentation should be as follows:
1. Provide background on primary text or other features of the article = Have discussion to develop interpretations => in relation to research articleThink: "What will my classmates need to know/think about to “get” the research article?"
2. Discuss research article in terms of
- focus,
- supporting points,
- essay organization (what each section of the essay did or accomplished),
- methodology => authors’ assumptions/perspective
- methods
3. Interactive application of the method (to illustrate how the method is used + what it is “good” for)
Discourse Analysis Assignment. Next we talked about your DA papers: From what I was seeing on your blogs - the biggest difficulty is to ask a CRITICAL question that is not about the CONTENT of the discussion = but rather about how features of the WAY participants can talk can answer a larger question relvant to literacy learning. We came out with a kind of formula for "good" questions that is as follows:
What [did the way the participants talked] show about [some attitude, belief, reason for why the interview turned out the way it did, perspective on learning => that connects to literacies]?
Due dates will be as follows:
First Draft DA: Nov 3 Thursday
ð Returned by Nov 7
Final draft DA: Due Nov 17
ð Returned Nov 21
Draft Research Project: Due Nov 28
I strongly suggested a process for developing your essay where you move back and forth between looking at the evidence in the transcript - and asking yourself what it shows/or what questions it raises about why/how we experience literacy learning. You might need to go through several rounds of looking at the data & posing questins before you come up with something that interests you and that there is sufficient evidence in the transcript for you to write about.
You are not required to bring in secondary sources (research by other researchers) - but you may if you feel it supports your position. This essay is very much like the textual analysis by Fetterley- only it is uses the speakers moves in the transcripts (rather than plot, character, setting, historical context, cultural context, etc) to develop an exploration of your research question.
For Thursday:
1. Catherine and Kathryn will discuss the essay using visual analysis (handout available in Writing Center in the Blue notebook = also I provided copies in class).
Read: Rose (in your text book), pages 78 to the conclusion.
Blog 12: Drafty writing for your Discourse Analysis project. Keep working on your question + evidence + the connections.
I strongly suggested a process for developing your essay where you move back and forth between looking at the evidence in the transcript - and asking yourself what it shows/or what questions it raises about why/how we experience literacy learning. You might need to go through several rounds of looking at the data & posing questins before you come up with something that interests you and that there is sufficient evidence in the transcript for you to write about.
You are not required to bring in secondary sources (research by other researchers) - but you may if you feel it supports your position. This essay is very much like the textual analysis by Fetterley- only it is uses the speakers moves in the transcripts (rather than plot, character, setting, historical context, cultural context, etc) to develop an exploration of your research question.
For Thursday:
1. Catherine and Kathryn will discuss the essay using visual analysis (handout available in Writing Center in the Blue notebook = also I provided copies in class).
Read: Rose (in your text book), pages 78 to the conclusion.
Blog 12: Drafty writing for your Discourse Analysis project. Keep working on your question + evidence + the connections.
Thursday, October 20, 2011
10.20 Discourse Analysis Again!
We spent today's class going through the chat transcripts in light of the new handouts on story selection, language analysis, and how to (re)present the transcript you are analyzing in your essay. If you have additional questions - you can lurk around your classmates blogs to see how they are applying these concepts - or schedule a conference with me.
Although I originally envisioned this project as a group project, the class preference seemed to be that you write individual papers. So that is what we will do - and the credit allotted to the group project will be for your individual DA essay + presentation.
For Monday
Blog 11: Choose the transcript (pick from among the gamer, adult learner, chat room transcripts) you want to use for your essay (see assignment sheet posted to the right) and do the following to set up your essay.
1. State your focus: what your analysis will "show" => the question you will answer/explore.
This needs to be focused as opposed to general. For example, "what are the power relationships in the chat stories?" = too general. "How do cultural assumptions about the "print" generation, and the "internet" generation affect they way A & S talk to each other = and what does the influence of these assumptions on conversation mean about the kind of "truth" interviewers can learn across generation?" = a good question with both a specific focus & a more general point.
