8) Project 3 Final Revision

7/30/2019 8) Project 3 Final Revision

1/15

With this paper I wanted to show that football coaches are a discourse community

and that they would be more efficient in achieving their group goals if they utilized new

forms of technology specifically the Zeus computer program in making decisions during

and before games. I thought that I would be successful in achieving this because I am

knowledgeable about the subject. I come from a coaching background and I have

coached on high school teams despite my young age. I also have been the head coach of

a youth football team in Nevada. I constantly am reading about the game of football and

am very current on my knowledge regarding game planning and statistical data. I want to

return to the sport some day at the high school level and so I research almost daily. I

changed my paper drastically from my peer-reviewed paper. I didnt understand the

assignment at first and failed to make a claim. Also I didnt provide enough information

in my synthesis section the first time around. The revised paper includes an in depth

synthesis regarding concepts I thought applied to my discourse community. Also I made

a claim. I think that as far as what could be better, I feel like I couldnt quite fit the paper

within the word limit. I tried and felt that my ending was rushed despite going over by a

few hundred words. I think that to fully write a polished paper I would need more of a

word limit. I ended my paper sort of abruptly to avoid going over more than I already

have. I think that if I had no limit I could have explored a more complete argument and

tied things together more cleanly. As far as what is working well I think that I have done

a large amount of research. I am sure that I sound informed on my topic and I think that

the reader will pick up on this as well. I think I make an argument that is logical and

makes sense. I do a good job of supporting the argument in my opinion. This project has


2/15

taught me to be more organized and to keep in mind who I am writing to. Also I learned

a great deal about discourse communities and what goes on inside of them.


3/15

Football Coaches: An Ethnographic Study

As people we are all involved in some kind of group or area of interest. Have we

ever stopped to wonder what makes up these groupswhat they are called or what they

bring to others within different areas of interest? These groups are called discourse

communities among scholars. They aremore or lessgroups that share an interest and

a common goal. A community I am involved in is a community of football coaches.

Inside of this large community there are smaller communities made up of individual

teams.

The coaches on these teams are held to a standardalmost alwaysthat includes

instant success. If a team is not competing for championships right away employers of

coaches often times have little patienceleading to a coaching staffs dismissal. This

type of pressure to winand to win earlypushes those involved in the coaching

discourse community to employ many means of gaining an edge over opponents. Many

coaches rely on current sorts of multiliteracies to achieve this advantage over

competition.

The question arises thenwhat type of multiliteracies are used to aid in the

success of these coaches and how can new forms of multiliteracy be used to gain an edge

over competition that is seen within the discourse community among individual teams?

Often times coaches experience communication issues that hinder them from fully

experiencing success in finding a solution to this answer. The problem lies in their

language issues and stubborn attitudes in sticking to old ways. The answer to the problem

and the question lies in advancement of technology. Through the breakdown of statistics

and the use of new forms of technologies coaches can combine current forms of


4/15

multiliteracy with newer forms that are either not yet being used or are being used by a

small percentage of coaches. To understand this concept better it is important to first

understand what is already being said about discourse communities.

According to John Swales, to identify a group of individuals as a discourse

community the group has to meet a set of six criteria. In his article The Concept of

Discourse Community Swales says,

1. A discourse community has a broadly agreed set of common public goals

2. Discourse community has mechanisms of intercommunication among its

members 3. A discourse community uses its participatory mechanisms

primarily to provide information and feedback 4. A discourse community

utilizes and hence posses one or more genres in the communicative furtherance of

its aims 5. In addition to owning genres, a discourse community has acquired

some specific lexis 6. A discourse community has a threshold level of

members with a suitable degree of relevant content and discoursal expertise

(Swales 471472).

By outlining a set of criteria we can see what constitutes a discourse community and what

does not. This helps us identify many key concepts that arise when discussing discourse

communities such as how information is passed and why certain problems or situations

might arise.

Now that John Swales has given a clear concept of what a discourse community

is, it is important to look at the actual function of a discourse community and what goes

on inside of one. What it takes to be a member and what must happen once one is

already a member is an essential part of understanding discourse communities. There are


5/15

many important concepts and ideas about what goes on inside of discourse communities,

but for the purpose of this paper there are only a handful that are overly important. Those

concepts are the ideas of identity, authority, the definition of genre, the definition of

multiliteracies, and Discourse with a capital D. James Paul Gee, the Writing About

Writing glossary, and Elizabeth Wardle express these ideas.

