edd assignment 3 josephine v saliba

8/8/2019 EdD Assignment 3 Josephine v Saliba

1/27

Doctor of Education EdD Programme: ER2 Module 3 Processes of EducationalResearch

Discourse conflict or discourse alignment?Applying Critical Discourse Analysis to engage teachers

and learnersin the transformation of learning

1. Introduction: a new world order

Evolving language and literacy studies, particularly New Literacy Studies

(NLS) research, seek to understand teaching and learning beyond traditional

behaviourist and cognitive models that often create misunderstandings

about the needs of specific learners (Gee, 2000, 2004). As a learning

support practitioner, I often experience the imposition of policies and

practices that influence if not outrightly violate non-traditionally accepted

socio-cultural values, backgrounds and the complexity of the multimodal

literacy practices involved.

Traditional deficit models of education disregard equality of diversities and

continue to misrepresent students perceived as needing support to develop

apparently lacking skills necessary to function within traditional societies

dominated by conservative Discourses of Power (Gee, 2004). This essay

discusses previously explored issues of power and discourse. It is a

professional reflection on aspects of bilingualism, multimodal literacies,

discourse and identity; specifically about how in bilingual Malta, we describe

literacy needs using particular language and nuances within what I term the

Discourse of Support Education. Our purported bilingualism influences the

situated language of Discourse communities to socially construct meanings

that may disadvantage people operating within Discourses other than those

of the dominant or powerful communities (ibid).

This imbalance of power is displayed by how we mostly use Maltese to teach

and speak about learning support students but assess and write policy

documentation using often formal and clichd English. Paralleling Jaffe's

observations (2003:42), my bilingual College's literacy support programmes

Josephine V. Saliba Page 1


2/27


evidence 'an implicit curriculum that is conveyed to students through the

way that pedagogical and social functions are distributed across the two

languages of the school'. This curriculum is influenced by the vocational

nature of the College, bound by national policies and its mission statement to

serve the economic and employment needs of individuals and the nation. As

a state funded College, it manoeuvres within 'mutual accommodation of the

State and community institutions which are understood to be the State's

primary minority community interlocutors' (da Silva & Heller, 2009:96). The

College's motives in supporting students' literacy needs reflects the State's

shift from championing education towards social justice to producing

economic opportunities, thus harnessing 'an economic development

discourse to an older one of community reproduction' (ibid:97).

Globalisation dominates over small nation state development. Language is

thus becoming a marketable commodity on its own, distinct from identity

and accompanied by struggles of legitimacy over 'who has the right to

produce and distribute the resources of language and identity' (Heller,

2003:473). Such struggles filter through the education system, leading Jaffe

(2003:43) to look at 'the different statuses and relationships that are

produced in classroom literacy practices; in particular, how linguistic identity,

authenticity and authority are created and distributed across verbal and

written genres, across different languages, and across

different social actors'.

Different social actors and communities may not share the same coded

language and social practices. Following Foucault and others, Gee (1990)

states that within the Discourse of literacy, language as social practice is

only part of how we communicate, what we accept, share, discard, ignore or

suppress. Language labels 'files full of experiences, images, texts, and

dialogue' representing other modes of communication such as visual and

other non verbal modes so that when used by 'bigots' dominant verbal or

written language superimposes its vales on both discourses/Discourses



3/27


formed by other communities' reproduction of identity, creating perceptions

of 'good and right' (Gee, 2009 online). Western democratic societies retain

complex power relations perpetuating myths of what is socially acceptable or

not. Traditional schooling does not negotiate complex communication

practices and relationships thus negating multiple realities and stances.

Therefore, Gee (1999) and other NLS researchers analyse learning within

multimodal social practices through semiotic approaches and discourse

analysis.

Arguably, the most exponential studies explore links between language and

power through linguistic and social theories predominantly of Marx, Gramsci,

Althusser, Habermas, Foucault and Bourdieu, with leading Critical DiscourseAnalysis (CDA) research done by Fairclough (1989, 2001). CDA addresses

issues of literacy as social practice by investigating ways of interacting

(genre), ways of representing (discourse) and ways of being (style) which

can capture the linguistic nuances of construction and transformation of

subjectivities across contexts and over time (Rogers, 2004). Accordingly,

this assignment also discusses issues of language and power referring to the

potential of CDA in transforming traditional discourses. Reflections on

professional discussions and informal student-lecturer dialogue explore the

College's Discourse dynamics to better understand organisational issues of

language, power and literacy.

2. Transformation through participation

Currently, the College is attempting to increase the student application and

retention rates for Foundation programmes. It has introduced a new national

Level 1 (UK Level 2) course in preparation for existing national Level 2 (UK

Level 3) programme which had previously been partly spread over two

academic years for students with little or no qualifications. The ultimate goal

is to enable 'deficit students' to obtain minimum certification required by



4/27


local employers, hence the effort to introduce local standardised

qualifications. However, as Jaffe (2003) and Heller (2003) observe, such a

process is complex and conflicts arise over what ought to be standardised

and how it should be evaluated to avoid repeating the failures of previous

institutions and individuals. Although discussion is vague in apportioning

blame and shame, issues of relevance and failure pervade the discourse.

The conflict revolves around issues of access to resources and power, how to

enable students overcome literacy difficulties to enter employment. The

College's vocational status often renders personal gain and development as

a means towards this ultimate end. As the nation's only post-secondary

vocational education institution, the College is the State's alternative to auniversity education providing further education and employment

opportunities to those students who are either unwilling to pursue

traditionally conventional professions or who would automatically be

disqualified from pursuing such studies through inclination or standardised

literacy ability. Globalisation pressures both individuals and the State to

retain a competitive edge not only as a minor European nation, but also as a

key player in the less dominant Mediterranean region and a viable

alternative financial centre to stronger Eastern economies.