2. List the points your discussion will make to support your focus.
3. Indicate features of the language + parts of the transcript you will use to support your points.
In terms of how to find your focus => you will probably need to spend some time analyzing the transcript (like we did in class) in order to discover what you have to say. So in some sense you will have to work on the post backwards = beginning with observation & analysis, thinking about what your observations show - and finally thinking about how your different observations work together to make an overall point.
In class:
We will workshop these "plans" and set you up to write the draft.
On Thursday, we will begin work on visual analysis. I will be giving feedback to blogs + posting the revised schedule for the remaining research methods over the weekend (hopefully by Sunday night).
Have a good weekend!
Although I originally envisioned this project as a group project, the class preference seemed to be that you write individual papers. So that is what we will do - and the credit allotted to the group project will be for your individual DA essay + presentation.
For Monday
Blog 11: Choose the transcript (pick from among the gamer, adult learner, chat room transcripts) you want to use for your essay (see assignment sheet posted to the right) and do the following to set up your essay.
1. State your focus: what your analysis will "show" => the question you will answer/explore.
This needs to be focused as opposed to general. For example, "what are the power relationships in the chat stories?" = too general. "How do cultural assumptions about the "print" generation, and the "internet" generation affect they way A & S talk to each other = and what does the influence of these assumptions on conversation mean about the kind of "truth" interviewers can learn across generation?" = a good question with both a specific focus & a more general point.
2. List the points your discussion will make to support your focus.
3. Indicate features of the language + parts of the transcript you will use to support your points.
In terms of how to find your focus => you will probably need to spend some time analyzing the transcript (like we did in class) in order to discover what you have to say. So in some sense you will have to work on the post backwards = beginning with observation & analysis, thinking about what your observations show - and finally thinking about how your different observations work together to make an overall point.
In class:
We will workshop these "plans" and set you up to write the draft.
On Thursday, we will begin work on visual analysis. I will be giving feedback to blogs + posting the revised schedule for the remaining research methods over the weekend (hopefully by Sunday night).
Have a good weekend!
Monday, October 17, 2011
10.17 DA Writing Assignment
NOTE: I have posted some handouts[under Notes/Discussions/Handouts on the link list to the right] that may be useful for you as you look through the transcripts. The Sample Questions handout lists series of questions you might ask that would lead you to a focus for an essay. The Language Features handout lists different "moves" speakers make (e.g. shifting among pronouns) and states what the moves might "mean" in terms of underlying motives. The Story Sets handout suggests strategies for identifying or picking out a "set" of stories or conversations that fit together to make a single point.
We took a look at the sign-up sheet for presentations - and it seems everyone is good with the assignments. They are as follows.
We took a look at the sign-up sheet for presentations - and it seems everyone is good with the assignments. They are as follows.
Visual Analsyis
Kathryn J
Catherine R
Ethnographic Methods
Britt
Britt
Subrina
Interviews
Amanda
Melissa
Oral history
Juliana
Melissa
Oral history
Juliana
Katie
Quanitative methods
Quanitative methods
Nicole
Jazmyne
We will use the format we have used for discussing the other methods - where we begin with the presentation of a sample essay that uses the method under discussion, followed by a more theoretical discussion based in the material in your text book. Beginning with visual analysis, you will present a discussion/interactive activity to "immerse" the class in the method - and in the following class I will follow up with a discussion of the Griffin essay on the topic.
Discourse Analysis Assignment
We spent the rest of class working into the DA essay. The assignment sheet is posted to the right. I belabored the point that this essay needs BOTH to make a series of observations about what is going on in the data, and to make a nontrivial point about the significance of what is going on in the data. (The assignment sheet points that out about 3 different ways).
You will develop the essay as a series of drafts - and I will provide feedback at several stages before you turn your work in for a grade. If at any point you feel you need extra input from me = schedule a conference.
After reviewing the assignment sheet we talked through the transcript on Chat rooms. You noticed features of the talk, similarities and differences between talk in the first discussion, and in the sectond, and we talked about what research question you night use a discussion of those features to explore.
