Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Kobayashi, Zappa-Hollman, & Duff (2017) Academic Discourse…
Kobayashi, Zappa-Hollman, & Duff (2017) Academic Discourse Socialization (ADS)
State-of-the-art review papers (e.g., Duff, 2010; Duff & Anderson, 2015) :<3:
Monographs (e.g., Leki, 2007) (Mertz, 2007)
Edited volumes (Casanave & Li, 2008)
PHD dissertation (e.g., Anderson ,2016; Fei, 2016; Morton, 2013)
Objective
how students gain the necessary dispositions and learn to perform meaningful actions in institutionally and socioculturally valued ways as they participate in their disciplinary communities (Duff, 2010)
Higher education focused
Early development
Morita and Kobayashi (2008)
Three major orientations: the study of disciplinary socialization :star:
English for academic purposes
What students need to know to succeed in higher education
qualitative/ethnographic research
document the socially and historically situated nature of disciplinary socialization
critical discourse/literacy studies
foreground issues of access and power and examine identity, agency, and learner resistance (Liu & Tannacito, 2013; Waterstone, 2008; White, 2011)
Comments: :pencil2: these studies also revealed and presented the followings:
challenges students face in academic studies (e.g., Anderson, 2015; Evans & Morrison, 2011) :<3:
linguistic and rhetorical demands of academic texts in different disciplines (e.g., Bazerman et al., 2009; Nesi & Gardner, 2012) :<3:
the complexities, contingencies, and hybridity of ADS (Duff, 2010) :<3:
focuses on academic writing and literacy practices
:unlock:
Major contributions
studies start to look at socialization into oral discourse and multimodal practices :lock:
e.g., academic presentations (e.g., Duff and Kobayashi, 2010; Kobayashi, 2016; Morton, 2009; Yang, 2010; Zappa-Hollman, 2007a)
class or small group/team discussions (e.g., Ho, 2011; Morita, 2009; Seloni, 2012)
negotiation simulations (Shi, 2010; 2011)
one-on-one writing conferences (Gilliland, 2014; Okuda & Anderson, 2018)
some unsuccessful task performance (Shi, 2011; Zappa-Hollman, 2007) and Fei (2016) dissertation
Interesting study: White (2011) two minority college students' ambivalence about appropriating academic discourse even though they need to so to gain respect and legitimacy in class. Because using this discourse equals to "talking like White people" and "selling out" their cultural or ethnic traditions". :<3:
opposite case: Liu and Tannacito (2013) fully embrace all practices
focus on feedback practices (students-professors) (e.g., Fujioka, 2014) and genre writing discourse (e.g., Yamada, 2016)
computer-mediated learning in academia
Chang & Sperling (2014) ESL students face-to-face classroom and online discussion forums
Liew & Ball (2010) a TA 's use of highly academic discourse to reply to a student's post, negative impact
Yim (2011): two blended graduate courses at a Canadian University (one formal, one informal)
Work in progress
roles and types (teachers, peers, networks, learners):
Agents
Teachers:
socialization has been taken place through apprenticeship (novices are inducted into the valued practices of their community with the help of more experienced members
Chang & Sperling (2014); Anderson, 2016; Eriksson and Makitalo (2013)
Peer collaboration
Vicker (2008): Japanese student with American partner: socialized his American classmate into ways of thinking and talking expected of programmers :<3:
Cheng (2013) power inequality between a Korean MA and her native peers
Another line of research (understudied): :<3: combining frameworks of language socialization, communities of practice, and social network . theory(Milroy, 1987)
contribution: recognize the interplay between emotional and academic support afforded to students by different socialization agents: take into account multiple agents that impact their ADS experiences :star:
Intertextuality
wiki explanation
: Intertextuality is the shaping of a text's meaning by another text. It is the interconnection between similar or related works of literature that reflect and influence an audience's interpretation of the text. Intertextual figures include:
allusion, quotation, calque, plagiarism, translation, pastiche and parody.
[1][2][3] Intertextuality is a literary device that creates an 'interrelationship between texts' and generates related understanding in separate works.
Also: referencing!
intertextuality is viewed as a function of the relations that people construct as they interact with each others, rather than as a property of the text (Bloome & Clark, 2006)
Haneda (2009): a teacher references to US pop culture - challenges for Korean students in class discussions
Bucholtz et al. (2012): peers linked a TV show hosts to a student, gave him a weak identity
Academic posters (multimodal and social nature) (D'Angelo, 2016)
:pencil2: involves multimodality, embodiment, and performativity in ADS
Entextualized Humor
in ADS
entextualized humor in informal academic socialization
Bucholtz et al., 2011
Learners' trajectories and identities and socialization
across tasks/events
the use of learning strategies across contexts
Semiotic resources
the use of language as mediating tool (the use of L1), the use of translanguaging
Problems and difficulties
lack of direct observational data or artifacts (many of them are self-reported studies) (narratives by learners about their experiences)
uncritically promote the adoption of certain academic values, identities, and practices through ADS, perpetuates long-established practices and ideologies,
socialization kind of disempowers or reduces the agency of learners
they have voice in shaping their own and others' academic discourse and possibilities,
Ultimate question, which kind of coincide with the question brought up in the "Writing like an engineering book" :!:
how can ADS provide a sufficient foundation so that learners can succeed in their academic domains without the process being overly dogmatic and the range of outcomes too narrow and conventional? :!!:
:pencil2:the understanding here is that, by publishing the ADS work, the analysis would be "this one either successfully socialized into the community or not", this mode is kind of a similar process of reproducing the same structure and simplifying the standard of "success"
The question brought in the "Writing like an engineer book":
whether we see their gradual enculturation into engineering discourse as a success story or a story of increased acceptance of a distorted view of the world. What is the relationship between becoming a member of a discourse community (a process that usually involves coming to see a discourse as "natural") and retaining some distance on a community's discourse in order to critique its inevitable limitations? As scholars and teachers of professional writing, what do we want for our students? :!!: :!?:
:lock:
not transformative and innovative
innovative aspects, such as new way of publishing, new way of configuring participation in learning communities, et c
Future directions
focus on other types of tasks and events (e.g., oral presentations, collaboration tasks, student portfolios, reflections, feedback from teachers, tutors, peers)
the use of interactive student response systems (online)
contexts other than US or Asian international students
other programs (e.g., academic English preparatory program or bridge-like programs