Wednesday, May 31, 2006
More on Discourse Analysis by Gee & Green
In a 1998 article, titled Discourse Analysis, Learning, and Social Practice: A Methodological Study, Gee and Green stated “Discourse analysis approaches have been developed to examine ways in which knowledge is socially constructed in classrooms and other educational settings” (p. 119). Discourse analysis can be used to study the social practices in the classroom, small groups and whole class interactions. In this article an “ethnographically grounded approach to discourse analysis” is used to study classroom activities, situated meanings, cultural models, reflexivity, and the construction of a “logic-of-inquiry,” through observations and the analysis of text (class materials) (p. 121).
This article illustrated Gee’s discourse analysis at an earlier stage, in comparison with his 2005 book - for more information about the book go to the previous posting. Many of the examples he presented in the book are introduced here. However, this reading is important because it included important details that clarify Gee’s method. Here the authors presented ‘cultural models;’ in the book Gee used the term “Discourse models” instead. These are defined as ‘patterns of practice’ developed from the data and validated through the use of different tools of inquiry as well as by questioning (using the building tasks questions).
The example Gee and Green discussed about ‘discursive construction of opportunities for learning’ (pages 149-158) included the complete process of Discourse Analysis. I believe this can be a great introduction to this method. However, the book is a must read, since the method has been refined and extended.
*Gee, J. P. & Green, J. L. (1998). Discourse Analysis, Learning, and Social Practice: A Methodological Study. Review of Research in Education, 23, pp. 119-169.
This article illustrated Gee’s discourse analysis at an earlier stage, in comparison with his 2005 book - for more information about the book go to the previous posting. Many of the examples he presented in the book are introduced here. However, this reading is important because it included important details that clarify Gee’s method. Here the authors presented ‘cultural models;’ in the book Gee used the term “Discourse models” instead. These are defined as ‘patterns of practice’ developed from the data and validated through the use of different tools of inquiry as well as by questioning (using the building tasks questions).
The example Gee and Green discussed about ‘discursive construction of opportunities for learning’ (pages 149-158) included the complete process of Discourse Analysis. I believe this can be a great introduction to this method. However, the book is a must read, since the method has been refined and extended.
*Gee, J. P. & Green, J. L. (1998). Discourse Analysis, Learning, and Social Practice: A Methodological Study. Review of Research in Education, 23, pp. 119-169.
Saturday, May 27, 2006
Closing the gap
I decided to micro-managed myself. Instead of setting myself to do a specific task and worrying about not being able to complete it, I decided to write down the times I spend working only on the dissertation. Checking email, looking for things, reading and interacting with others in blogs, writing in my blog, and organizing myself will not count as dissertation time; but reading and writing, organizing and analyzing data, and writing reflections about my data will - these are things that I think will really move me forward in this process. With this I hope I can close the gap between what I want to do and what I really do. I also hope to feel good about the work I do. In this way,what could seem a little or a lot will not be the main foucs, instead quality will be.
I started working on the dissertation on Monday, as I had planned before. Throughout the week I read, summarized, reflected, and tied ideas in the different sections of the book while reflecting on how it could relate to my dissertation. This week has been good. I dedicated quality time to re-reading and summarizing J. P. Gee’s (2005) An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Practice (2nd ed.). I read the first edition a few years ago, and have read this one a chapter at a time, one section here and there, or an important paragraph that dealt with a specific topic at one time or another. Reading it from front to cover gave me a lot more, not only background information but also the whole picture. Gee presented his method throughout the book using many different examples that complement and sometimes supplement what he has said before (he even tells us this). Also, the appendix has much to add to the overall strategies of Gee’s discourse analysis.
For example, in Chapter Three, James P. Gee wrote about Tools of inquiry. In this chapter, he only presented four of the six tools he discussed in this book. These are social languages, Discourses, intertextuality, and Conversations. The other two, to which he dedicated more than two chapters are the following, social meaning and Discourse models. I thought it was a little deceiving to list the first four in Chapter Three without even mentioning how important and fundamental the other two are. Yes, it is true; Gee indicated in the Introduction (Chapter One), “Each of Chapters 2-6 discusses … specific tools of inquiry that are part of the overall method and strategies for using them” (p. 8). But the thing is that by giving such title to Chapter Three, Tools of inquiry, it seemed he would present tools here and strategies elsewhere. This is not the case at all, and what follows is as important -- one could even say it is fundamental. In a further edition I would suggest that all the tools be listed and introduced in the same chapter. This would give the reader the whole picture of the method from the beginning.