James Paul Gee explains in his article, Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics, that

to truly be a part of a Discourse community we as people must, say or write the right

thing in the right way while playing the right social role and (appearing) to hold the right

values, beliefs, and attitudes. Thus, what is important is not language, and surely not

grammar, but saying (writing)doingbeingvaluingbelieving combinations (Gee

484). This idea that being a part of a discourse community is important. You are either

involved in it or you are not. There is no in between. This means that being involved in

a discourse community is just thatbeing. It is a part of the individual. Because

belonging is a sense of beingit cannot be taught. Gee claims that Discourse

communities are not mastered by overt instruction, but instead through enculturation into

certain behaviors that support the inclusion of new individuals taught by those that have

already mastered a certain Discourse (Gee 484). Through apprenticeshipor

enculturationa veteran member of any community can help someone practice being a

certain way with them, however, they cannot teach anyone to be a part of a discourse

community (Gee 485).

Gee ties in one more important aspect of Discourse communities before making

an important statement. Gee connects with Swales indirectly by mentioning the

participation of individuals involved in Discourse communities. Gee claims that an


6/15

individuals participation through participatory mechanisms is an important aspect of

communities from a member perspective. The members of any given community needs

to be active participants in order for the community to function as well as to retain

membership (Gee 487). All of Gees ideas tie into what he calls Discourse as opposed

to discourse. Discourses with a capital D are ways of being in the world (Gee

484). Essentially Gee is saying that being a member of a Discourse community takes

total immersion in that community. (For the sake of avoiding confusiondiscourse

communities will now be referred to as Discourse communities for the remainder of

this paper.)

So far Discourse communities have been defined by Swales and what it takes to

be a member and stay a member has also been described by Gee. Elizabeth Wardle

makes her contribution to the conversation by breaking down the identity of members as

well as who has authority inside of Discourse communities. Wardle states, To find

their own unique identities within new organizations, newcomers must choose levels

and types of engagement; they must find modes of belonging (Wardle 524). Wardle

goes on to state these three modes of belonging as engagement, imagination, and

alignment (Wardle 524). These three concepts are important in an individuals fitting into

a certain community and establishing themselves as apart of that community.

Once identity is established there is generally some sort of authority that is gained

inside of a community. Authoritylike identityis constantly changing and being

negotiated (Wardle 525). Authority is something that is given by institutions or members

of a Discourse community, and must be maintained through appropriate expressions of

authority. All members have a level of authority, but the authority can only be kept if


7/15

members learn the appropriate speech conventions or otherwise, lose the authority

(Wardle 526). This idea that there is a hierarchy present inside of organizations is an

important one to grasp. The use of authority by those with the most authority can directly

influence the livelihood as well as the future membership of those with less authority in

any given Discourse community.

The last concept pertinent to this paper is the definition of genre. It is given to

us by the Writing About Writing glossary. The glossary says, genre actually goes well

beyond texts; accordingly, some theorists use genre to describe a typified but dynamic

social interaction that a group of people use to conduct a given activity (Writing About

Writing 724). Genre describes all of the modes of communication that are used to relay

information within a Discourse community. This goes beyond text and stretches into

multiple forms of literacy giving way to multiliteracies within Discourse Communities.

Multiliteracies include the ability to compose and interpret multimodal texts, as well as

the ability to make meaning in various texts (Writing About Writing 728). Multiliteracies

and genres can include audio, visual, and textual forms of communication. If information

is passed through a certain means than it is a genre.

To quickly recapSwales identifies what a discourse community is, Gee

identifies what it takes to become a member, Wardle shows that there is a hierarchy of

power and authority among individuals in a Discourse community, and the definitions of

multiliteracies and genre show that communication within a Discourse community is

more than just saying or writing things down. All of these sources show that Discourse

communities are constantly processing and producing information as well as the

importance of their individual parts.


8/15

As I explained earlierI am a part of a Discourse community of football coaches.

Looking at the definitions above and the information provided by the authors it is evident

that this community is the epitome of what these authors are discussing. Football

coaches fit Swales six criteria. They want to win, they exchange game tape and

information between each other, the use of statistics and game film are examples of

numerous forms of genres that help to achieve the shared goal, there is an obvious lexis

with one example being play calls, there are professionals and youth football coaches

with high school and college levels in between the high and the low, and there is

generally a set number of coaches that can be involved on a given team.

Gee stated that being involved in a Discourse community involves being. This

is apparent in football coaches as well. Generally speaking a coach is involved as an

assistant before he can achieve more authority and advance in the field. Through

enculturation he learns how to be a head coach from the head coach he assists (Coffin 1).

Wardle claims that there are certain means of achieving identity and authority

within a group. In the Discourse community of coaches the coaches must be engaged in

what is going on, create concepts with their imagination, and their ideas and goals must

align with those that the other members posses in order for them to truly have an identity

within the group. Also, authority is distributed throughout individual coaching staffs.

The head coachgenerally a more senior memberhas the most authority where a

positions coachgenerally a newer memberhas the least authority. Every member of

the staff has a say however there is a clear hierarchy of authority present.