The College Mission Statement (online) is 'to provide universally accessible

vocational and professional education and training with an international

dimension, responsive to the needs of the individual and the economy'. This

laudable political platitude is contradictory. The College approves of

programmes that motivate, teach, support, transform individuals who yet

need to conform to external requirements to survive. In a small island state,

these external factors, whether factual or perceived, filter dangerously into

classrooms. It is a challenge for staff, given their diverse values,

backgrounds and beliefs to actually 'put the student at the heart of what we

do' as the latest College Strategic Plan (online) advocates. How can we

operate within a mainly traditional model to bring about transformative



5/27


learning and teaching without directly or indirectly reaffirming those past

negative identities and experiences that students bring with

them into the classroom?

As Haller (2003) warns about how corporate culture pressures institutions togroom students' and workers' language skills to fit a professional image, Jaffe

(2003) favours collaborative 'talk about text' to transform teaching and

learning. The classroom as living narrative can thus deal with conflict

between discourses as:

subjectivities are a continually evolving framework that both

shapes and is shaped by activity settings. The more conflict,

contradictions, and multiple discourses that compose the self,

the more likely the self will evolve. The converse is true as well.

The more stable the discourses within any person are, the fewer

possibilities there are for transformation (Chouliaraki and

Fairclough, 1999, in Rogers, 2004).

Participation is hence pivotal within classroom interaction. Communication

within the College's literacy support classes is affected by external

Discourses of power, territory and self-definition. Staff and student discourse

may thus be expressed through conflicting, placating, condescending,

sympathetic, open or other kinds of language, on the spectrum between

direct conflict to complete understanding, consequently affecting learning in

its widest sense learning about self as well as content.

In classrooms, 'people define and defend their selves and subjectivities

through narrative (Luttrell, 1997, in Rogers, 2004). Power issues render

vulnerable students more susceptible to transformations in self-identity.

Hence, discursive construction of subjectivities should be analysed from a

transformational perspective, ideally emphasising processes contributing to

positive changing participation as opposed to the reinforcement of traditional

models (Chouliaraki and Fairclough, 1999 in Rogers, 2004). This essay



6/27


explores how CDA can contribute to such transformational teaching and

learning since it claims to describe, interpret, and explain how language

reflects and constructs social realities and especially how shifts in discourse

patterns might be thought of as learning (Rogers, 2004).

In discussing how CDA can explore issues of language and power, I quote

professional reflections on how shifts in the discourse patterns can occur

within a domain (intertextual) or across domains (intercontextual) and how

the College's literacy support programmes are proposing to interrupt or

undo problematic literate subjectivities (Rogers, 2004). The College's efforts

at transformational learning through traditional approaches pose a number

of possible contradictions revolving around issues of identity andparticipation in the classroom. Different situated practices exhibit different

'ways of becoming a participant, ways of participating, and ways in which

participants and practices change' (Lave, 1996:157), with some ways

emphasising learning mechanisms rather than the development of identity

through various practices. Even if outright conflict and impositions by

dominant communities may not be immediately evident, discourse alignment

as opposed to conflict remains of concern since most people:

value education and uphold a view of themselves and of literacy

that is in alignment with the views of the school. () It is this

alignment that causes them to more readily believe when the

school tells them that they or their children are deficient or

disabled, because they so readily believe in and value the

institution of the school (Rogers, 2004).

This essay thus explores issues of participation, discussing whether

Foundation learning support programmes are empowering students to shift

traditional deficit ways of thinking about themselves; are they transformative

or do they reinforce traditional models beneath a veneer of words purporting

social justice? Personal professional reflections discuss whether the



7/27


College's Foundation programmes evidence discourse conflict, contradiction

or alignment; whether the language used in College is evidence of traditional

power struggles; whether what is being said and written differs from actual

classroom practice; and whether a shift towards transformational discourse

can be perceived.

3. Language, power and social structure

Previous assignments have illustrated how the Maltese educational system is

dominated by hierarchical and traditional authorities (Bezzina, 1995, 1998;

Borg and Falzon, 1989; Farrugia, 1986). Market forces and globalisation have

always influenced political decisions concerning education and employability

and adopting Western traditional learning styles was the easiest and fastest

model to replicate in an ever increasingly urgent bid to expand economic

growth and trade (Mayo, 1994; Baldacchino and Mayo, 1997). The most

dominantly radical counter-influences to capitalism observed within the

Maltese educational system emerged under the umbrella term of 'social

justice' embraced by the clergy, the two major political parties and trade

unionists. Religious and political ideological slogans revolving around the

themes of education, work, justice and liberty make it impossible 'to

separate literacy from questions of power' (Janks, 2009:5).

These ideologies remain steadfastly ingrained in Maltese education and

social institutions notwithstanding the advent of new capitalist structures

(Gee, 2000 in Barton, Hamilton and Ivanic, 2000:185). They have become

'ideology as common sense' (Fairclough, 2001) as established dominant

institutions ensure that they are never seen to sustain power through

inequality, otherwise people would cease to believe in them and change to

some degree would follow. Consequently, national education development

has made little effort to relate literacy 'to general issues of social theory

regarding textuality, figured worlds, identity and power (Street, 2003:87-88).



