A discourse community could be defined as a group of people who develop and use systems of speech and writing that are quite specific to their particular community’s needs and goals. They find participatory mechanisms to transmit information and feedback and are composed of a minimum number of expert members and a frequently larger number of apprentice members that little by little operate on the basis of the community implicit and explicit goals (Pintos and Crimi, 2010).
Many researchers and theorists have described a discourse community as a knowledge community, “a social mechanism that holds people together and which emerges from them with certain values, aims, expectations and language-using practices” (as cited in Pintos, & Crimi, 2010, p.11). From these theorists, Swales (1990) provided basic criteria for a discourse community to be recognized as such. According to him, these groups should meet important requirements such as common goals, specific genres, high level of expertise, use of specialized terminology, information exchange and participation. The purpose of this paper is to analyze four articles to find evidence which could support his theory.
Wenzlaff and Wieseman (2004) seem to confirm Swales’ (1990) criteria when they postulate that teachers need teachers to grow because information exchange and participation are implied, teachers share common goals, use specialized terminology, and have a relative level of expertise. What is more, one of the purposes of their study is to immerse teachers in a collaborative culture that allowed them to learn from one another as colleagues and to fulfil their aim they took into account the importance of interactions in a discourse community and the significance of a collaborative culture as a force for change.
Hoffman-Kipp, Artiles, and Lopez Torres (2003) state that although reflection is in itself an important means for developing subject matter, and pedagogical-content knowledge about how to teach, it is not enough. Reflection must coexist with meaningful praxis, understood as the union of reflexion and action. This meaningful practice will require the achievement of common goals, a good exchange of information and participation, use of specialized terminology and a good deal of theory to illuminate it. All this illustrates their vision of teacher reflection as constituent of teacher learning as praxis and how Swales’ (1990) requirements can contribute to it development.
Kelly-Kleese, (2001, 2004) described a discourse community stating that “ is a group of people who share certain language using practices ... that can be seen as conventionalized by social interactions within the group and by its dealings with the outsiders” (as cited in Bizzel, 1992, p. 222) and highlighted that although discourse community borrows from speech community’s definition the idea that it is bound together primarily by its uses of language is a more inclusive term because it includes both spoken and written discourse. What is more, she considers that higher education has a discourse community that governs the university’s spoken and written words and that, in this context, the community college can be seen as a subset of this larger discourse community and also as a discourse community in its own right, because its members have, over time, developed a common discourse that involves shared knowledge, common purposes and relationships, and similar attitudes and values.
Under the light of this analysis, it can be concluded that all the authors appear to show evidence of their support to Swales’ (1990) discourse community definition. Through their articles the ideas of sharing common goals, using specific vocabulary, high degree of expertise, information exchange and participatory mechanisms have been developed and put into use. Is this development what allows us to consider up to what extend his criteria has been praised.
Reference
Hoffman-Kipp, P., Artiles, A. J., & Lopez Torres, L. (2003). Beyond reflection: teacher
learning as praxis. Theory into Practice. Retrieved October 2007, from
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0NQM/is_3_42/ai_108442653
Kelly-Kleese, C. (2001). Editor’s Choice: An Open Memo to Community College
Faculty and Administrators. Community College Review. Retrieved October 2007,
from
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HCZ/is_1_29/ai_77481463
Kelly-Kleese, C. (2004). UCLA community college review: community college
scholarship and discourse. Community College Review. Retrieved October 2007,
from
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HCZ/is_1_32/ai_n6361541
Pintos, V., & Crimi, Y. (2010). Unit 1: Building up a Community of Teachers and
Prospective Researchers.
Universidad CAECE: Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Retrieved , August 2, 2010, from
http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=6856
Wenzlaff, T. L., & Wieseman, K. C. (2004). Teachers Need Teachers To Grow.
Teacher Education Quarterly. Retrieved October 2007, from
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3960/is_200404/ai_n9349405
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario