Educational Terminology

Professionalism in discourse communities

Since a discourse community is a knowledge community where its members share certain values, aims and expectations, it is possible to suggest that these people are hold together through the use of socially constructed language practices (Bizzel, 1986, 1992; Candlin, 1997; Gunnarson, 1997; Herzberg, 1986; Ivanic, 1998; Reid, 1993; Swales, 1990; cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010). On top of that, characteristics, which are based on Swales’ (1990) core criteria for this knowledge organization, could be identified in the field of education. According to Swales’ (1990) requirements, this kind of community should present patterns of common goals, participatory mechanisms, information exchanges, community-specific genres, highly specialized terminology and high level of expertise (cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010).

Both experts and apprentices, who make use of particular systems of speech and writing as well as accomplishing Swales’ (1990) basic criteria requirements, could be part of an academic community. Regarding the author’s (1990) notion of discourse community and his principles for testing and checking people’s membership, varied examples have been found in teaching learning as praxis “describing how a group makes use of discourse to organize different activities” (as cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010, p.13). As an example, situated learning discourse community for teacher reflection provides insights on how teachers and colleagues interact and exchange ideas in goal-directed communicative activities (cited in Hoffman-Kipp, Artiles & Lopez-Torres, 2003).

Belonging to any disciplinary knowledge organization implies not only the use of specific lexicon, practices, beliefs or goals, but also professionalism, which encompasses certain qualities required to perform demanding tasks in a society. Banfi (1997) describes professionals as those individuals who make use of their intellectual skills which have been acquired after a period of specialized learning in order to be able to provide a social service (cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010). In addition, McLaughlin and Talbert (1993) assert that “teachers need opportunities to participate in professional communities that discuss learning theories and various teacher materials and pedagogy” (as cited in Wenzlaff & Wieseman, 2004, para.5). As a consequence, it is possible to believe that teachers should promote and achieve professionalism, so as to extend knowledge in order to better perform in discourse organizations in the field of education.

References

Hoffman-Kipp, P., Artiles, A. J., & Lopez-Torres, L. (2003). Beyond reflection: teacher learning as praxis. Theory into Practice, Summer, 2003. Retrieved Octover 2010, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0NQM/is_3_42/ai_108442653

Pintos, V., & Crimi, Y. (2010). Unit 1: Building up a community of teachers and prospective researchers. Universidad CAECE, Buenos Aires, Argentina. Retrieved October 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, Spring, 2004. Retrieved October 2010, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3960/is_200404/ai_n9349405

Academic writing in discourse scenarios

Academic conventions for generating knowledge

Taking into account that academic writing involves the ability to generate knowledge through the act of composing, it is important to state that this process requires the use of specific conventions for the purpose of knowledge transforming (Grabe & Kaplan, 1996; cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010). “[A] general academic register, a formal style, a proficiency in language use, the ability to integrate information from other sources, and the types of genres academic writing deals with” (as cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010, p.10) are considered to be essential for operating into academic settings. According to Reid (2001), the way in which information is presented, argued and supported is emphasized over the content to be transmitted and shared in the community (cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010).

Throughout Myles’ (2002) article, academic conventions have probably been applied according to the formal requirements that characterize discourse communities. The use of quotations has been incorporated for citing the author’s exact words in order to support the writer’s claims. Not only does Myles (2002) make use of direct quotes to state the author’s original meaning, but also paraphrases to express others’ ideas in a newly legitimated mood avoiding plagiarism. In addition, ellipses, which indicate that part of the original text has been omitted within a quotation, have been included in Myles’ (2002) article. The use of insertions into the original quote has been worked out by this author when changing a lower-case letter from the original quotation to an upper-case letter in the incorporation by means of square brackets.

In view of the fact that introductory phrases are placed inside the first sentence in paragraph organization, since they contain the source and state the main idea (cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010), Myles (2002) has worked out structures such as the authors’ last name, the year of publication between brackets and the reporting verbs. Considering that “introductory phrases are a type of in-text citations” (as cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010, p. 21), Myles (2002) has developed paraphrased in-text citations which include dates listed in different forms. As an example, she has included either the author’s last name followed by the date between parentheses in the signal phrase, or the authors’ last name together with the year of publication between brackets at the end. However, when Myles (2002) has cited the author’s own words through the use of direct quotations, she has integrated quotes into her work by specifying both the author’s last name, the year of publication, and page number between brackets after closing them.

