An attempt to define a discourse community
Many researchers and theorists, such as Bizzel (1986, 1992) Candlin (1997) Reid (1993) and Swales (1990), have defined a discourse community as a knowledge community formed by a group of people who operate on the basis of certain values, goals, expectations, and language practices. Moreover, to be recognized as such, a discourse community should meet a set of characteristics. According to Swales (1990; as cited in Pintos, 2009), these requirements are: common goals, participatory mechanisms, information exchange, community-specific genres, highly specialized terminology, and high general level of expertise. Therefore, if someone belongs to a discourse community, s/he should give testimony of such membership by meeting the mentioned aspects.
Regarding the first characteristic, it refers to the fact that the group should achieve certain objectives and have specific interests. Thus, considering teachers as part of a situated learning discourse community (Hoffman-Kipp et al, 2003) where they interact with colleagues in goal-directed activities, collaborating, strategizing solutions to problems, and relying on each other; it turns evident that what Swales (1990) states as one necessary characteristic, it is indeed.
It is possible to relate the ideas mentioned above with the second and third aspects proposed by Swales (1990). Accordingly, discourse members will not survive unless they are intercommunicated through mechanisms that facilitate the circulation of information and feedback. Wenzlaff -Terri et al (2004) state “interactions with the people in one’s environment are major determinants of both what is learned and how learning takes place” (p. 1). Furthermore, one of these authors’ core concepts is the idea of forming a cohort structure within education, defined as the one that “fosters a collaborative culture (…), enhances opportunities for influencing decision-making processes and for connecting personally and professionally with colleagues” ( Wenzlaff – Terri et al, 2004 p. 2).
Last but not least, the three remaining characteristics proposed by Swales (1990) are closely related to language practices and level of knowledge. Therefore, developing communicative competence becomes crucial since the group needs to acquire specific vocabulary and be aware of conventionalized style and language principles. Christine Kelly – Kleese (2004) argues that a community college can be understood as a discourse community within a larger community of higher education. In doing so, she makes reference to what Swales (1990) states in the last requirements by claiming that “members of two-year college discourse communities share understandings about how to communicate knowledge and achieve shared purposes, and they exhibit a flow of discourse that has a particular structure and style” (Kelly-Kleese, 2004 p. 2).
On balance then, belonging to a discourse community implies not only knowing about the specific language practices this community uses but also taking part in those practices. Thus, a discourse community cannot exist in the absence of a collaborative culture and an environment that supports risk-taking and reflection; being both essential if we are to be considered active members that contribute effectively to the development of a community of researcher teachers.
References
Hoffman-Kipp, P., Artiles, A. J., & Lopez Torres, L. (2003). Beyond reflection: teaching learning as praxis. Theory into Practice. Retrieved August 2009, from
http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=2730
Kelly-Kleese, C. (2004). UCLA community college review: community college scholarship and discourse. Community College Review. Retrieved August 2009, from
http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=2730
Pintos, V. (2008) Unit 1: Building up a community of teachers and prospective researchers. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Universidad CAECE. Retrieved August 2009, from
http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=2730
Wenzlaff, T. L., & Wieseman, K. C. (2004). Teachers need teachers to grow. Teacher Education Quarterly. Retrieved August 2009, from
http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=2730
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Succeeding in academic contexts: The required study skills.
Purpose: To provide an account of the study skills required for achieving English for Academic Purposes (EAP) goals satisfactorily (Jordan, 1997; as cited in Pintos, 2009).
Thesis: When reading, writing and listening for study purposes common core abilities, techniques, and strategies are used (Jordan, 1997; as cited in Pintos, 2009).
Audience: Teachers and students involved in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) courses.