According to Gee, the discourse analyst searches for Discourse models that come from the themes identified in the data. Transcribing is a lot more than just putting words in a paper. Transcribing is a two-step process that starts with the raw transcription. This one is then used to start “theorizing” with the data. To find the themes, discourse analysts use the building tasks (seven) and tools of inquiry (4-6). The process is recursive, going back and forth with the data, asking questions (26 questions from the building tasks) and reflecting about it (4-6 inquiry tools) until Discourse models can be written and then tested with the data itself (convergence, coverage, linguistic) and with other discourse analysts and citations (agreement).
This is what I am set do.
Next steps: Continue reading about discourse analysis from Gee and other authors in order to improve Chapter three of my dissertation.
Inquiry tools:
Building tasks:
Validity:
Process - possible steps:
I started working on the dissertation on Monday, as I had planned before. Throughout the week I read, summarized, reflected, and tied ideas in the different sections of the book while reflecting on how it could relate to my dissertation. This week has been good. I dedicated quality time to re-reading and summarizing J. P. Gee’s (2005) An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Practice (2nd ed.). I read the first edition a few years ago, and have read this one a chapter at a time, one section here and there, or an important paragraph that dealt with a specific topic at one time or another. Reading it from front to cover gave me a lot more, not only background information but also the whole picture. Gee presented his method throughout the book using many different examples that complement and sometimes supplement what he has said before (he even tells us this). Also, the appendix has much to add to the overall strategies of Gee’s discourse analysis.
For example, in Chapter Three, James P. Gee wrote about Tools of inquiry. In this chapter, he only presented four of the six tools he discussed in this book. These are social languages, Discourses, intertextuality, and Conversations. The other two, to which he dedicated more than two chapters are the following, social meaning and Discourse models. I thought it was a little deceiving to list the first four in Chapter Three without even mentioning how important and fundamental the other two are. Yes, it is true; Gee indicated in the Introduction (Chapter One), “Each of Chapters 2-6 discusses … specific tools of inquiry that are part of the overall method and strategies for using them” (p. 8). But the thing is that by giving such title to Chapter Three, Tools of inquiry, it seemed he would present tools here and strategies elsewhere. This is not the case at all, and what follows is as important -- one could even say it is fundamental. In a further edition I would suggest that all the tools be listed and introduced in the same chapter. This would give the reader the whole picture of the method from the beginning.
According to Gee, the discourse analyst searches for Discourse models that come from the themes identified in the data. Transcribing is a lot more than just putting words in a paper. Transcribing is a two-step process that starts with the raw transcription. This one is then used to start “theorizing” with the data. To find the themes, discourse analysts use the building tasks (seven) and tools of inquiry (4-6). The process is recursive, going back and forth with the data, asking questions (26 questions from the building tasks) and reflecting about it (4-6 inquiry tools) until Discourse models can be written and then tested with the data itself (convergence, coverage, linguistic) and with other discourse analysts and citations (agreement).
This is what I am set do.
Next steps: Continue reading about discourse analysis from Gee and other authors in order to improve Chapter three of my dissertation.
Discourse Analysis
Inquiry tools:
- social languages
- Discourses
- inter-textuality
- Conversations
- social meaning
- Discourse models
Building tasks:
- politics
- activities
- connections
- sign systems and knowledge
- identities
- relationships
- significance
Validity:
- agreement
- with other discourse analysts
- with citations from literature
- covergence
- coverage
- linguistic
Process - possible steps:
- raw transcript – to – theorized transcript – stanzas, lines, micro and macro-units, stories and body parts
- use inquiry tools and building tasks to identify themes
- develop a Discourse model
- test with data
- validate
Using Discourse Analysis, as stated by James Paul Gee, and writing a Discourse Model – a hypothesis, a theory that comes from the data - is a recursive process. Yet what has been presented here is not a tight process, a step by step procedure that needs to be followed to the letter of the ???. Ideal discourses will use many of these tools and building tasks, but not necessarily all of them!