On account that “academic writing is a type of writing that involves composing for knowledge transforming” (Grabe & Kaplan, 1996; as cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010, p.10), the purpose of Myles’ (2002) article seems to be concerned with enhancing the audience to explore, reflect and clarify important notions regarding the process of academic writing in the field of education. The author makes reference to the nature of errors, the learners’ language skills and strategies in native language as well as social and cognitive factors which affect the development of writing in the second language. Besides, the complexity of teaching this skill is clearly expressed, since “the ability to write well is not a naturally acquire skill; it is usually learnt or culturally transmitted as a set of practices in formal instructional setting or other environments” (Myles, 2002, p.1).

After reading and analyzing Myles’ (2002) article, it has been possible to work not only on its content, but also on its structure. Identifying the article’s purpose and its audience allow us to explore and reflect about its intended meaning. What is more, the possibility of transforming the text through the act of composing provides us with the opportunity to communicate knowledge by means of academic as well as technical uses. As Swales (1990) portrays “academic writing and its genres articulates in which a discourse community operates” (as cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010, p.10), allowing its members to shared highly specialized conventions for constructing and sharing knowledge. Consequently, presenting and supporting information through the use of specific genres and styles provides us with the necessary tools to succeed in academic scenarios.

References

Myles, J. (2002). Second language writing and research: The writing process and error analysis in student texts. TESEL-EJ, 6, (2). Queen’s University. Retrieved November 2010, from

 http://www-writing.berkeley.edu/TESl-EJ/ej22/a1.html

Pintos, V., & Crimi, Y. (2010). Unit 3: Academic writing. Universidad CAECE, Buenos Aires, Argentina. Retrieved November 2010, from

http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=7392

Personal narratives: Second part

A critical incident report: A troublesome situation

Some years ago, when I was studying for being a teacher of English, I had to go through a very difficult situation. This happened one day, when I was preparing my practices in an impoverished school in the suburbs of my city where my partners and I went to observe groups of students, take notes and ask some questions to the teacher in charge of them. It was known for us that those children who attended that educational institution used to be very violent and aggressive with their fellows as well as their teachers. Besides, they stayed at school from very early in the morning up to the last hours in the afternoon, so they had to spend all day long there and be fed up by the assistants, since they lived far away so as to go and return home many times a day. Those young learners had English as a curricular subject from the first year of schooling. However, most of them disliked the idea of learning this foreign language. What is more, the teacher in charge of delivering this subject had told us that the groups behaved so badly that most of the times it was impossible for her to work with them.

The first two weeks before starting my practices, I went there to observe a 6^th year class formed by students between 10-11 years old. The purpose of my visit was to gather information about the learners’ previous knowledge, needs, interests and weaknesses, so as to plan the topics and activities for my specialty. At the very beginning of the class, the students engaged with the topic introduced by the teacher which was related to “People’s daily lives”, but in a few minutes the class became a disaster. One of the boys stood up and started to throw pencils and other objects to the rest of the students, who then became involved in this problematic situation. Things made worse when the headmistress came in the classroom as the teacher was shouting in a fury without being able to control children and calm them down. Fortunately, the superior, taking profit of her experience, sorted out this situation by showing herself determined as well as by letting the group understand that those attitudes were going to change after all. After witnessing that event, I went home thinking about what a great challenge that group would be for me.

During the following days, I was able to analyze my notes, prepare materials and plan the lessons.  I had a clear image that engaging the students and keeping them relaxed would be a success for the development of my classes. When the hopeful day came, I felt so anxious and enthusiastic about the idea of being in front of that group of learners, that I brought the best of me so as to create a strong rapport and a wonderful classroom atmosphere. Although their level of English was very rudimentary, they took part in every task presented with eagerness and sympathy. Whenever they seemed to become bored or exhausted, a game or an ice-breaker activity was introduced to make them feel relaxed and interested with the aim of the class. None of them misbehaved or even disturbed the positive mood which each of us had been able to achieve that day. As a result, that troublesome situation which I had to experience those previous days, allowed me to analyze and reflect about my teaching practices as well as being able to understand that those young children, who came to school with their problems and sufferings, wanted to be felt valuable and their actions taken into account.