8/27


Nevertheless, modern technology is creating a new social order, possibly

leading sections of the population to critically engage with their

environment, voicing their dissatisfaction with the local dominant religious

and political powers. Yet social life paradoxically shows that:

while there is apparently more space than ever before for

individual and group differences, there seems to be at the same

time a sort of 'codification' of aspects of social life which is partly

a codification of discourse (Fairclough, 2001:207).

Today's new social order creates corporate identities and narratives.

Technology sustains the value our modern societies give to work as a means

to financial gain and sense of belonging to a global community (Gee, 2000,

in Barton, Hamilton and Ivanic, 2000). This knowledge-economy world

associates functional literacy with reading and writing that not only serve the

individuals needs but especially employment and economic development

which might have little if anything to do with the individuals culture and

society (Rassool, 1999; Papen, 2005). Thus, nationally, not only does literacy

remain bound to traditional notions of citizenship (Mayo, 2004), but reflecting

a global trend, in an emerging new world order formal traditional literacyteaching and learning remain central to normative political and social life.

In reaction, critical literacy and CDA challenges utilitarian vocational

meanings (Rassool, 1999:8), encouraging people to read behind the literal

text, reflect on their society and the struggles of power, engaging 'in a

critical discussion of the positions a text supports (Papen, 2005:11). Those

wishing to impose or resist the new order struggle with the multimodal entity

of language 'both over new ways of using language, and over linguistic

representations of change' (Fairclough, 2001:204). Hence CDA echoes

Freire's sentiments that what is important is that the person learning words

be concomitantly engaged in a critical analysis of the social framework in

which men exist (Freire, 1972:31-2).



9/27


Freire (1972) believes reading the word cannot be separated from reading

the world and that individuals who know how to 'read' both attain a sense of

self that enables them to transform their social situations. Within NLS

research, Street (1984) discusses this further and distinguishes between

autonomous and ideological models of literacy. Attitudes to literacy, both

traditional and intertextual multimodal communications are not only

restricted to an individual's psychological attitudes but are socially and

textually produced (Janks, 2009:9). Foucault emphasises that all discourses,

including discourses of literacy, produce truth/power and in turn generate

and propagate the effects of power of dominant groups (Janks, 2009:14).

Ideology has moved on from sovereign power over individuals to disciplinarypower that regulates society and the individual (Foucault, 1977). Notions of

dominators and dominated are blurred, although dominant discourses of

truth/power may emerge creating social subjects interacting within complex

relationships. One overarching aspect of such complex societal relationships

is language in its verbal and non-verbal entity as a socially conditioned and

conditioning process (Fairclough, 2001; Kress, 2003; Kress and van Leeuwen,

2006). As discussed, ideologies are naturalised dominant discourses that

appear to be common sense. Fairclough (2001) observes that even people

who work in institutions that do not seemingly have direct links to capitalist

or governing classes have tied interests that propagate the

dominant capitalist system.

Institutional practices which people draw upon without thinking

often embody assumptions which directly or indirectly legitimize

existing power relations. Practices which appear to be universal

and commonsensical can often be shown to originate in the

dominant class or the dominant bloc, and to have

become naturalized(Fairclough, 2001:27).



10/27


Thompson (1984, 1990, in Janks, 2009:37) identifies five general modes of

ideological operation: legitimation, dissimulation, unification, fragmentation,

reification. By looking at texts, or discourses, 'linguistic and non-linguistic

symbols which are regularly used to obtain particular ideological effects' may

be identified (Fairclough, 2001:27). However, Thompson, unlike Fairclough

does not consider unequal power relations as always leading to negative

ideological discourses. These 'symbols are not only or always used for these

purposes, nor are these modes of ideology only realised in these ways' but

provide useful ways of thinking about the relation between symbolic forms

and social effect (Janks, 2009:37).

This reinforces Foucault's theory that the 'political question()is not error,illusion, alienated, consciousness or ideology; it is truth itself' (1980:133).

Dominant societal discourses seize and propagate power infiltrating and

bolstering 'procedures which constitute discourses and the means by which

power constitutes them as knowledge, that is, as truth' Janks (2009:50).

Foucault does not focus on the negative censorship, exclusion, blockage,

and repression (1980:59) aspects of power but on how it affects the

processes which subject our bodies, govern our gestures and dictate our

behaviours (1980:97).

This 'capillary form' of power (Foucault, 1980:39) requires our focus 'on the

effects of the texts, knowledges, and practices that we bring into our literacy

classrooms' as well as on the kind of access to which resources these

classrooms provide ((Janks, 2009:5,51). Since literacy is not a neutral

activity but a selection of those parts preferred by the dominant groups,

critical literacy and CDA highlight the 'positioned and positioning' (ibid:22).

CDA in the classroom enables critical reflection on political choices such as

the language and texts used for instruction and the content that is included

or excluded from the classroom, who imposes the curriculum and how, who

decides what to teach, and the nature of student involvement in

such decisions (Janks, 2009:23).



11/27


4. Critical Discourse Analysis: method, theory and practice

The new Level 1 (UK Level 2) embedded literacy and vocational programme

aims to integrate literacy within vocational learning. Planning meetings

initiated last April culminated in the production of schemes of work and

assessment modes in July 2010. College administrators launched the

innovations bringing in guest speakers from England to present models of

embedded learning which local staff were to adapt and implement the

following September. This process thus constrained by lack of time,

experience and relevance to the local scenario raised contradictions and

conflicts revolving around student needs, staff duties, language and

sociocultural identity. Personal professional concern mingled with intellectual

curiosity whether such a situation could be explained through CDA since it 'is

amply prepared to handle such contradictions as they emerge and

demonstrate how they are enacted and transformed through linguistic

practices in ways of interacting, representing, and being' (Rogers, 2008:1).

