Building a discourse community

Building a Discourse Community

A definition of what a discourse community theoretically and practically involves has been posed by numerous scholars.  The aim of this paper is to analyze Swales’ (1990) basic criteria as regards the six requirements a discourse community should fulfill. These will be supported by theoretical evidence found in supplementary articles.

Swales (1990) affirmed that having common goals and interests is the first requirement in a discourse community.  Similarly, Ovens (2002) stated that the situated learning discourse community uses reflection when teachers plan and set activities and objectives. This reflection is not only individual, but implicitly claimed and shared within the social community of the school. Therefore, all the participants attempt to achieve a certain set of goals.

The second established criterion involves the participatory mechanisms that allow teachers to share information and obtain feedback (Swales, 1990).  Several scholars (Blanton, Simmons and Warner, 2001) have agreed that “journals or virtual systems of communication can be used to mediate teacher learning so that they recall, share and respond to one another’s experiences” (p.3).  This relates reflection and action in a unique and integrated process, which is suggested to enhance professionalism.

Interaction in the discourse community is another significant criterion since its participants need to communicate and cooperate continually.  The focus is not on the individual per se, but in the relationship he/she can establish with the rest of the community.  This may be assured by the use of a cohort, which involves teachers supporting each other in the process of learning and reflecting (Fullan, 2001).

Community specific genres are Swales’ fourth requirement.  Holquist and Emerson (1991) noted that “a social language is a discourse peculiar to a specific professional or ethnic group at a given time” (as cited in Wertsch, 1991, p. 57).  This language is a determined genre acquired by the community, and may include views on culture, roles, learning, justice and educators. It may take oral or written forms.

The fifth item considered is the highly specialized terminology, carried out by the use of abbreviations and acronyms. In addition, there are words that acquire a particular meaning when used in the discourse community. Such is the case of “open door”, which in this context refers to the possibilities of success given to the participants. (Kelly- Kleese, 2004) 

A high level of expertise is the final requisite highlighted by Swales (1990). A discourse community deals with knowledge continually, since all the participants make their contribution in terms of experiences, practices and theories. As Soltis (1981) pointed out, knowledge and learning are the results of interactions among people, who change and adapt their views when working together.   

In conclusion, Swales’ (1990) depiction of a discourse community has been supported and agreed by several authors. Common goals, participation, interaction, a specific genre, specialized terminology and a high level of expertise seem to be the intertwined elements that enhance teachers’ development as professionals. 

References

Blanton, W.E., Simmons, E., & Warner, M. (2001). The fifth dimension: Application of cultural-historical activity theory, inquiry-based learning, computers, and telecommunications to change prospective teachers' preconceptions. Journal of Educational Computing Research. 24. Retrieved September 2011, from http://faculty.soe.syr.edu/takoszal/IDE800-Adv-ID-and ET/IDE850_sp06/additional_readings/blanton_simon-CHAT.pdf

Fullan, M. G. (2001). Teacher educator as advocate. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association of Teacher Educators . New Orleans.

Kelly-Kleese, C. (2004). UCLA community college review: community college scholarship and discourse. Community College Review. Retrieved September 2011, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HCZ/is_1_32/ai_n6361541

Ovens, A. (2002). Discourse communities and the social construction of reflection in teacher education. Retrieved from September 2011, from http://www.ecu.edu.au/ conferences/herdsa/main/papers/ref/pdf/Ovens.pdf

Soltis, J. F. (1981). Education and the concept of knowledge.  Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.

Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Wertsch, J.V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.