9/15

Finally coaches go to conferences, watch videotape of opponents, read books, and

study statistics to utilize multiple genre types to their advantage. This plays into the

mastering of multiple forms of literacy or multiliteracies.

All of these concepts show that football coaches are a high functioning Discourse

community. Now that it is apparent what a discourse community is, how it functions, and

the fact that coaches are in fact a Discourse community, we are brought back to the

concept originally stated at the beginning of this paper. Coaches utilize many forms of

literacy to gain an edge over opponents. Often times new technologies are neglected and

not used whereas older more proven methods of literacy are used to gain an advantage for

game day. Certain genres are ignored or used by very few coaches. This is something

that needs to change. Through the breakdown of statistics and the use of new forms of

technologies coaches can combine current forms of multiliteracy with newer forms that

are either not yet being used or are being used by a small percentage of coaches. This

ignorance has led to problems regarding language and language use inside of this

community. The problem is miscommunication between coaches in reference to play

calling and what is the right call to play in certain situations.

Often times coaches have to make split second decisions that can impact the

outcome of the game in a major waya win results or a loss. With all of the time and

effort that is put into the process of learning tendencies and play calling strategies for any

given week it would make sense that coaches could agree and understand what calls to

make and when to make them especially when it comes down to key moments in games.

This is not the case. On any given week there is at least one instance of coaches yelling


10/15

at each other or disagreeing over a play call. Emotions run high and often times coaches

stick to what they have been taught as assistantsconservative play calling.

Conservative play calling consists of accumulating as many points as possible

while taking as few risks as possible. This is the way the majority of coaches look at

football. It can be viewed as the safe way to coach. This type of thinking is often

attributed to winning games, but in reality it is not the most effective way to win games

through play calling. Tightening up the play calling during big games or key moments is

not as effective as relying on the new forms of genre and multiliteracies that are

constantly evolving and are available to coaches.

New technology is coming out every day. New forms of data analysis are

constantly evolving and coming into use through multiple different fields. Why not in

football? These new forms of multiliteracy and evolving genre can help aid in solving

age-old problems that have plagued football coaches and their communication issues.

Instead of relying on conservative play calling it is important to not ignore data that the

coaches themselves have compiled as well as allowing these new technologies to help

make a difference. For some reason coaches continue to rely on their old ways while

completely ignoring these new genre in their attempts to solve their language and

communication issues in coming to a decision on play calls in key moments.

The biggest example of data analysis technology that is being ignored is the Zeus

computer program developed by ViMass Group. Zeus is a computer program developed

that models and predicts the outcomes of coaching decisions. The program produces

statistical outputs showing the odds of favorable outcomes depending on the personnel

and paly calls of a coaching staff. The output by the program even produces what is


11/15

called the Game Winning Chance, which evaluates the chances of winning the game

based off of specific play calls.

If this genre was used with the current forms of information gathering coaches

could establish more of an edge on competition than they already can. By using this

technology there is a clear advantage yet it is often times ignored thanks to the distrust of

old school coaches that currently dominate modern football. An example of the

computers statistical advantages can be seen in the analysis of the 2011 game between

the Dallas Cowboys and the New York Giants.

The game featured one team that would claim first place in the NFC East late in

the season leaving the other on the outside looking in. Both teams were in position to

make a run for the division championship. The weight that this game carried was

palpable and obvious just by seeing the players warm up. This leads to a lot of emotion

involved on the players end of things, but even more so on the coachs. Emotionally

charged play calling is something that is often seen in big games resulting in conservative

tendencies. ESPN broke down the numbers that were compiled by the Zeus computer

system and explained the importance of the statistical data here:

So, how did the Cowboys' and Giants' coaching staffs perform in their

respective decisions? Dallas faced fewer tough decisions (four shown in

the table) and performed quite well, missing only one. That 1.5 percent

Game Winning Chance error for attempting a long field goal early in the

game got a moderate confidence score of 5, meaning extreme factors (such

as misevaluation of the teams' customized characteristics) could lead to a

reversal of ZEUS' play-call choice.)


12/15

Often, coaches get condemned by the media for "questionable" play calls

after a loss. Sometimes, these criticisms are completely unfounded and

based merely upon "playing results" or second-guessing. Unfortunately for

the Giants' coaching staff, that wasn't the case Sunday. New York

stumbled on six of the nine critical decisions analyzed here, and five of the

six had confidences of 10. Let's take a closer look at these suboptimal

decisions.

New York went on to fail on five of six decisions that the computer was absolutely 100

percent confident they would make. Just based off of logic and statistical data the

computer said there was no way the Giants could fail if they called the correct play call in

those five instances. The Giants went on to lose the game as indicated by their Zeus

computer Game Winning Chance. The coaches couldnt make the correct call during

the game and relied to much on their conservative way of calling plays. This led to a

narrow defeat that hurt their chance at a division title. Essentially the computer

outperformed the coaching staff.