Analysing relationships within diverse Discourses is never easy and clearcut.

Ethical considerations including analyst involvement require academic

professional research. Nevertheless, readings about bilingualism and the

potential of CDA stirred a considerable amount of reflective thinking about

my professional role both as participant and academic observer. Reflecting

on the evident conflicts, I noted that complex power-knowledge relationships

risk being reduced to a language of binary absolutes, dominant/dominated,

social justice/injustice, literate privileged/illiterate underprivileged. Reading

about CDA made me aware that this tendency together with the assumption

that power is embedded in language might be socioculturally inherited thus

necessitating the need 'to understand the relationship between language

form and function, the history of the practices that construct present-day



12/27


practices, and how social roles are acquired and transformed' (Rogers,

2008:2).

CDA is different from other discourse analysis methods because it

includes not only a description and interpretation of discourse incontext, but also offers an explanation of why and how

discourses work (Rogers 2008:2).

Through professional reflection, I would also add that CDA is also an attitude

or a stance that I would be interested in adopting in future research as it aids

the understanding of relationships between language and important

educational issues such as 'the current relationship among the economy,

national policies, and educational practices' (Rogers, 2008:1). Studies by

Jaffe (2003a,b), Heller (2003, 2009), da Silva and Heller (2009) Rogers (2008)

and Gee (2008) allow parallels to be drawn with the local situation where

national policies, communities of practice, social interaction and the

distribution of resources are part of the Discourse of bilingualism where 'the

discrepancy in achievement between mainstream and working class and

minority children' remains as powerful groups insist on traditional resolutions

to modern educational problems' (Rogers, 2008:11).

National and government institutions continue to espouse positivist, reliable,

and replicable methodologies that can only examine issues from an often

ideological point of view that has become common sense and naturalised but

remains ineffective in the changing world order. However, CDA research

would not provide a panacea. Criticised for potentially projecting counter-

ideologies onto findings to suit the beliefs of the analysts, CDA practitioners

are often in disaccord between them since there is an unequal balance

between social theory and linguistic method. Furthermore, critics state CDA

is not systematic and rigorous since it is restricted to the temporal

interpretations of social contexts (Rogers, 2008:14). Regardless of this

positivist assertion, Rogers agrees that an inherent drawback in CDA is that



13/27


the methodology has not been widely used to analyse matters of learning

and that few studies have tackled nonlinguistic aspects of discourse such as

activity and emotion ironic when considering that emotion is often the

basis of ideology (ibid). Such critique is often levelled at analysts whose sole

goal is the disruption of power relations.

Inversely, researchers who engage in CDA as a genuinely critical social

scientific method 'reflexively demonstrate the changing relationship between

social theory and linguistic structures and how this fits into evolving social

and linguistic theories and methodologies' (Rogers, 2008:15). The research

of Fairclough (1995) and Gee (1999) are such examples. Indeed, Gee has

paid extensive attention to CDA and matters of learning, pointing out that'one can only generate paradoxes or problems about learning with regard to

specific perspectives on what learning is, and the problems and paradoxes

shift with different perspectives' (Rogers, 2008:12). 'CA is not a theoretical

enterprise but rather a very concretely empirical one' (Denzin &

Lincoln, 2008:359).

5. CDA and discursive practices in bilingual communities of practice

My professional interest in oral literacy departs from the notion that 'face-to-

face social interaction (...) is the most immediate and the most frequently

experienced social reality' (Denzin & Lincoln, 2008:358). In-class

observations indicate that when staff acknowledge students' oral

competence in their maternal minority language, students engage more in

class even vis a vis the dominant language. Following Jaffe (2003a:43), it

appears that students build up a particular individual and collective stance

that acknowledges their individual and collective identities. Giving minority

language texts an authoritative and collaborative dimension fosters a

stronger relationship between language and student identity that makes

them more confident in engaging with both languages when left at liberty to



14/27


show their competence and familiarity beyond the restrictions required by

standardisation (ibid).

Students often come to my learning support classes declaring they do not

know a single word of English yet when they engage in collaborative talkabout text, they show oral competence and understanding beyond formal

assessment test results, a valuable foundation for the development of other

competences. I thus set out writing this essay in belief that 'the interplay of

utterances and actions in live social interaction involves a complex

organization that cannot be found in written text' (Denzin & Lincoln,

2008:359) and that 'talk creates and maintains the intersubjective reality'

(ibid:361). Nevertheless, readings on multimodal literacies and NLS studiesalso challenged this assumption and aroused my interest in CDA.

The complex local bilingual situation is the result of a long historic struggle

over the language question. National pride and support in the minority

language is socioculturally strongly grounded, albeit folkloristic

sentimentality and academic purism sometimes do not reflect the current

use of the everyday language which displays a mixture of accomodation and

resistance to historically dominant languages, and specifically to English, thelast of the colonisers. In Malta full immersion in foreign languages has long

been the correct standardised teaching method. However, English, unlike

other foreign dominant languages, filters throughout all aspects of society,

embedded in the educational system unlike other languages of past and

present elites. Thus, the education system is divided between using

separate single correct standards of both languages and accepting a

vernacular mix of both languages in use as more technical English words are

incorporated in the workplace.