For example:
Features in transcript => use of I in first part & we in the second part; different emotions attached to the two discussions "scary" v "fun"; differences in agency as indicated by active voice, sentence constructions, verb forms etc
Questions: What does A's talk in these two excerpts show about her relatinonship to mainstream stories about "individualism" ? What does this relationship suggest about :"stereotypes" associated with gender? Age? Connections to others?
or
Features in transcript: Length of turns in the two segments; kinds of questions (connections between subject's answers and interviewer's questions); interviewer's choice of language for "saying back" etc
Questions: what is the interviewer's role in directing the focus of conversation? the subjects' role? What kinds of strategies "work" to get subjects to talk? How do these strategies change depending on the subject matter?
Blog 10: Do some more analysis for the Chat transcript + state some questions you might be interested in exploring + the features of the talk you would use as evidence. Then analyze the Adult learners transcript and post questions and evidence for it as well. Write into this one. The more writing you do - the more practice you have for your analysis.
Good class today!
In class Thursday=>
We will talk about ways to re-arrange/re-represent the transcript for presentation in your essay.
Also, you will share your analyses so far as a way to get a broader idea of the features your classmates are noticing in the transcripts. We will make a list of these features, and I will provide some additional resources (not required - but if you want more "directions" they will be available in the writing center).
Discourse Analysis Assignment
We spent the rest of class working into the DA essay. The assignment sheet is posted to the right. I belabored the point that this essay needs BOTH to make a series of observations about what is going on in the data, and to make a nontrivial point about the significance of what is going on in the data. (The assignment sheet points that out about 3 different ways).
You will develop the essay as a series of drafts - and I will provide feedback at several stages before you turn your work in for a grade. If at any point you feel you need extra input from me = schedule a conference.
After reviewing the assignment sheet we talked through the transcript on Chat rooms. You noticed features of the talk, similarities and differences between talk in the first discussion, and in the sectond, and we talked about what research question you night use a discussion of those features to explore.
For example:
Features in transcript => use of I in first part & we in the second part; different emotions attached to the two discussions "scary" v "fun"; differences in agency as indicated by active voice, sentence constructions, verb forms etc
Questions: What does A's talk in these two excerpts show about her relatinonship to mainstream stories about "individualism" ? What does this relationship suggest about :"stereotypes" associated with gender? Age? Connections to others?
or
Features in transcript: Length of turns in the two segments; kinds of questions (connections between subject's answers and interviewer's questions); interviewer's choice of language for "saying back" etc
Questions: what is the interviewer's role in directing the focus of conversation? the subjects' role? What kinds of strategies "work" to get subjects to talk? How do these strategies change depending on the subject matter?
Blog 10: Do some more analysis for the Chat transcript + state some questions you might be interested in exploring + the features of the talk you would use as evidence. Then analyze the Adult learners transcript and post questions and evidence for it as well. Write into this one. The more writing you do - the more practice you have for your analysis.
Good class today!
In class Thursday=>
We will talk about ways to re-arrange/re-represent the transcript for presentation in your essay.
Also, you will share your analyses so far as a way to get a broader idea of the features your classmates are noticing in the transcripts. We will make a list of these features, and I will provide some additional resources (not required - but if you want more "directions" they will be available in the writing center).
Thursday, October 13, 2011
10.13: Doing Discourse analysis= 4 approaches
We talked through the 4 sample essays, each of which used a different approach to analyzing the language/information in the transcript.
Smith = social linguistic (interactional) approach
As the name for this approach suggests - the focus was on LANGUAGE, in particular on interactional units. Smith classified 3 levels of interactions:
Organizing the trancript in terms of this classification allowed Smith to look at how sets of interactional units interact to create learning situations.
Goldman = cognitive
Goldman looked at the transcript in terms of a model of how individuals use mental represntations to understand the world around them.