By basing the decisions on mathematical outcomes coaches would achieve a

higher chance of attaining their desired outcome. If as a Discourse community coaches

take note of constantly evolving technology they could better achieve their goals as well

as produce information in a more efficient manner. The problems regarding play calling

and language issues inside of this Discourse community could be totally eliminated. By

relying on newer versions of data analysis this Discourse community can benefit other

communities of a similar sort, and can become more successful among its own members.


13/15

Interview Questions:

Coach Lane CoffinCoach Coffin is a coach at Marsh Valley High School in Moscow,

Idaho. Coach Coffin has won state championships and has also coached with my father.

He has been coaching for many years and has a son who is now on his staff.

How does your community of coaches fit the six guidelines presented by John Swales?

Well we want to win. We focus a lot on the process of winning and what

it takes to be a winner. We share film and go to seminars. I dont really

understand what you are saying about the genres. We definitely have a

specific language and lexicon. We have new coaches and more

experienced coaches. That plays into novices and experts. We also have a

threshold cap of 9 coaches.

Have you experienced any moments where you could decipher a clear hierarchy of

authority among coaches?

Absolutely I have. Generally speaking what the head ball coach saysgoes. He has the power to make all the important decisions, but will rely

on his assistants as well. The reason it is his say most of the time is

because it is his ass on the line. If I make a bad call as an offensive

coordinator he is the one that gets blamed not me. He faces more job

security issues than anyone on the staff so that is why he has the most

authority. Other coaches have authority as well though. When I was an


14/15

offensive coordinator for Cal high in California I had almost complete

control of the offense. Our head guy was a defensive mined coach and

didnt care how I called the offense mostly because he wasnt super

inclined on the offensive side of the ball.

How did you experience a rise in authority?

At first I was a grad assistant at Idaho State. I learned a lot there underthe coaches that were ahead of me. I was fresh out of undergrad and was

working for a local paper there to pay the bills. Those guys at ISU taught

me a lot and I eventually decided that I wanted to become a teacher and

coach at the high school level. That is what I did. I moved to California

to teach at a school there and eventually ended up as the OC at Cal high.

After a few years at ISU and a few years at Cal High I moved back to

Idaho and was offered a head coaching job here. I took it and have been

here ever since.

Would you agree with what Wardle says about establishing an identity?

I dont know a whole lot about this writing class of yours, but I think thatit might apply. Sure. I dont know if I understand exactly based off of

what you said, but I think that when you explain it to me I could see how it

can fit in with football.

Have you heard of the Zeus program for computing data and play calls?

I have not.Would you go for it on fourth down in the 2007 Super Bowl if you were on the goal line

with the Colts offense? (I had just showed him the ESPN article referenced in my paper).


15/15

I think I would have kicked the field goal as well. The coaches at ISUtold me to always take the points. That is what I would have done.

Work Cited

Gee, James P. Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics: Introduction. Journal of Education

171.1 (1989): 5-17. Print.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=zeus/061206

Swales, John. The Concept of Discourse Community. Genre Analysis: English in

Academic and Research Settings. Boston: Cambridge UP, 1990. 21-32. Print.

http://www.thepostgame.com/blog/men-action/201211/how-oregon-coach-chip-kelly-

can-spark-moneyball-revolution-nfl

http://vimassgroup.com/ViMass_Group/Welcome.html

Wardle, Elizabeth. Identity, Authority, and Learning to Write in New Workplaces.

Enculturation 5.2 (2004): n. pag. Web. 18 Feb. 2010.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=zeus/061206http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=zeus/061206http://www.thepostgame.com/blog/men-action/201211/how-oregon-coach-chip-kelly-can-spark-moneyball-revolution-nflhttp://www.thepostgame.com/blog/men-action/201211/how-oregon-coach-chip-kelly-can-spark-moneyball-revolution-nflhttp://www.thepostgame.com/blog/men-action/201211/how-oregon-coach-chip-kelly-can-spark-moneyball-revolution-nflhttp://vimassgroup.com/ViMass_Group/Welcome.htmlhttp://vimassgroup.com/ViMass_Group/Welcome.htmlhttp://vimassgroup.com/ViMass_Group/Welcome.htmlhttp://www.thepostgame.com/blog/men-action/201211/how-oregon-coach-chip-kelly-can-spark-moneyball-revolution-nflhttp://www.thepostgame.com/blog/men-action/201211/how-oregon-coach-chip-kelly-can-spark-moneyball-revolution-nflhttp://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=zeus/061206

8) Project 3 Final Revision

Documents

Transcript of 8) Project 3 Final Revision