Wednesday, May 17, 2006
"Del dicho al hecho, hay un gran trecho"*
I used to say this all the time, as if I was giving myself an excuse to procrastinate. But things caught up with me and I had to start doing things in a different way, pushing myself, working toward my goals without looking back.
It is so easy to belittle yourself, to keep in your mind negative comments; that at the end do not take you anywhere. That I did for a very long time. Once I was accepted to the doctoral program I had to stop the little talk, and start working toward my goal. And so, I got busy with work and due dates. One thing at a time, little by little, things had to get done, and they were.
And now I am back home, trying to keep myself on schedule. That is my main goal. But I am very lucky, I have my husband’s and family support and my school support as well. Now I will have to stay close to my schedule: starting on May 23, 2006 I will work no less than 30 hours a week on my dissertation. The plans of getting my study room ready are on their way and should be completed by next Monday.
* This Spanish saying could be translated in the following way: 'From what you say to what you do there is a big gap'
It is so easy to belittle yourself, to keep in your mind negative comments; that at the end do not take you anywhere. That I did for a very long time. Once I was accepted to the doctoral program I had to stop the little talk, and start working toward my goal. And so, I got busy with work and due dates. One thing at a time, little by little, things had to get done, and they were.
And now I am back home, trying to keep myself on schedule. That is my main goal. But I am very lucky, I have my husband’s and family support and my school support as well. Now I will have to stay close to my schedule: starting on May 23, 2006 I will work no less than 30 hours a week on my dissertation. The plans of getting my study room ready are on their way and should be completed by next Monday.
* This Spanish saying could be translated in the following way: 'From what you say to what you do there is a big gap'
Sunday, May 07, 2006
I cannot wait!
I am about to finish with my job responsibilities and then I'll have time to continue working with my research. I am anxious to go back to Chapter Three and continue working with its changes, corrections, and additions. This should be my first step; then Chapter Two revisions will follow.
After these revisions get done I'll be able to start working with the organization of my data. I have identified all the cases I'll be studying already. This, I did as I got ready for my Proposal Presentation. My data is archived in a public online discussion forum. I have permission from the web site administrator and I also have the IRB approval from UF to conduct my research project.
The process of organizing the data includes creating tree diagrams of threaded discussions. From the tree diagrams, each branch will be converted into a story, one that will be analyzed following J. P. Gee's (2005) discourse analysis. In my pilot study each thread included at least three stories, we'll see if this is the case in the other threaded discussions as well.
I cannot wait!!!
After these revisions get done I'll be able to start working with the organization of my data. I have identified all the cases I'll be studying already. This, I did as I got ready for my Proposal Presentation. My data is archived in a public online discussion forum. I have permission from the web site administrator and I also have the IRB approval from UF to conduct my research project.
The process of organizing the data includes creating tree diagrams of threaded discussions. From the tree diagrams, each branch will be converted into a story, one that will be analyzed following J. P. Gee's (2005) discourse analysis. In my pilot study each thread included at least three stories, we'll see if this is the case in the other threaded discussions as well.
I cannot wait!!!
Saturday, May 06, 2006
Silence = Very busy!
I was going to write that this week has been extremely busy, but when I thought of it I realized the whole semester has been incredibly busy. Yes, very productive too! That is the good part of it, what makes it rewarding, what makes me happy and self-accomplished. But all of this would not be possible if it wasn't for so many people: family, friends, professors-mentors, and even my students.
My proposal presentation went really well. I am lucky to have a committee that is supportive; that believes in constructive criticism; that is willing to work with me and help me move forward. This is not something common - I've heard - many doctoral students find themselves working by themselves, with very little guidance. This is not may case at all! All of my committee members are like colleagues, working with me, and me working with them -- working together!
The meeting started as scheduled. First, I made a ten-minute presentation of the research project. From there on, a session of questions and answers followed -- brainstorming, commenting, and developing conversations throughout the following hour or so. We worked together to refine my research topic, to better delimit the research question. We identified holes in the literature review, we looked at possible areas of research that needed to be added to the second chapter. We also went over chapter three and identified sections that needed to be expanded, clarified, revised, where examples were important as to show in detail what I was planning to do. It was a great meeting! I felt I got good criticism; that we were able to negotiate, together, what needed to be done. :)
Thanks to my committee members, Drs. K. Dawson, M. Koro-Ljungberg, R. Ferdig, and R. Telg I can see myself completing my research project -- that is my dissertation -- in a few months. I still have much to do, but this is how it should be!