I. Teaching English for Non Obvious Reasons (TENOR)
A. English for General Purposes (EGP)
II. English for Specific Purposes (ESP)
A. English for Occupational Purposes (EOP)
B. English for Vocational Purposes (EVP)
C. English for Professional Purposes (EPP)
D. English for Academic Purposes (EAP)
1. Definition
2. First recorded use of the term
3. Divisions
a. English for General Academic Purposes (EGAP)
b. English for Specific Academic Purposes (ESAP)
4. Range of settings
a. Higher education studies
b. Pre-departure courses
(1) Pre-sessional courses
(2) In-sessional courses
(3) Inclusions
(a) Formal teaching programs
(b) Self-access situations
(c) Distance-learning materials
(d) Computer-assisted language learning (CALL)
Reference
Pintos, V. (2008) Unit 1: Building up a community of teachers and prospective researchers. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Universidad CAECE. Retrieved August 2009, from
http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=2730
Purpose: To provide an account of the study skills required for achieving English for Academic Purposes (EAP) goals satisfactorily (Jordan, 1997; as cited in Pintos, 2009).
Thesis: When reading, writing and listening for study purposes common core abilities, techniques, and strategies are used (Jordan, 1997; as cited in Pintos, 2009).
Audience: Teachers and students involved in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) courses.
I. Teaching English for Non Obvious Reasons (TENOR)
A. English for General Purposes (EGP)
II. English for Specific Purposes (ESP)
A. English for Occupational Purposes (EOP)
B. English for Vocational Purposes (EVP)
C. English for Professional Purposes (EPP)
D. English for Academic Purposes (EAP)
1. Definition
2. First recorded use of the term
3. Divisions
a. English for General Academic Purposes (EGAP)
b. English for Specific Academic Purposes (ESAP)
4. Range of settings
a. Higher education studies
b. Pre-departure courses
(1) Pre-sessional courses
(2) In-sessional courses
(3) Inclusions
(a) Formal teaching programs
(b) Self-access situations
(c) Distance-learning materials
(d) Computer-assisted language learning (CALL)
Reference
Pintos, V. (2008) Unit 1: Building up a community of teachers and prospective researchers. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Universidad CAECE. Retrieved August 2009, from
http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=2730
Monday, October 26, 2009
Professional development within the teaching field
Growing professionally in the area of teaching is commonly seen as a process of acquiring knowledge about a specific subject, without considering that the acquisition of social and academic skills is also crucial. It is well known that educating remains not only as a way of transmitting knowledge, but also a provision of a social service. In doing so, teachers are involved in varied school communities which have specific learning, psychological and physiological needs. Consequently, if educators are to meet those needs and progress in their own working field, being constant researchers becomes essential. Thus, reflection, updating, collaboration and exposure of results and conclusions seem to be desirable principles.
As stated before, most education representatives believe that professionalism is synonymous with knowledge acquisition. Not only teachers, but also governmental workers who are in charge of stating educational plans of action assume that developing professionally is a matter of displaying high levels of expertise and control in the classroom. Once these aspects are tackled, their combination results into students’ learning success.
Whenever a research is concluded, the results are to be published, so as to share them with the rest of the discourse community. In academic writing, there are certain words and phrases that help to develop ideas and relate them to one another: they are discourse markers. For instance, in the article High-Quality Teaching: Providing for Rural Teachers’ Development. The Rural Educator (Howley and Howley, 2005) it is possible to identify a huge number of them. Just to illustrate the function of some, “however”, “but”, “nevertheless” and “even though” are used to present contrasting ideas. “In addition”, “moreover” and “furthermore” add information to what has been said; thus, their usage is much more elegant than just making a list or using the conjunction “and”. As well as this, there are expressions such as “therefore” or “as a result” expressing that the second element follows logically from the first. “Such as” and “for example” appear to exemplify concepts or ideas. Last but not least, “first” and “second” help when listing is required.
Regarding professional development, there is an approach founded on data-based improvement that has taken as a guide some of the principles of management approaches to professionalism. Such approaches, regard management development as a formal process where managers are exposed to learning opportunities while doing their work. Within the educational field, teachers improve only if they are able to analyze the ongoing classroom life and standardize their conclusions.