This is a very real problem in our College and professional sharing with

colleagues revealed that most of us engage in some sort of revoicing in our

classes. Verbal teaching and vocational instruction by staff sympathetic to



15/27


learning needs occurs collaboratively in both languages leading to eventual

written work and assessment in English. The difficulty is that written English

is then often full of 'mistakes' that represent the Maltese idiom and students

are penalised for not being able to communicate well in the dominant

language. Staff is divided about whether to strictly reinforce official

standardised correctness or acknowledge the transformative effects of such

collaborative use of language which would eventually lead to better mastery

of both languages in the longer term. Vocational lecturers are usually more

inclined towards the latter, often accusing academic staff of demotivating

students who need functional language more than academic knowledge.

Academic staff counter that it is senseless to incorporate some sort of pidgin

language when proper words already exist in both languages, albeit some

might seem archaic in Maltese. Learning support colleagues seem to

straddle both arguments, confirming Jaffe's belief (2003a) in embedding the

minority language in the learning process, positioning it in contrast to

English. This together with a mitigated hierarchical and collaborative

learning, leaves individuals free to participate and express their competence

acknowledging and valuing individual identities as well as the collective class

community.

This professional discussion further linked my perspectives on oral literacy

with greater awareness of multimodal communication and literacies. Both

staff and students shared ideas in Maltese but switched to English when

using education terminologies. Education jargon in English seemed more

acceptable and politically correct to staff. In fact, they preferred to use Latin-

derivatives when a non-English word was used as this seemingly gloss over

the seemingly more negative connotations of Maltese when describing

'weak' students, especially when senior administration was present.

Nevertheless, while both staff and students used different language

according to formal and informal settings, students felt less pressured than

staff to conform to political correctness; their initial descriptions of their



16/27


linguistic competences were less positively couched than staff's professional

terms. All this must surely affect multimodal staff-student communication

which is greatly but not exclusively verbal.

The drawbacks of verbal communication particularly emerged with staff'sdiffidence to voice real sentiments when issues of student involvement and

participation were discussed. Numerable colleagues shared concerns that

planning the new Foundation programmes would have benefited from the

inclusion of current students' voice, especially learning support students.

Instinctively, I felt that this might have been sometimes said sincerely and at

other times simply as lip service. 'Participation' took on as many

connotations as staff's ideological and emotional motivations; sympathy,frustration with the system, hostility even since student 'failure' was seen as

being projected onto them by management.

Interestingly, factors such as age, experience, social status and the kind of

familiar and close relationship established with the student often impinged

on staff's opinions and probably spill into their classrooms. Informal dialogue

with students indeed often did reveal that 'negative ideologies are acquired

on a routine basis in schools (Rogers, 2008:13). Nevertheless, thisprofessional sharing seemed to indicate that social justice ideologies and

hence some kind of participation models pervade numerous classrooms as

does Fairclough's interpretation of interdiscursivity (1992) between the

College's staff and students. This seems to have the potential to transform

otherwise stable discourses transforming perceptions of student identity.

CDA could possibly reveal this potential for transformation bringing further

understanding to the intertextuality between language, utterance-type

meanings, situated meanings and social practices (Freeman, 1998; Rogers,

2008) between the College's communities of practice. In the current

linguistic market's domination by standard English, CDA could investigate

reactive alignment or resistance by examining:



17/27


a wide range of social practices, including written documents

and/or social activities in order to make explicit the underlying

cultural notions that link forms of writing and/or talk to social

groups in a way that seems natural within that context (Freeman,

1998:17-18).

Eventual intertextual research of spoken and written texts through a

multimodal stance could identify links between different groups' ideological

assumptions and expectations thus understanding the evolution of these

ideological stances (Freeman, 1998). It would possibly facilitate better

understanding between groups as stances are always partial and can always

be better expanded and refined through dialogue (Cummins, 2000).Education in a bilingual setting would then become the responsibility of the

entire organisation, lessening the stigma of learning support, hence also

transforming learning, discourses and communities of practice. It could also

lead to long term policies addressing 'issues of underachievement in

culturally and linguistically diverse contexts' (ibid:36) without forcing staff to

enter into discourses of conflict or alignment with traditional learning but

rather transform learning processes at all levels.

A CDA study into the local issues surrounding bilingualism would thus open

up the discussion beyond the mere acquisition of both language skills,

focusing on the different ideological stances towards different literacies and

languages and the diverse social and cultural backgrounds which ultimately

provide different people with different educational, linguistic and literacy

goals (Freeman, 1998). Acquisition and learning could evolve into

interdiscursive social practices, supporting student potential and

acknowledging dominant and subordinated communities whilst better

understanding relationships that influence school structures and the roles of

educators and students (Cummins, 2000:36-40). Truly effective education in

a bilingual setting should embrace transformative and intercultural

challenges where collaborative power relations affirm student identities and



18/27


extend their interactions with educators, actually hearing and respecting

student voice rather than silencing the power of self expression (ibid:44-49).

Staff within such settings work with others to:

make meaning with or from texts (...) interested in what all kindsof texts (written, visual and oral) do to readers, viewers and

listeners and whose interests are served by what these texts do.

They also help students to rewrite themselves and their local

situations by helping them to pose problems and to act, often in

small ways, to make the world a fairer place (Janks, 2009:19).

6. Conclusion: Involving students literacy practices in the

classroom

This essay departed by exploring issues of discourse conflict or alignment

through professional reflection about the belief of the immediacy of talk

especially in a bilingual setting involving primarily Maltese verbal

communication. It progressed to premise that multimodal language and

literacy discourses filtering in the classrooms is confusing to the studentswho shift from the organisational to their own personal communities,

especially those students who come from subordinate literacy backgrounds.