My proposal presentation went really well. I am lucky to have a committee that is supportive; that believes in constructive criticism; that is willing to work with me and help me move forward. This is not something common - I've heard - many doctoral students find themselves working by themselves, with very little guidance. This is not may case at all! All of my committee members are like colleagues, working with me, and me working with them -- working together!
The meeting started as scheduled. First, I made a ten-minute presentation of the research project. From there on, a session of questions and answers followed -- brainstorming, commenting, and developing conversations throughout the following hour or so. We worked together to refine my research topic, to better delimit the research question. We identified holes in the literature review, we looked at possible areas of research that needed to be added to the second chapter. We also went over chapter three and identified sections that needed to be expanded, clarified, revised, where examples were important as to show in detail what I was planning to do. It was a great meeting! I felt I got good criticism; that we were able to negotiate, together, what needed to be done. :)
Thanks to my committee members, Drs. K. Dawson, M. Koro-Ljungberg, R. Ferdig, and R. Telg I can see myself completing my research project -- that is my dissertation -- in a few months. I still have much to do, but this is how it should be!
Monday, May 01, 2006
Getting Ready for the Proposal Presentation
As the date for my proposal presentation approaches I’ve been going through a wide range of emotions. Am I really prepared? Have I done my readings close enough to the text, to the authors intentions? Do I really understand what I have to do?
On Saturday I was desperate. I wanted to find a reference I though I had, to a diagram that seemed so real in my mind. I went over my stack of articles and looked closely for diagrams, but nothing came up. I was lucky enough to get a call from a friend. We went for lunch and then for ice cream at Sweet Dreams, where I had wonderful chocolate ice cream! After, I went back to work. Getting away helped me calm down; taking my mind away and concentrating in other things allowed me to start reflecting, and to consider other alternatives.
So when Sunday came in, I decided to look at the articles again. This time I went over the specific section related to data analysis. I made a table and took notes, with page numbers, for further reference. And, I did not found the diagram I was looking for!!!
I realized the tree diagram (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_structure ) I am using in my analysis is an application of Graph Theory. Something I have taught before, as part of the Discrete Mathematics course I used to teach. I love to teach this unit, and somehow it has become part of me. It helped me organize my data, and it allowed me to look at the postings in a discussion forum in a different way (Gee, 2005). I was able to use my knowledge about tree diagrams and apply it to the postings organization of a threaded discussion, finding mathematical stories. Gergen (1999) would say, that my “conventions, habits, or ways of life” were the basics and background of my current construction, what he has called discourse as structured (p. 64).
And so, tomorrow will be the big day! I feel good. It's not going to be perfect, but I will do my best.
On Saturday I was desperate. I wanted to find a reference I though I had, to a diagram that seemed so real in my mind. I went over my stack of articles and looked closely for diagrams, but nothing came up. I was lucky enough to get a call from a friend. We went for lunch and then for ice cream at Sweet Dreams, where I had wonderful chocolate ice cream! After, I went back to work. Getting away helped me calm down; taking my mind away and concentrating in other things allowed me to start reflecting, and to consider other alternatives.
So when Sunday came in, I decided to look at the articles again. This time I went over the specific section related to data analysis. I made a table and took notes, with page numbers, for further reference. And, I did not found the diagram I was looking for!!!
I realized the tree diagram (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_structure ) I am using in my analysis is an application of Graph Theory. Something I have taught before, as part of the Discrete Mathematics course I used to teach. I love to teach this unit, and somehow it has become part of me. It helped me organize my data, and it allowed me to look at the postings in a discussion forum in a different way (Gee, 2005). I was able to use my knowledge about tree diagrams and apply it to the postings organization of a threaded discussion, finding mathematical stories. Gergen (1999) would say, that my “conventions, habits, or ways of life” were the basics and background of my current construction, what he has called discourse as structured (p. 64).
And so, tomorrow will be the big day! I feel good. It's not going to be perfect, but I will do my best.