The model she used assumed that as we interpret the world, we resort to a model made up of
Goldman gave evidence from the trancript for the conversations location in a particular level. Her analysis looked at relationships among these different cognitive levels of :"understanding" a text - and noted how the transcript moved sequentially from one level to the next in a way that created effective learning.
Macbeth - ethnometholdological
Macbeth used a close examination of language to establish the values in the conversation. In particular he looked at how the teacher signalled "correct" (valued) answers to students, and described the interactions that allowed students to "read" these answers.
Carter - Black feminist, micro-ethnographic
Carter looked at how larger cultural stories (assumptions/values/beliefs => stereotypes) influenced the classroom conversation and what it means that they do. In particular, she noted instances where students gave answers that were NOT supported in the text. The assumption in this method is that if individuals give answers not warranted by the conversation/text under discussion => that they come from some other cultural source (that validates/suggests them as possible answers).
Sample application of Sociolinguistic/interactive approach:
After reviewing the four approaches, we then began to APPLY the sociolinguistic/interactive approach to the sample transcript on Gaming (posted to the right).
To do this - we used the same analytic approach (classifying the data in the transcript in terms of messages, interactions, and interaction sets; identifying the characteristics of boundaries between the interaction sets; and paying attention the patterns in the transcript that were made visible through marking it up in terms of the sociolinguistic model from the essay.
We got about two thirds through the transcript in terms of identifying sets of interactions - and defining the features that identified boundaries between different interactions.
Blog 9, Part 1: Finish analyzing the Practice Transcript in terms of the sociolinguistic approach from Smith's essay. Your post should include:
Blog 9, Part 2: develop another analysis of the Gaming Transcript using one of the three other models.
On Monday - we will work on these analyses as a class. The idea is for you to get as much experience as possible trying out these methods. In addition to posting your analyses on your blog, send me a copy at the course email as a MSword document . This way I will be able to send feedback & comments.
Format each analysis so that it includes:
Name of the approach you choose
Good class - and have a great weekend.
Smith = social linguistic (interactional) approach
As the name for this approach suggests - the focus was on LANGUAGE, in particular on interactional units. Smith classified 3 levels of interactions:
- message units = an utterance - something said
- interactional units = sets of messages that are connected - such as questions and answers
- sets of interactional units = larger clusters of interactions focused on a common purpose, line of exploration etc.
Organizing the trancript in terms of this classification allowed Smith to look at how sets of interactional units interact to create learning situations.
Goldman = cognitive
Goldman looked at the transcript in terms of a model of how individuals use mental represntations to understand the world around them.
The model she used assumed that as we interpret the world, we resort to a model made up of
- a surface layer (the physcial presentation of whatever we are interpreting)
- a textbase = what the text says - as conveyed through the language of the text
- a situation model = or the assumptions referred to by the text - and acted on by the reader= how the reader interprets the text.
Goldman gave evidence from the trancript for the conversations location in a particular level. Her analysis looked at relationships among these different cognitive levels of :"understanding" a text - and noted how the transcript moved sequentially from one level to the next in a way that created effective learning.
Macbeth - ethnometholdological
Macbeth used a close examination of language to establish the values in the conversation. In particular he looked at how the teacher signalled "correct" (valued) answers to students, and described the interactions that allowed students to "read" these answers.
Carter - Black feminist, micro-ethnographic
Carter looked at how larger cultural stories (assumptions/values/beliefs => stereotypes) influenced the classroom conversation and what it means that they do. In particular, she noted instances where students gave answers that were NOT supported in the text. The assumption in this method is that if individuals give answers not warranted by the conversation/text under discussion => that they come from some other cultural source (that validates/suggests them as possible answers).
Sample application of Sociolinguistic/interactive approach:
After reviewing the four approaches, we then began to APPLY the sociolinguistic/interactive approach to the sample transcript on Gaming (posted to the right).
To do this - we used the same analytic approach (classifying the data in the transcript in terms of messages, interactions, and interaction sets; identifying the characteristics of boundaries between the interaction sets; and paying attention the patterns in the transcript that were made visible through marking it up in terms of the sociolinguistic model from the essay.