To sum up, making progress in the teaching field implies not only quality of instruction but also autonomy and self-direction. What is more, taking the road of reflection and everyday practice reformulation are the major principles. Thus, “a profession is far more than a group of individuals who are all engaged in the same line of work” (Banfi, 1997, as cited in Pintos, 2009, p. 23).
References
Howley, A. & Howley, C. B. (2005). High-quality teaching: Providing for rural teachers’ professional development. The Rural Educator. Retrieved October 2007, from
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa4126/is_200501/ai_n13591361
Pintos, V. (2008) Unit 1: Building up a community of teachers and prospective researchers. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Universidad CAECE. Retrieved August 2009, from
http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=2730
Growing professionally in the area of teaching is commonly seen as a process of acquiring knowledge about a specific subject, without considering that the acquisition of social and academic skills is also crucial. It is well known that educating remains not only as a way of transmitting knowledge, but also a provision of a social service. In doing so, teachers are involved in varied school communities which have specific learning, psychological and physiological needs. Consequently, if educators are to meet those needs and progress in their own working field, being constant researchers becomes essential. Thus, reflection, updating, collaboration and exposure of results and conclusions seem to be desirable principles.
As stated before, most education representatives believe that professionalism is synonymous with knowledge acquisition. Not only teachers, but also governmental workers who are in charge of stating educational plans of action assume that developing professionally is a matter of displaying high levels of expertise and control in the classroom. Once these aspects are tackled, their combination results into students’ learning success.
Whenever a research is concluded, the results are to be published, so as to share them with the rest of the discourse community. In academic writing, there are certain words and phrases that help to develop ideas and relate them to one another: they are discourse markers. For instance, in the article High-Quality Teaching: Providing for Rural Teachers’ Development. The Rural Educator (Howley and Howley, 2005) it is possible to identify a huge number of them. Just to illustrate the function of some, “however”, “but”, “nevertheless” and “even though” are used to present contrasting ideas. “In addition”, “moreover” and “furthermore” add information to what has been said; thus, their usage is much more elegant than just making a list or using the conjunction “and”. As well as this, there are expressions such as “therefore” or “as a result” expressing that the second element follows logically from the first. “Such as” and “for example” appear to exemplify concepts or ideas. Last but not least, “first” and “second” help when listing is required.
Regarding professional development, there is an approach founded on data-based improvement that has taken as a guide some of the principles of management approaches to professionalism. Such approaches, regard management development as a formal process where managers are exposed to learning opportunities while doing their work. Within the educational field, teachers improve only if they are able to analyze the ongoing classroom life and standardize their conclusions.
To sum up, making progress in the teaching field implies not only quality of instruction but also autonomy and self-direction. What is more, taking the road of reflection and everyday practice reformulation are the major principles. Thus, “a profession is far more than a group of individuals who are all engaged in the same line of work” (Banfi, 1997, as cited in Pintos, 2009, p. 23).
References
Howley, A. & Howley, C. B. (2005). High-quality teaching: Providing for rural teachers’ professional development. The Rural Educator. Retrieved October 2007, from
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa4126/is_200501/ai_n13591361
Pintos, V. (2008) Unit 1: Building up a community of teachers and prospective researchers. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Universidad CAECE. Retrieved August 2009, from
http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=2730
Effective readers develop into proficient writers
Within the academic discourse community, it is almost impossible to think about the development of writing without the aid of reading, and vice versa. Thus, engaging students into profitable reading activities would influence effectively on writing proficiency; in other words, the former skill becomes the source of the necessary input for achieving the latter successfully. According to Bloor (1985), there are four different ways of dealing with reading in academic contexts: psychological, linguistic, content-oriented and pedagogically- oriented approaches (Bloor, 1985; as cited in Jordan, 1997).