Professional reflections presented here suggest the occurrence of both

discourse conflict and alignment as well as interdiscursive communities of

practice that might have transformational value. Nevertheless such

assertions warrant further ethically reviewed research, possibly an

intertextual CDA analysis of discourse allowing:

the researcher to link spoken and written texts that are produced

by a wide range of participants who interact with one another on

a regular basis in actual communities of practice, and to make



19/27


explicit the underlying discourses that structure their everyday

interactions and interpretations (Freeman, 1998:19).

Organisation-wide transformation would be ineffective if only oral bilingual

aspects were explored. Policy documentation analysis would also benecessary; however, I believe that just as important is an analysis of how

these texts are being multimodally reinterpreted in the classroom thus

affecting learning processes. Thinking about:

how texts may be re-written and how to remake the word ()

repositioning texts () tied to an ethic of social justice () can

contribute to the kind of identity and social transformation that

Freires work advocates (Janks, 2009:18).

Nevertheless researching bilingual minority communities is challenging since

there is overlap in the polynomic use of language (Jaff, 2003b). Discourses

present in situated practice present language and identity shifts which are

further compounded in this digital age 'replete with spaces of representation,

communication, and information dissemination' that draw on 'multiple modes

of expression and capitalize on technologies that facilitate social

collaboration in new ways' (Vasudevan, 2010:62). Researching educational

practice is complex where 'temporality and synchronicity of identity

performances have given way to multi-spatial and cross-temporal

instantiations of the self' (ibid). Moreover, boundaries of recognition and

misrecognition also shift; misrecognition being present in embedded criteria

of evaluation (Bourdieu, 1988; Jaffe, 2003b). Structures of misrecognition

and process of domination enforce compliance to dominant social and

linguistic powers (Jaffe, 2003b:515). However:

In a national curricular climate where testing too often leads

discussions of pedagogy, it is imperative to seek out spaces of

education that are governed by principles of discovery and play



20/27


and that are free from punitive measures of learning and

engagement (Vasudevan, 2010:79).

Adopting new multimodal literacies in classrooms present seemingly

valuable opportunities to transform dominant texts using interesting mediafamiliar to students. Developing their multi-modal literacies across a range

of media respects, represents and includes their 'otherness' which might not

be otherwise recognised by dominant discourses and texts. Multimodal

literacies are transformative because they encourage students to 'shape

their literacy learning experiences by intentionally blurring artificial in/out of

school binaries that are institutionally reinforced' (Vasudevan, 2010:78). For

students who are labeled as weak, struggling or at risk, conventionalschooling may be alienating and demotivating, especially if 'these are young

people who live digital lives but who are confined to analog rights in school'

(ibid:64). Notwithstanding, although digital literacies often present the best

opportunities for multimodal expression, 'educators should not feel

compelled to supply digital modalities, nor should they feel constrained by

limited access to multimodal resources' (ibid:79). True multimodality should

transform classrooms into spaces offering the opportunity 'of inspiring new

sites of education through composing' (ibid).

Composing, or writing in its broadest and even digital sense is not simply

physical production but also presents opportunities for authorship of self and

identity (Ivanic, 1998). Different ideas of self, person, position, subjectivity

and related theories exist. Following Ivanic (1998), this essay investigates

how educational institutions contribute to the development of the self,

transforming selfhood to privileged identities that 'shape and constrain

actual people writing actual texts' (Ivanic, 1998:27). Traditional theories

attempt to do this by treating spoken and written language as distinct,

however this assignment has raised my awareness of how both literacies

link and reflect aspects of social relationships and social contexts which are:



21/27


in a constant state of flux, continuously being re-shaped by social

processes of alignment with some conventions and contestation

of others. Both spoken and written language are enmeshed inthe social processes: both are heavily 'contextualized' in this

sense of context (Ivanic, 1998:61).

Still, dominant literacies continue to privilege and value written texts

directing the purposes of educational social contexts (Ivanic, 1998:65), as

personal professional experience evidences at my College. Before involving

learning support staff in programme development, oral and communicative

literacy was infrequently part of formal assessment. This perceived

superiority of writing is another aspect of the bilingual culture and Western

colonisation (ibid). Most students attending complete withdrawal literacy

sessions usually will never initially realise they are not completely 'illiterate'

in English because they can speak and communicate in the language better

than they can write it. Only when they start to make intertextual

connections and experience a transformation in their attitude and skills does

their sense of identity and motivation receive a boost.

Yet, the inherited mentality that standardised competency in written English

is a passport to social life, employment, identity and citizenship prevails

throughout the College. Following Mayo (1994) I would elaborate that the

site of the struggle for Maltese sense of citizenship is the ability to write in

both languages, favouring students' successful performance in written

English assessment as a passport for employment. Students compiling their

Europass CV are either not aware of the Maltese version or opt for the

English one because it appears more professional and may appeal to more

possible employers. Selfhood and personhood as understood by Ivanic

(1998) and others quoted in this essay is negated in favour of citizenship as

described by Mayo (1994). This reaffirms the



22/27


traditional relationship between theory and practice in academic

support (...) in which teachers as 'knowers' translate theory into

prescriptions about the characteristics of academic writing and

practical tips on how to do it, which they 'transmit' to learners. In

my view this may lead to some short-term benefit for learners,

but will not have the emancipatory value (Ivanic, 1998:337).