We got about two thirds through the transcript in terms of identifying sets of interactions - and defining the features that identified boundaries between different interactions.
Blog 9, Part 1: Finish analyzing the Practice Transcript in terms of the sociolinguistic approach from Smith's essay. Your post should include:
- a "marked up" transcript represented in terms of the sociolinguistic approach
- a list & discussion of patterns that the approach allowed you to see
- a list & discussion of the questions you might answer through extending your application of this method to the transcript.
Blog 9, Part 2: develop another analysis of the Gaming Transcript using one of the three other models.
On Monday - we will work on these analyses as a class. The idea is for you to get as much experience as possible trying out these methods. In addition to posting your analyses on your blog, send me a copy at the course email as a MSword document . This way I will be able to send feedback & comments.
Format each analysis so that it includes:
Name of the approach you choose
- a "marked up" transcript represented in terms of the model used for the approach
- a list & discussion of patterns that the approach allowed you to see
- a list & discussion of the questions you might answer through extending your application of this method to the transcript.
I will be reading Blogs beginning on Saturday. Hopefully you can yous this feedback on some of your early efforts at discourse analysis to set you up for the work we will do on Monday.
Good class - and have a great weekend.
Thursday, October 6, 2011
10/6 More Discourse Analysis
NO CLASS ON MONDAY=> See you Thursday, October 13
We did some discourse analysis on a transcript of an interview. We spent some time talking about the material in the transcript - and then we deepened our exploration in terms of the 4 frames for analysis identified by Bloome et all.
1. the "linguistic turn" and its detailed focus on language
2. movement between micro + macro perspectives on the material
3. consideration of socio/historical contexts
4. structures for power including 'dominant narratives' that designate the "right" way to be and think.
I this discussion we paid attention to the ways that discourse analysis (like any other research method) is NOT a "set of decontextualized, ideilogically neutral, and autonomous tools that can be applied to any situation. . . ." Our analysis showed how our choices about what features of the text to focus on, which social structures (such as stories and interviews) to use to "interpret" the transcript, and so on implied both our own assumptions about what was important and our understanding of "the way the world is." This is not really surprising, if you think about it - but it is important to remember.
In our analysis we noted the following with respect to the frames identified by Bloome et al.
1. the "linguistic turn" and its detailed focus on language
the interview had themes connected to friends, fear, the ESL test
You also noted some of the features we looked at in the classroom description from the book: use of pronouns, turn taking, repeated words, word choices, active/passive constructions (agency => when the speaker represented herself as in control; emotions associated with the different statements, and so on
2. movement between micro + macro perspectives on the material
We then looked at the particular (micro-level) word choices, patterns for telling her stories, representations of agency, and so on in this story in terms of larger cultural patterns (macro level) for story telling associated with age (position in the life course). We identified the fact that L told her story about passing the test 3 times - and that each time she told it - even when she dealt with its negative aspects = she featured a positive resolution.
Researchers have identified this pattern has been identified with US patterns for telling stories in late adolescence - particularly among middle class youth, and as a pattern used by individuals who "grow and change in positive ways." Although we could have talked much more about how L's patterns for storytelling and connecting to values correlate with larger cultural assumptions, values and beliefs= this brief discussion showed how individuals do not tell their stories - or even choose their words on their own. They select from a "menu" that is "out there in the culture, and one task of discourse analysis is to identify connections to which cultural forms influence individual choices.
3. consideration of socio/historical contexts
While the context for this conversation was a particular interview for a research project - interviews have a long history and are associated with many different "assumptions" about what kind of information should be reported, who has authority, what the purpose of the conversation should be, what it is OK to say (and what it isn't OK to say) and so on. In L's interview - both she and Ch operated within the conventions of a research interview. We could have spent more time about how their assumptions about what should happen in research interviews affected their conversation.
For example, Ch believes in "active interviews" where subjects are invited to reflect on the meaning of their experiences - and interviewers are allowed to contribute ideas and reflections of their own. This position is what allowed for the second story to emerge. If Ch had believed that "emotions" can "distort" what "really" happened - she may not have asked the question that elicited the story about not having any friends.