Personal Narratives

Reflexive analysis of classroom events in teacher training programs

Regarding that a critical incident is a method of reflective practice (Kennedy & Wyrick, 1990, cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010) which allows us to describe an event by gathering data of the place, time, the people involved as well as the action taken with the purpose of solving a problem (Merzirow, 1990, cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010), it is possible to state that this kind of methodology is considered a useful tool for enhancing knowledge and expertise in the future professionals. Besides, critical incidents bring opportunities that provide reflexive analysis of the varied institutional contexts. The purpose of introducing processes of reflection and analysis about classroom events could be thought as a positive means for developing teachers’ skills when facing problematic situations that demand these professionals to take more assertive actions.

At present, teachers have to go through difficult situations which were not common in the past. Most of them do not possess the ability and experience that are necessary to cope with these problematic issues, and as a result, they feel discouraged, disillusioned, oppressed or surpassed by uncontrollable events which could have had another end. Fernández Gonzalez, Elórtegui Escartín and Medina Pérez (2003) claim that critical incidents, as a pre-service and in-service teacher education strategy, would provide reflexive analysis of classroom events as a powerful method that integrates theory and practice. As a consequence, the need to form professionals goes beyond the idea of specific subject knowledge, since being able of observing, reflecting, and taking assertive actions is thought as an urgent demand by our society where serious problems are arisen without finding positive solutions at all.

On condition that a critical incident may help teachers reflect upon their current practices, Rahilly and Saroyan (1997) emphasize that the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) which was designed by Flanagan in 1954, allows these professionals to collect “qualitative and quantitative data about classroom teaching and teaching thinking” (as cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010). Besides, Flanagan (1954) suggests five steps in CIT which go from determining general aim of study, planning and identifying how facts will be collected, collecting data, analyzing data, up to interpreting and reporting requirement of the activity being studied (Pintos & Crimi, 2010). According to Fernández and Fernández (1994, cited in Fernández et al.) a critical incident technique is presented to teachers in a written form in order to be analyzed so as to reach a conclusion. Those situations, which allow teachers to come near reality in a safety mood, help them to gain insight for possible actions in their future jobs.  

Being a teacher means to provide knowledge and develop students’ skills, but also to observe, reflect and analyze upon our practice and classroom events which contribute to enrich our lives as professionals. For that reason, critical incidents are thought to be a practical instrument to be used for the purpose of sorting out embarrassing situations. Consequently, it would be necessary to deal with and apply this methodology to future teachers, so as to become part of the curricular contents in their teacher training programs (Fernández et al.). What is more, being able to recognize and act effectively over those complex episodes would foster professionalism as well as personal growth during the early stages of instruction.

References

Fernandez, Gonzalez, J., Elortegui Escartin, N., & Medina Perez, M. (2003). Los incidentes críticos en la formación y perfeccionamiento del profesorado de secundaria de ciencias de la naturaleza. Revista Universitaria de Formación de Profesorado, 17-001. Zaragoza. España: Universidad de Zaragoza. Retrived November 2010, from

http:// http://redalyc.uaemex.mx/redalyc/src/inicio/ArtPdfRed.jsp?iCve=27417107

Pintos, V., & Crimi, Y. (2010) Unit 2: Personal narratives in teaching. Universidad CAECE, Buenos Aires, Argentina. Retrieved November 2010, from
http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=7214

Basic criteria for discourse communities

Requirements for discourse communities

On account of a discourse community is a knowledge community where its members are hold together and develop as well as use systems of speech and writing specific to a particular community’s needs and goals, it is possible to identify specific characteristics based on Swales’ (1990) basic criteria (cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010). According to Swales’ (1990) requirements for testing and checking any community membership, an academic organization should present patterns of common goal, participatory mechanisms, information exchanges, community-specific genres, highly specialized terminology and high level of expertise to be reached by the group of individuals who are able to give testimony of such membership (cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010). Consequently, this work aims to illustrate those discursive features which have been approached through different perspectives by the development of specific studies.

Regarding the group objectives and interests, Kelly-Kleese makes reference to the notion that language can help meet the goals by considering the community college as a discourse community which is also a concept that borrows from speech community (2001, p. 1). Besides, the notion of common goals is stressed throughout the following statement:

The beliefs that teachers hold about themselves influence their motivation to learn and act in different ways. How a person learns a particular set of knowledge and skills, the nature of peer interactions, and organizational supports as well as physical and social contexts become fundamental parts of what teachers learn.