Developing the discoursal self through writing would contribute to better

academic writing for multiple purposes. Student identity can be encouraged

through the development of the autobiographical self, the self as author,

socially available possibilities for self-hood and the discoursal self (Ivanic,

1998:330, 338). Also, we should not automatically expect students,especially those requiring academic/literacy support to be able to engage in

autonomous and independent discourse without first going through the

stages described by Bakhtin (1981) and construct their own 'voice'. Aided by

theory and research, academic and literacy support staff should address

Ivanic's stages for developing writer identity, limiting technical and

mechanical exercises to transform study programmes of study by building

'the teaching of writing around writing tasks with real communicative

purposes for real readers' (Ivanic, 1998:338-339) that enables the

development of self, identity, voice, dialogue and discoursivity.

Outside educational institutions, individuals constantly engage in multiple

discourses and social practices which 'intersect, transverse, and challenge

one another' to create a transformed social being (Shuart Faris & Bloome,

2004:203). Educational texts encompass these social discourses and

discursive practices in which 'the purposes of the participants, the goals of

the participants, the power relations among participants, and many other

factors all have their effects on the forms of texts' translated and

constructed in classrooms (ibid:205). Constructing the self and an individual

voice is complex in face of conflicting or transformative ideologies that may

be juxtaposed or mutually affirmative depending on whether individuals wish



23/27


to join, dominate or resist the dominant ideologies. These 'voices' (Bakhtin,

1981) reflect and form the social, cultural and ideological practices of other

individual voices; one way of understanding these processes is to seek to

understand the 'multiple functions and the interdependencies among these

functions' within educational institutions (Shuart Faris & Bloome, 2004:206).

Intertextual CDA research sifts these voices enabling deeper understanding

between texts and subjectivities and encouraging dialogue and participation.

In an educational organisational setting, CDA helps the researcher identify

the type of language being adopted by members of communities of practice,

especially by more vulnerable students who may engage with ideologies

through direct quotation, imitation/adoption, stylization, parody and hiddenpolemic; some students are more susceptible to the idealisation of other

voices (Bakhtin, 1981; Shuart Faris & Bloome, 2004:213-214).

Therefore, to accept, resist, reject or transform these influences, 'new forms

of literacy pedagogy that encourage students to view both composing and

interpreting texts as practices of discourse analysis and social and political

negotiation' should be developed (Shuart Faris & Bloome, 2004:247). CDA

would allow students and staff to critically examine how society, culture,economics and politics affect their own literacy and that of their community

of practice. Transformation of learning could thus start from dialogue which

discusses relationships of power, focusing on which discourses individuals'

College communities of practice are being expected to speak, write, value

and follow thus opening up the choice of whether individuals or groups would

rather be in conflict or alignment with such discourses.

References

Bakhtin, M. M. (1930), Holquist, M. (Ed.), Emerson, C. and Holquist, M.



24/27


(Trans.) (1981) The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. Austin andLondon: University of Texas Press.

Baldacchino, G. and Mayo, P. (Eds.) (1997) Beyond Schooling: AdultEducation in Malta. Malta: Mireva Publications.

Barton, D. (Ed.) (1994) Sustaining Local Literacies. Reading: Education

for Development.

Barton, D., Hamilton, M. and Ivanic, R. (2000) Situated Literacies:Reading and Writing in Context. London: Routledge.

Bezzina, C. (1995) The Maltese Primary School Principalship: Perceptions,Roles and Responsibilities. PhD thesis, Brunel University, School ofEducation, UK.

Bezzina, C. (1998) Making quality work: the changing role of educationofficers and subject-co-ordinators. Paper presented at the MUT

Conference, The Roles of Education Officers and Subject Co-ordinatorsas Agents of Change and Development, 25-26th April. Malta: MaltaUnion of Teachers.

Borg, M.G. and Falzon, J.M. (1989) Stress and job satisfsaction amongprimary school teachers in Malta. Educational Review, 41 (3), 271-9.

Bourdieu, P. (1988) Collier, P. (Trans.) Homo Academicus. Cambridge MA:

Polity Press.

Chouliaraki, L. and Fairclough, N. (1999). Discourse in Late Modernity:Rethinking Critical Discourse Analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University

Press. Cited in: Rogers, R. (2004) Storied selves: A Critical DiscourseAnalysis of adult learners' literate lives. Reading Research Quarterly,Newark:Jul-Sep 2004. 39(3), 272-273,275-305. Available from:ProQuest http:// proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=686812771&Fmt=4&clientld=29199&RQT=309&VName=PQD[Accessed 18 June 2010].

Creese, A. and Martin, P. (Eds.) (2003) Multilingual Classroom Ecologies:Inter-Relationships, Interactions and Ideologies (Bilingual Educationand Bilingualism). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.

Cummins, J. (2000) Language, Power and Pedagogy: Bilingual Children in

the Crossfire. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.Da Silva, E. and Heller, M. (2009) From protector to producer: the role of

the State in the discursive shift from minority rights to economicdevelopment. Language Policy(2009)8, 95-116.

Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.) (2008) Collecting and InterpretingQualitative Materials. Los Angeles: Sage Publications Ltd.

Fairclough, N. (1992) Discourse and social change. London: Polity.



25/27


Fairclough, N. (1995) Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study ofLanguage(Language in Social Life). Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd.

Fairclough, N. (2001) Language and Power (Language in Social Life).Harlow:Pearson Education Ltd.

Fairclough, N. (2003)Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for SocialResearch. New York, London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Ltd.

Farrugia, C. J. (1986) Career choice and sources of occupationalsatisfaction and frustration among teachers in Malta. ComparativeEducation, 22(3), 221-31.

Foucault, M. (1977) Discipline and Punish. New York: Pantheon.

Foucault, M. (1980) Power/Knowledge: Selected interviews and otherwritings 1972-1977. New York: Pantheon Books.