As regards the first of the approaches already mentioned, it is concerned with the processes that take place in the reader’s mind when involved in such activity (Jordan, 1997). The philosophy of this approach underlies exercises focusing on word recognition and interpretation. Reading activities of this kind could be those where students are asked to identify specific vocabulary first, and then give an account of what they have understood by means of producing their own pieces of writing.
Secondly, a linguistic approach focuses on the words and sentences of the text. It is believed that the reading ability will improve if learners are able to deal with linguistic aspects efficiently. In doing so, exercises focusing on grammar become essential. Examples of this are those reading tasks where students are to recognize, name and specify function and structure of distinctive grammatical issues included in the text. In academic contexts, activities where learners are supposed to identify and classify discourse markers, for instance.
Regarding the third approach, it is assumed that giving learners a specific purpose for reading will improve their efficiency. As well as this, if students read about areas of their own interest, they will be truly engaged. These two aspects lead us to think about tasks where readers are given a set of pre-reading questions about a text bearing relevance for them. For example, in the case of students attending an EAP course, reading papers, dissertations or books about discourse or academic language practices could be considered representative of the content-oriented principles.
Finally, a pedagogically-oriented approach is the one that places learning theories at the top of the scale in reading motivation. According to this view, students are supposed to work at their own rate by means of using self-access materials. A good example could be a course where the teacher presents a set of reading tasks based on different texts provided with answer key resources for students to assess their own progress.
All in all, reading proves to be a reliable source for acquiring language and strengthening students’ cognitive abilities; aspects that enable learners to construct their knowledge and produce meaningful writings within their discourse community. Consequently, developing interested and stimulated readers becomes the major aim.
Reference
Jordan, R. (1997). English for Academic Purposes – A guide and resource book for teachers. Cambridge, UK: CUP.
Within the academic discourse community, it is almost impossible to think about the development of writing without the aid of reading, and vice versa. Thus, engaging students into profitable reading activities would influence effectively on writing proficiency; in other words, the former skill becomes the source of the necessary input for achieving the latter successfully. According to Bloor (1985), there are four different ways of dealing with reading in academic contexts: psychological, linguistic, content-oriented and pedagogically- oriented approaches (Bloor, 1985; as cited in Jordan, 1997).
As regards the first of the approaches already mentioned, it is concerned with the processes that take place in the reader’s mind when involved in such activity (Jordan, 1997). The philosophy of this approach underlies exercises focusing on word recognition and interpretation. Reading activities of this kind could be those where students are asked to identify specific vocabulary first, and then give an account of what they have understood by means of producing their own pieces of writing.
Secondly, a linguistic approach focuses on the words and sentences of the text. It is believed that the reading ability will improve if learners are able to deal with linguistic aspects efficiently. In doing so, exercises focusing on grammar become essential. Examples of this are those reading tasks where students are to recognize, name and specify function and structure of distinctive grammatical issues included in the text. In academic contexts, activities where learners are supposed to identify and classify discourse markers, for instance.
Regarding the third approach, it is assumed that giving learners a specific purpose for reading will improve their efficiency. As well as this, if students read about areas of their own interest, they will be truly engaged. These two aspects lead us to think about tasks where readers are given a set of pre-reading questions about a text bearing relevance for them. For example, in the case of students attending an EAP course, reading papers, dissertations or books about discourse or academic language practices could be considered representative of the content-oriented principles.
Finally, a pedagogically-oriented approach is the one that places learning theories at the top of the scale in reading motivation. According to this view, students are supposed to work at their own rate by means of using self-access materials. A good example could be a course where the teacher presents a set of reading tasks based on different texts provided with answer key resources for students to assess their own progress.
All in all, reading proves to be a reliable source for acquiring language and strengthening students’ cognitive abilities; aspects that enable learners to construct their knowledge and produce meaningful writings within their discourse community. Consequently, developing interested and stimulated readers becomes the major aim.
Reference
Jordan, R. (1997). English for Academic Purposes – A guide and resource book for teachers. Cambridge, UK: CUP.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)