CI8470: Discourses, Cultural Models, and Genres Mediating Activity

Worlds: Discourses Discourses: ways of knowing/thinking; serves

to limit/restrain ways of talking Foucault: “madness”/hysteria Rules for talking/defining knowledge Subjects--represent discourse “mad” people Social practices for dealing with people

Gee: discourses Primary discourses: acquired in

childhood Secondary Discourses: more

specialized, specific discourses Academic, community, knowledge-based

Discourses as “identity tool-kits”

Research Questions What are the situated meanings of

language use in certain contexts? How are people using language in these

contexts--for what purposes? What situated identities are people

taking up? What cultural models/storylines inform

language use/social practices?

Murrell: Situated mediated identity theory Identity mediated by cultural

practices/models Social identity: positioning Personal identity: experiences Ego identity: subjective “Struggling reader”

Power/agency: Positionining Rogers: family literacy practices Special education program: St. Louis Mother/daughter in school system

Marginalized by discourses of “special education”: lack of power/agency to address daughter’s problems

Resist system by asserting themselves

Cultural models Movies/video tapes that define what is

normal/typical within discourses Reflects “common sense” assumptions Evident in perceptions of hierarchies and

discussion of what one values Acquired through socialization and apprenticeship

(Holland and Eisenstat, Educated for Romance)

“Color-Blind Racism” Collective understandings/representations Use of “racetalk” to avoid racist label

“Everyone is equal, but….” “I am not prejudice, but…”

Denial of structural nature of discrimination Criticism of government race-based programs

Use of storylines “I didn’t own slaves” “The past is past”

Discourses of class Position: everyone is “middle class” Social/power relations: “us” vs. “them” Work/workplace: post-Fordist economy

“Second class” status: adjunct instructors Cultural heritage: value/everyday life Academia alienates working-class students

Lack of spaces for working-class students to demonstrate expertise/agency

Argument: Review of A Place to Stand (working-class bar) Arguments in bar: performance of collective identities

as a “class act” “In performed argument, the group is both speaker

and audience. Acting as both subject and agent, the Smokehouse cohort draws on available topi to invent an argument about its own subject position via the scripted performances of individuals.”

Difficulties of ethnographies of class culture Conflicted identities: bar maid and researcher Need to reflect on one’s own subjectivity

Bettie: Class: cultural identity vs. class consciousness Identity not necessarily politicized Not necessarily aware of class discourse

versus race and gender discourses Lack of a discourse for discussing class

Class as performance “Passing” as middle or working class Use of language, dress, and discourses

Bettie: Performing class Performance: habitus: learned

dispositions Passing and agency reflecting access to

cultural capital Performativity: effects of social

structures on class inequality

Syntax and power Agency: who is doing the action? Nominalization: actions into nouns:

“increased student and teacher accountability” “scientifically-based, test-driven instructional approaches to

reading” Use of passive vs. active verbs

Deflect attention from actors New skills-based methods have been implemented.”

Mood/modality Mood: statements vs. questions vs.

commands Who has the power to do what? “We” will consider all options in Iraq?

Modality: certainty: must, should, always vs. less certainty: may, possibly, perhaps, etc.

Language use “ideologically-encoded words”

“terrorists” “liberal”

Word phrases “Tax-and-spend” “Cut-and-run” “Islamic facists”

Pronouns Imperial “we”

“We are at war against international terrorism”

“You”: in ads: synthetic sisterhood “Our”: our way of life is threatened

References to authority/texts As a study conducted by X found… As our reporters have discovered… As endorsed by leading experts in the

field… As my generals have informed me…

Roles: Letter to the editor: Double-voicing discourses Political: “conservative” Political: “liberal” Social science/sociological Psychological/psychogical Economic/business Law enforcement/military Media/entertainment/”news” Legal: First Amendment Neo-Marist/Critical Theory

Reflection: letters What discourses/cultural models were

you double-voicing? What language suggested that? Would your letter get published in the

Star Tribune?

Gee: SES and adolescent females’ identities Upper middle class: focus on “portfolio-

shape shifting”: acquire “experiences” Competition/achievement/cognition More expository, distanced

Working class: focus on everyday interaction Expression of feelings Concerns with fairness

KC West: student bloggers at Edina High School Situated identities: social language Varied according to attitudes towards

school/popular culture

Discourse of “business manageralism” Distanced, technocratic stances “which disallows

the speaking of concern, of welfare, of collective experience” (Norman Fairclough, 2003)

Teachers as part of a larger corporate structure Emphasizes productivity and efficiency Disallows teachers from expressing alternative

voices or perspectives Need for “measurable” standards Statistical measures as objective representations of

learning

Study: Discourse analysis of Wisconsin and Minnesota standards

Analysis of English content standards Wisconsin: New content standards: 1998 Minnesota: New content standards: 2003

Replaced constructivist Profile standards

Report in Education Policy Analysis Archives:

http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v15n18/

Thompson and Benson’s shared cultural models of standards:

“Students can reach the higher academic levels expected of them if these expectations are stated clearly and precisely. Once these are stated in the form of clear, rigorous content standards, districts and teachers will make “needed changes” in curriculum, teaching, and assessment, and students will put forth the extra effort to meet the higher expectations.”

John Benson, Letter accompanying first draft of DPI standards, 1996:

“Today’s youth will face enormous challenges in the competitive world of the twenty-first century. As the Business Roundtable has observed, “Only a generation removed from the time when hard work, a strong back, and common sense could secure a decent job, young people are faced with today’s global, information-based economy defined by constantly changing technology.” Not only must today’s students learn advanced academic skills, but they must also gain the flexibility to learn and adapt to changing conditions and job demands throughout their lifetimes.”

Benson’s quoted authority: the business community.Two neoliberal discourses justifying standards::

Education as training for businessNeed for continual innovation to keep up with global competition

This constantly moving target conflicts with the set goal of precisely defining content standards.

Tommy Thompson, Letter introducing Modern Red Schoolhouse Standards, 1997:

“We can no longer tolerate a situation where too many students areleaving schools without having learned the core set of skills and knowledge they will need to be successful. . . . The first, most importantstep to correct this situation and improve the performance of students is to agree on clear standards for what students ought to know and be able to do in a core set of subject areas: English, mathematics, science, history and geography.”Thompson’s quoted authority: Himself, as chair of the EducationCommission for the States.With his core sets of skills and subjects, Thompson looks back to a simpler time, rather than to a more complex future. He seeks to arrest change, rather than to prepare for it.There is no conflict here with the goal of setting precise academic goals.

Theme Rheme

A major component of the work I

did with both organizations was to re-focus the country’s attention towards educational excellence

One of the specific issues I

advanced was to encourage all states to embrace standards-driven reform

In concert with this effort, I

directed ECS to develop a 1996 publication entitled “Standards and Education, A Roadmap for State Policymakers.”

In the Forward of this publication, I

stated:

A theme/rheme analysis: The beginning of Thompson’s letter shows him using the grammar of English to present new information in the latter part of the sentence, and then neatly picking it up in the theme of the next sentence as a given accomplishment. This positions him as the strong authority figure on this issue.

Theme Rheme

These and other challenges require higher standards of excellence to improve academic performance.

The only way to ensure that Wisconsin's students have the skills and abilities to be successful in this rapidly changing technological world

is to set clear, high academic standards.

These standards must describe precisely. . . .

Similarly, Benson presents arguable information as fact in the rheme, then refers to it as established in the theme shortly thereafter. The “these” in the first sentence refers to the Business Roundtable quote given above.

Tommy Thompson as Strict Father: (From Lakoff, 1995) Identifies and protects against evils (“We can no

longer tolerate a situation . . .” “there is an urgent need. . .”

Sets boundaries (“clear standards for what students ought to know and be able to do in a core set of subject areas”)

Sets policies for all; others serve to carry them out (“I have adopted and adapted the Modern Red Schoolhouse’s academic content standards. . .” “I will establish a public engagement process. . .”

John Benson as Nurturing Parent: (from Lakoff, 1995; 2004) Attempts to hear all sides (“The standards will

not be complete until all state residents who want to contribute to the effort have had an opportunity to do so.” “All voices need to be heard: parents, teachers, business people . . .”)

Tries to be fair (“In the second draft of the standards, we have attempted to balance the views on all sides of these issues.”)

Conclusions: Standards Development In both states, a business discourse shaped

standards development Focus on “results” related to testing Focus on “core knowledge”

Rejection of constructivist standards Influence of conservative think-tanks

Politicians promoting standards adopted a “strict father” model

Assumed the need for “control”