Freeman, R. D. (1998) Bilingual Education and Social Change. Clevedon:Multilingual Matters Ltd.

Freire, P. (1972) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London: Penguin.

Gee, J. P. (1990). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses.Critical perspectives on literacy and education. London: Falmer Press.

Gee, J. P. (1992). The social mind: Language, ideology, and social practice(Series in Language and Ideology). New York: Bergin & Garvey.

Gee, J. P. (1999).An introduction to Discourse analysis: theory andmethod. London and New York: Routledge.

Gee, J. P. (2000) The New Literacy Studies: From socially situated to the

work of the social. In: Barton, D., Hamilton, M. and Ivanic, R. (2000)Situated Literacies: Reading and Writing in Context. London:Routledge. Chapter 11, p.180-196.

Gee. J. P. (2004). Situated language and learning: A critique of traditionalschooling. London: Routledge.

Gee, J. P. (2008) Discourse Analysis: What Makes It Critical? In: Rogers, R.(Ed.) (2008) An Introduction to Critical Discourse Analysis inEducation. New York: Routledge. p. 19-50.

Gee, J. P. (17 October 2009) Author's Blog Words [online]. Available from:http://jamespaulgee.com/node [Accessed on 4 August 2010].

Heller, M. (2003) Globalization, the new economy, and thecommodification of language and identity. Journal of Sociolinguistics,7(4), 473-492.

Ivanic, R. (1998) Writing and identity: The discoursal construction ofidentity in academic writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins PublishingCo.



26/27


Jaffe, A. (2003a) Talk Around Text: Literacy Practices, Cultural Identity andAuthority in a Corsican Bilingual Classroom. In: Creese, A. and Martin,P. (Eds.) (2003) Multilingual Classroom Ecologies: Inter-Relationships,Interactions and Ideologies (Bilingual Education and Bilingualism).Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd. p. 42-60.

Jaffe, A. (2003b) Misrecognition Unmasked? 'Polynomic' language, expertstatuses and orthographic practices in Corsican schools. InternationalPragmatics Association: Pragmatics, 13(4), 515-537.

Janks, H. (2009) Literacy and Power (Language, Culture, and TeachingSeries). New York, London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Ltd.

Kress, G. (2003) Literacy in the New Media Age. London: Routledge.

Kress, G. and van Leeuwen, T. (2001) Multimodal discourse. London:

Arnold.

Kress, G. and van Leeuwen, T. (2006) Reading Images: The Grammar ofVisual Design. New York: Routledge.

Lave, J. (1996). Teaching, as learning, in practice. Mind, Culture and

Activity, 3, 149-164.

Luttrell, W. (1997). School smart and mother-wise. Working class women'sidentity and schooling. New York: Routledge. Cited in: Rogers, R.(2004) Storied selves: A Critical Discourse Analysis of adult learners'literate lives. Reading Research Quarterly, Newark:Jul-Sep 2004. 39(3),272-273,275-305. Available from: ProQuest http://

proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=686812771&Fmt=4&clientld=29199&RQT=309&VName=PQD[Accessed 18 June 2010].

Malta College of Arts, Science & Technology (1 August 2010) MCASTMission Statement[online]. Available fromhttp://www.mcast.edu.mt/about_missionstatement.asp [Accessed on 1August 2010].

Malta College of Arts, Science & Technology (1 August 2010) MCASTStrategic Plan 2007-2009 [online]. Available from

http://www.mcast.edu.mt/downloads/quicklinks/strategic_plan.pdf[Accessed on 1 August 2010].

Mayo, P. (1994) State Sponsored Adult Literacy Programmes in Malta: ACritical Review. In: Barton, D. (Ed.) (1994) Sustaining Local Literacies.Reading: Education for Development. p.31-39.

Papen, U. (Ed.) (2005) Adult Literacy as Social Practice. London:

Routledge.



27/27


Rassool, N. (1999) Literacy for Sustainable Development in the Age ofInformation. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Rogers, R. (2004) Storied selves: A Critical Discourse Analysis of adultlearners' literate lives. Reading Research Quarterly, Newark:Jul-Sep2004. 39(3), 272-273,275-305. Available from: ProQuest http://

proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=686812771&Fmt=4&clientld=29199&RQT=309&VName=PQD[Accessed 18 June 2010].

Rogers, R. (Ed.) (2008) An Introduction to Critical Discourse Analysis inEducation. New York: Routledge.

Shuart-Faris, N. and Bloome, D. (2004) Uses of Intertextuality inClassroom and Educational Research. Connecticut: Information AgePublishing.

Street, B. (1984) Literacy in Theory and Practice. New York: Cambridge

University Press.

Street, B. (2003) Whats new in New Literacy Studies? Criticalapproaches to literacy in theory and practice. Current Issues inComparative Education, 5(2), 77-91.

Thompson, J. B. (1984) Studies in the theory of ideology. Cambridge:Polity Press. Cited in:Janks, H. (2009) Literacy and Power (Language,Culture, and Teaching Series). New York, London: Routledge, Taylor &Francis Ltd.

Thompson, J. B. (1990) Ideology and modern culture. Oxford: BasilBlackwell. Cited in: Janks, H. (2009) Literacy and Power (Language,Culture, and Teaching Series). New York, London: Routledge, Taylor &Francis Ltd.

Vasudevan, L. (2010) Education remix: New media, literacies, and theemerging digital geographies. Digital Culture & Education, 2(1), 62-82.

edd assignment 3 josephine v saliba

Documents