4. structures for power including 'dominant narratives' that designate the "right" way to be and think.
As we noticed - L's stories in this section of the interview connect to dominant stories about "success" and the "American Dream" where doing well in school (complying with school requirements) and learning English is good and associated with a step up. This story is true in many important ways - but the focus on "success" and "opportunity" can overshadow the hardships associated with being "tracked" at school, the unfairness of the "test" (you really couldn't study) - the way it becomes so "high stakes" (it was really nerve-shocking) and the school system does not support or prepare students.
As we noted in class, the structure of the educational system set up these hardships - and paying attention to the stories that underlie educational policies can help us think about new possibilities. Is there a more compassionate, more effective way to support language learning + cultural change? Do we need a different kind of a story? Discourse analysis that looks at power structures and dominant narratives can help us to ask these kinds of questions.
This class exercise walked you through an examination of a particular text in terms of the frames identified in your book. It was a bit of a whirlwind - but hopefully those ideas are starting to make sense.
For next class:
Read: Bloome et al, Chapters 3 & 4. Pay particular attention to the sample essays.
Blog 8: Post your notes/analysis of the sample transcript (the handout is in the right side panel labeled Sample Transcript for DA.)
Four of your classmates have volunteered to answer a set of questions on the 4 sample discourse analysis essays in Chapter 3.
Jen Theesfield - p 79
Nina Sinicropi 93
Will Barbieri p 105
Jen McDonald p. 119
They are going to prepare a MS word document and email it to me that answers the following questions:
1. what are the essay's main points?
2. what theories does it draw from (the authors should mention them straight out)
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)
4. how is this essay organizaed (name what kind of material is in each section)?
5. what is this kind of discourse analysis good for? or - what kind of questions can it answer?
We will use a discussion of their presentations as a way to talk in some more depth about what discourse analysis is - and what it can do.
I am working on the list of presentations on research methods and will post a "draft" for next class. We will talk it over and finalize it in class.
Good work today and see you Thursday.!
We did some discourse analysis on a transcript of an interview. We spent some time talking about the material in the transcript - and then we deepened our exploration in terms of the 4 frames for analysis identified by Bloome et all.
1. the "linguistic turn" and its detailed focus on language
2. movement between micro + macro perspectives on the material
3. consideration of socio/historical contexts
4. structures for power including 'dominant narratives' that designate the "right" way to be and think.
I this discussion we paid attention to the ways that discourse analysis (like any other research method) is NOT a "set of decontextualized, ideilogically neutral, and autonomous tools that can be applied to any situation. . . ." Our analysis showed how our choices about what features of the text to focus on, which social structures (such as stories and interviews) to use to "interpret" the transcript, and so on implied both our own assumptions about what was important and our understanding of "the way the world is." This is not really surprising, if you think about it - but it is important to remember.
In our analysis we noted the following with respect to the frames identified by Bloome et al.
1. the "linguistic turn" and its detailed focus on language
the interview had themes connected to friends, fear, the ESL test
You also noted some of the features we looked at in the classroom description from the book: use of pronouns, turn taking, repeated words, word choices, active/passive constructions (agency => when the speaker represented herself as in control; emotions associated with the different statements, and so on
2. movement between micro + macro perspectives on the material
We then looked at the particular (micro-level) word choices, patterns for telling her stories, representations of agency, and so on in this story in terms of larger cultural patterns (macro level) for story telling associated with age (position in the life course). We identified the fact that L told her story about passing the test 3 times - and that each time she told it - even when she dealt with its negative aspects = she featured a positive resolution.
Researchers have identified this pattern has been identified with US patterns for telling stories in late adolescence - particularly among middle class youth, and as a pattern used by individuals who "grow and change in positive ways." Although we could have talked much more about how L's patterns for storytelling and connecting to values correlate with larger cultural assumptions, values and beliefs= this brief discussion showed how individuals do not tell their stories - or even choose their words on their own. They select from a "menu" that is "out there in the culture, and one task of discourse analysis is to identify connections to which cultural forms influence individual choices.
