a "doc" chronicle

After reading Foucault, I headed back to Chapter 3, to continue editing and revising it. Still, I had once more to stop. As you can see, I have read about and researched discourse analysis. I have followed the trail from one author to the next until I found I had the tools to write something coherently. But I had neglected doing the same thing with social constructionism. Yes, I have read Gergen’s (1991, 1994, 1999) work, I also read Berger & Luckmann (1966), and Crotty (1998, Chapter 5: Constructionism: The making of meaning), but this was not enough. So now I am expanding my research about this theoretical perspective.

One thing that I already have cleared out is where does the foundation of social constructionism reside. Gergen (2002) himself stated:

constructionism finds its early roots in the sociology of knowledge and the history of science. However, constructionist views have been deeply enriched and expanded by more recent developments in literary theory (poststructuralist and deconstruction theory most visible), critical theory (from the Frankfurt school to contemporary feminist theory), social theories of power (most notably, Foucault’s work), rhetorical analyses of rationality and objectivity, and philosophic contributions to neo-pragmatism (from Wittgenstein to Rorty), among the most prominent (p. 188)

In this segment, Gergen presented some of the pieces to the social constructionism puzzle as it is related to different theories. In other writings, Gergen (1997) related social constructionism to education, making reference to Vygotsky, and how his work has influenced the idea of “learning as a social (as opposed to an individual psychological) process” (‘Social construction and the pedagogical project’ section, second paragraph). Continuing this line of thought he sustained the importance of dialogue and group problems solving, which is precisely the focus of my research. He suggested, “work by Edwards and Mercer (1987), Lave and Wenger (1991), and Wertsch and Toma (1995).” Of these I am already reading Lave and Wenger’s.

The idea of dialogue is at the center of social constructionism. Dialogue is the tool we use to “generate meaning together” (Gergen & Gergen, 2004, p. 299). Even more, meaning “is rooted in social process … sustained by conversations occurring between people” (Sampson, 1993, p. 99, as cited in Gergen, 2000, p. 149). For Gergen (2000), meaning is not the result of the individual mind, nor that of the community, but “a byproduct of language use within relationship" (p.150). A clear conecction is established here between social constructionism and discourse analysis: the study of language. Taking Gergen's cotentions about theories related to social constructionism, discourse analysis must be critical, must study power issues, and transformation. This is then supported by Gee's (2005) discourse analysis methodology. Some researchers will also argue that Fairclough's discourse analysis can also be the means to study discourse analysis (Rogers, 2004).

References:

Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The Social Construction of Reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York: Anchor Books.

Crotty, M. (1998). The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning and perspective in the research process, pp. 42-66. London: SAGE Publications.

Edwards, D., & Mercer, N. (1987). Common Knowledge: The development of understanding in the classroom. London: Methuen.

Gee, J. P. (2005). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and method. [2nd ed.]. NY, NY: Routledge.

Gergen, K. J. (1991). The Saturated Self: Dilemmas of identity in contemporary life. USA: Basic Books, Harper Collins Publishers.

Gergen, K. J. (1999). An Invitation to Social Construction. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Gergen, K. J. (1994). Toward Transformation in Social Knowledge. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Gergen, K. J. (1997). Constructing constructionism: Pedagogical potentials. Issues in Education, 3 (2), p. 195, 7p. [HTML copy].

Gergen, K. J. (2000). Technology, Self, and the Moral Project. In J. E. Davis (Ed.), Identity and Social Change. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Gergen, K. J. (2002). Beyond the empiricist / constructionist divide in social psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6 (3), pp. 188-191.

Gergen, M. M. & Gergen, K. J. (2004). Reflections: Between Narcissus and Dorian Grey. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 14, pp. 299-301.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rogers, R. (2004). An Introduction to Critical Discourse Analysis in Education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Wertsch, J., & Toma, C. (1995). Discourse and learning in the classroom: A sociocultural approach. In L. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.), Alternative Epistemologies in Education. Hillsdale, NJ: Earlbaum.