Monday, June 12, 2006
Finding an answer
Reading about critical discourses gave me a chance to clarify some of my misconceptions about Gee’s Discourse Analysis about it being critical or not.
According to Siegel (2000), critical theory has two purposes: to critique positivism (“the description, classification, and generalization of facts” (p. 144)), and to study “the relationship [between] theory and practice … connections among the economy, the culture industry, and the psychology of individuals” (p. 144). Critical approaches “look beyond the taken-for-granted” and “seek to challenge and transform the status quo” (p. 149).
Expanding on these ideas, Gee (2000) indicated that cultural models “explain why and how things happen” (p. 196). His idea of ‘cultural models’ has evolved today to ‘discourse models.’ This is evident when examining and comparing the first and second editions of his book An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and method (1999, 2005). In the first, he writes about cultural models (Chapter 4), in the second he changed the concept to ‘discourse models’ instead (Chapter 6). Both concepts are related to storylines or theories that explain why things are the way they are (Gee, 2000, p. 200); that help us understand texts and the world (Gee, 2005, p. 71); that “ ‘rationalize’ the situated meanings and practices that people in … [communities of practice] use” (Gee, 2000, p. 200). As Gee stated in the second edition of this book, “discourse models are deeply implicated in ‘politics’ [that is]… anything and any place … where ‘social goods’ are at stake, things such as power, status, or valued knowledge …” (p. 84).
With this I can say that Gee’s discourse analysis IS critical [he has even stated it himself] and then I have answered my question. I still will make other readings about this topic, one from Gee himself, published in Rogers edited book. But the good thing is that with what I have now I can continue editing Chapter Three in my dissertation.
Gee, J. P. (1999). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and method. [1st ed.]. NY, NY: Routledge.
Gee, J. P. (2005). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and method. [2nd ed.]. NY, NY: Routledge.
Gee, J. P. (2000). Discourse and sociocultural studies in reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research: Volume III (pp. 195-207). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc., Publ.
Siegel, M. (2000). Critical approaches. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research: Volume III (pp. 141-151). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc., Publ.
According to Siegel (2000), critical theory has two purposes: to critique positivism (“the description, classification, and generalization of facts” (p. 144)), and to study “the relationship [between] theory and practice … connections among the economy, the culture industry, and the psychology of individuals” (p. 144). Critical approaches “look beyond the taken-for-granted” and “seek to challenge and transform the status quo” (p. 149).
Expanding on these ideas, Gee (2000) indicated that cultural models “explain why and how things happen” (p. 196). His idea of ‘cultural models’ has evolved today to ‘discourse models.’ This is evident when examining and comparing the first and second editions of his book An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and method (1999, 2005). In the first, he writes about cultural models (Chapter 4), in the second he changed the concept to ‘discourse models’ instead (Chapter 6). Both concepts are related to storylines or theories that explain why things are the way they are (Gee, 2000, p. 200); that help us understand texts and the world (Gee, 2005, p. 71); that “ ‘rationalize’ the situated meanings and practices that people in … [communities of practice] use” (Gee, 2000, p. 200). As Gee stated in the second edition of this book, “discourse models are deeply implicated in ‘politics’ [that is]… anything and any place … where ‘social goods’ are at stake, things such as power, status, or valued knowledge …” (p. 84).
With this I can say that Gee’s discourse analysis IS critical [he has even stated it himself] and then I have answered my question. I still will make other readings about this topic, one from Gee himself, published in Rogers edited book. But the good thing is that with what I have now I can continue editing Chapter Three in my dissertation.
Gee, J. P. (1999). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and method. [1st ed.]. NY, NY: Routledge.
Gee, J. P. (2005). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and method. [2nd ed.]. NY, NY: Routledge.
Gee, J. P. (2000). Discourse and sociocultural studies in reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research: Volume III (pp. 195-207). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc., Publ.
Siegel, M. (2000). Critical approaches. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research: Volume III (pp. 141-151). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc., Publ.