(Ponticell, 1995; Putman & Borko, 2000; as cited in Wenzlaff & Wieseman, 2004, p. 1)

With reference to participatory mechanisms, it is possible to declare that in situated discourse community teachers interact with colleagues, exchange ideas as well as reflecting throughout goal-directed activities. These professionals are able to share sign systems and artifacts that are part of the social activity of the school community. Through team teaching and collaborative planning teachers are capable of discussing about their beliefs and daily practices by applying different artifacts (cited in Hoffman-Kipp, Artiles & Lopez-Torres, 2003). In addition, “teachers need opportunities to participate in professional communities that discuss learning theories and various teacher materials and pedagogy” (as cited in Wenzlaff & Wieseman, 2004, para.5), since interactions in professional knowledge communities are considered a major factor for teachers to grow.

On condition that information exchange is necessary for the group to survive, a discourse community –as Bizzell (1992) states- “[…] 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 outsiders” (as cited in Kelly-Kleese, 2001, para. 2). Similarly, the Soltis’ (1981) sociocentric view of knowledge and learning explains that the knowledge we take and the way we think and express are the result of people interactions over time (cited in Wenzlaff & Wieseman, 2004). Furthermore, Wenzlaff and Wieseman affirm that “interactions with the people in one’s environment are major determinants of both what is learned and how learning takes place” (2004, para. 4). According to Putnam and Borko (2000) changes appear when members enter discourse communities bringing with them new ideas and ways of thinking (cited in Wenzlaff & Wieseman, 2004). Therefore, Hoffman-Kipp et al. emphasize that reflection and learning emerge in social practice and that “reflection without participation is as impossible as thought without language” (2003, para.16).

Another important characteristic related to Swales’ (1990) basic criteria is concerned with the use of at least one genre that defines the discourse community. Identifying community-specific genres allows us to comprehend a discourse community. Thus, Kutz’ (1997) assumes that: 

Its members have, over time, developed a common discourse that involves shared knowledge, common purposes, common relationships, similar attitudes and values, shared understandings about how to communicate their knowledge and achieved their shared purposes, and a flow of discourse that has a particular structure and style.

(as cited in Kelly & Kleese, 2001, para. 4)

Throughout these words, Kutz develops the concept of discourse community which borrows from that of a speech community in terms of those words that are used and pronounced, those subjects that are dealt with, those ones in charge of asking and answering questions as well as its explicitly implications (cited in Kelly-Kleese, 2004). As an example of a discourse community, “[the community college] members have, over time, developed a common discourse that involves shared knowledge, common purposes, common relationships, and similar attitudes and values” (as cited in Kelly-Kleese, 2004, para. 6).

Providing that highly specialized terminology makes reference to the use of abbreviations and acronyms as one of discourse components, it is necessary to posses the knowledge to cope with specific notions and terms. For instance, “teachers also mediate their labour through cognitive mechanisms as they learn scientific concepts (i.e., systems of interconnected constructs that explain a domain of study)” (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996, as cited in Hoffman-Kipp et al., 2003, para. 19). In addition, Kelly-Kleese establishes that the community college makes use of language which is shared and understood within the higher education community (2001, para 6). By the same token, high general level of expertise is “[…] legitimated by academic credentials, professional associations, and the division of knowledge within the academy” (Zito, 1984, as cited in Kelly-Kleese, 2001, para. 11). Zito (1984) also explains that only qualified professionals who possess some socially institutionalized agency are considered to be apt to demonstrate the knowledge in such discourse communities (cited in Kelly-Kleese, 2001).

As a conclusion, Swales’ (1990) basic criteria contribute not only to evaluate any discourse community to be recognized as such, but also to highlight the idea of membership awareness (cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010). Consequently, evidence of Swales’ (1990) theory has been considered and developed by different authors in the field of discourse community as it has been stated along this work. Throughout these researchers’ words, features of discursive practices according to Swales’ requirements have been approached from varied perspectives reinforcing the author’s assumptions.

References

Hoffman-Kipp, P., Artiles, A. J., & Lopez-Torres, L. (2003). Beyond reflection: teacher learning as praxis. Theory into Practice. Retrieved November 2010, 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 November 2010, from

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0NQM/is_1_29/ai_77481463

Kelly-Kleese, C. (2004). UCLA community college review: community college scholarship and discourse. Community College Review. Retrieved November 2010, 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 November 2010, from

http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/viwe.php?id=6856

Wenzlaff, T. L., & Wieseman, K. C., (2007). Teachers need teachers to grow. Teacher Education Quarterly. Retrieved November 2010, from

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3960/is_200404/ai_n9349405