3. consideration of socio/historical contexts
While the context for this conversation was a particular interview for a research project - interviews have a long history and are associated with many different "assumptions" about what kind of information should be reported, who has authority, what the purpose of the conversation should be, what it is OK to say (and what it isn't OK to say) and so on. In L's interview - both she and Ch operated within the conventions of a research interview. We could have spent more time about how their assumptions about what should happen in research interviews affected their conversation.
For example, Ch believes in "active interviews" where subjects are invited to reflect on the meaning of their experiences - and interviewers are allowed to contribute ideas and reflections of their own. This position is what allowed for the second story to emerge. If Ch had believed that "emotions" can "distort" what "really" happened - she may not have asked the question that elicited the story about not having any friends.
4. structures for power including 'dominant narratives' that designate the "right" way to be and think.
As we noticed - L's stories in this section of the interview connect to dominant stories about "success" and the "American Dream" where doing well in school (complying with school requirements) and learning English is good and associated with a step up. This story is true in many important ways - but the focus on "success" and "opportunity" can overshadow the hardships associated with being "tracked" at school, the unfairness of the "test" (you really couldn't study) - the way it becomes so "high stakes" (it was really nerve-shocking) and the school system does not support or prepare students.
As we noted in class, the structure of the educational system set up these hardships - and paying attention to the stories that underlie educational policies can help us think about new possibilities. Is there a more compassionate, more effective way to support language learning + cultural change? Do we need a different kind of a story? Discourse analysis that looks at power structures and dominant narratives can help us to ask these kinds of questions.
This class exercise walked you through an examination of a particular text in terms of the frames identified in your book. It was a bit of a whirlwind - but hopefully those ideas are starting to make sense.
For next class:
Read: Bloome et al, Chapters 3 & 4. Pay particular attention to the sample essays.
Blog 8: Post your notes/analysis of the sample transcript (the handout is in the right side panel labeled Sample Transcript for DA.)
Four of your classmates have volunteered to answer a set of questions on the 4 sample discourse analysis essays in Chapter 3.
Jen Theesfield - p 79
Nina Sinicropi 93
Will Barbieri p 105
Jen McDonald p. 119
They are going to prepare a MS word document and email it to me that answers the following questions:
1. what are the essay's main points?
2. what theories does it draw from (the authors should mention them straight out)
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)
4. how is this essay organizaed (name what kind of material is in each section)?
5. what is this kind of discourse analysis good for? or - what kind of questions can it answer?
We will use a discussion of their presentations as a way to talk in some more depth about what discourse analysis is - and what it can do.
I am working on the list of presentations on research methods and will post a "draft" for next class. We will talk it over and finalize it in class.
Good work today and see you Thursday.!
Monday, October 3, 2011
10/3: Discourse analysis : Take 1
In class we identified the learning objectives for our study of discourse analysis and then dug into David Bloome's book. Rather than start with all the defining and classifying of different approaches to discourse analysis - we started with a close reading of the classroom example on page 24. We started by paying attention to our interpretation of what was going on within the described event - and then we identified and classified the "power moves" taken by students in the transcript. You noticed:
You identified, classified and counted these moves as a way to characterize what was going on.
Our next move would have been to talk through the analytic "moves" Bloome made in his analysis.
What you did - and what Bloome describes - are one form of discourse analysis. By emphasizing a different analytic frame, or definition of discourse we could engage in the other kinds of discourse analysis Bloome describes.
Chapter 1:
Bloome emphasizes that we will understand (and do) discourse analysis differently depending how we look at it. He then guides readers through 4 important ways of thinking about what discourse analysis does.
His discussion focuses on discourse analysis in terms of:
ForThursday: we will continue to work on discourse analysis, and on defining discourse.
Read: Chapter 1 & 2 = again. This time identify any language you do not fully understand. Come to class prepared to explore and make sense of these terms.
If you feel solid on the terminology - think about the 4 frames for discourse analysis. Can you identify assumptions for each frame? How will the different frames change/re-focus the kind of research/analysis you do?
Or go back to your book and think about the differences between discourse analysis that imagines discourse as a noun and discourse as a verb. Do you think these distinctions are worth making? Why or why not? .
These are the kinds of questions you will have on your exam for the section on discourse analysis.
Blog 7: 1) Describe what you learned in class today about discourse analysis;
2) what is still hard to understand?
3) what activities do you think would help you meet the learning objectives for our study of discourse analysis? .
- control of the floor (who intiated/held conversations)
- use of pronouns to represent self
- control of (and physical positioning of) material resources (crayons, paper, markers)
- use of questions (requests for information, demands for explanations, request for permission. . .)
- use of tone of voice (eg Michelle was angry)
- gaze, eye contact
- challenges (struggles for authority)
- team building
- and etc.
You identified, classified and counted these moves as a way to characterize what was going on.
Our next move would have been to talk through the analytic "moves" Bloome made in his analysis.
What you did - and what Bloome describes - are one form of discourse analysis. By emphasizing a different analytic frame, or definition of discourse we could engage in the other kinds of discourse analysis Bloome describes.
Chapter 1:
Bloome emphasizes that we will understand (and do) discourse analysis differently depending how we look at it. He then guides readers through 4 important ways of thinking about what discourse analysis does.
His discussion focuses on discourse analysis in terms of:
- the "linguistic turn"
- movement between macro and micro processes
- a larger understanding of context
- its relationship to power
Chapter 2: Chapeter 2 discusses how the kind of research we do depends on the way we think about what discourse is. When discourse is a noun, we can think of it either as an object that we observe, react to and use; or as a "subject" that causes us to do things and acts upon us; thinking of discourse as a "thing" also allows us to think of it as a text, a face-to-face interactions, an identity, or a "truth" about the way things are. Bloome's point is that thinking about discourse in each of these different ways causes us to ask different questions, discover different "facts", and come to different interpretations of its meanings, relationships, and uses.
Bloome also discusses how we might understand discourse if we interpret it (experience it) as a verb.
ForThursday: we will continue to work on discourse analysis, and on defining discourse.
Read: Chapter 1 & 2 = again. This time identify any language you do not fully understand. Come to class prepared to explore and make sense of these terms.
If you feel solid on the terminology - think about the 4 frames for discourse analysis. Can you identify assumptions for each frame? How will the different frames change/re-focus the kind of research/analysis you do?
Or go back to your book and think about the differences between discourse analysis that imagines discourse as a noun and discourse as a verb. Do you think these distinctions are worth making? Why or why not? .
These are the kinds of questions you will have on your exam for the section on discourse analysis.
Blog 7: 1) Describe what you learned in class today about discourse analysis;
2) what is still hard to understand?
3) what activities do you think would help you meet the learning objectives for our study of discourse analysis? .
Notes from 10/3 Class
Power hierarchy
Michelle
Katie
Oscar + David
Identifying + classifying moves Michelle
Ask questions in irritated tone of voice
Non-response
Controls valuable material physically holding it away
“don’t break it” = steps into authority role => gives direct orders
Aggressive => tone of voice,
Does not make eye contact
She is the only one drawing = she determines what “can” be drawn
Identifying + classifying moves fior Katie
Uses “we” statements
Demand that Michelle explain herself
Tries to take crayon box (contests power structure)
Identifying + classifying moves Oscar + david
David shut down = avoids looking at Micheele
Asserts himself by “I statements’ => function as requests for premission
Class October 3: learning outcomes for our work on discourse analysis
1. Students can use discourse analysis in non-trivial ways to enrich their professional and personal lives.
2. Students can read and use the research literature on methods for discourse analysis to extend and apply their understanding of discourse analysis.
2. Students can read and use the research literature on methods for discourse analysis to extend and apply their understanding of discourse analysis.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)