Swales’ (1990) characteristics in the teaching profession

How can members of a discourse community be recognized? Can the teaching profession be identified as a discourse community? This paper tries to find evidence about the characteristics identified in Swales’ (1990) which test whether a group of people belong to an academic discourse community or not.
According to Swales (1990, cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010, p. 13), a discourse community has common goals, participatory mechanisms, information exchange, community-specific genres, highly specialized terminology and a high general level of expertise. Are these characteristics present in a community of teachers?
Generally speaking, teachers’ main aim is to help students succeed in their learning. Common goals are exemplified in Howley and Howley, (2005). They explain how teachers working in professional learning communities strive for students’ success. Those teachers believe that this goal can be achieved only by analyzing their practices not only through their point of view, but changing their roles and thus living the experience as students.
Wenzlaff and Wiesemane (2004) depict the opportunities teachers have to learn, for example in-service training, workshops, structured courses, faculty and district meetings and school-based professional conversations. These participatory mechanisms allow teachers to share knowledge and to grow.
A discourse community cannot exist in the absence of a collaborative culture and an environment that supports risk taking and reflection, Wenzlaff and Wiesemane (2004). They highlight the importance of learning through the interaction with peers within a professional community which deals with learning theories and teachers’ resources. They claim that a collaborative culture and a risk taking-environment allow the discourse community to survive. Swales (1990, cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010, p. 13) defines this interaction as information exchange.
Kelly-Kleese (2004) lays emphasis on the common discourse shared by universities. Discourse community governs the university’s spoken and written word (Kelly-Kleese, 2004) which is also depicted in Swales (1990, cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010) as a community-specific genre. People who do not belong to this community may not understand the style and the language used in this specific context.
How do teachers generate knowledge and new specific words for their work? It is through action research that they widen their information, improve their skills and understanding. Kelly- Kleese (2004) considers universities knowledge generators which use and produce specialized terminology. To put it in another way, people who belong to the teaching field produce and use words such as: cultural-historical vision, praxis, a dialogical approach etcetera. These words belong to the specialized teaching terminology.
Evidence about the high general level of expertise is stated by Kleese, (2004):
(. . .) the community college professionals have little legitimate power and limited communicative competence- -they are often relegated to the role of readers within this community, while university faculty takes on the role of writer (p. 3 & 4).
She considers that university professionals have a higher level of expertise than the community college professionals.

All the characteristics established in Swales (1990) are seen in a community of teachers. They share common goals, the same participatory mechanisms, they exchange information and use specific genres; they also use and produce highly specialized terminology and have a high general level of expertise, therefore it could be argued that the teaching profession belongs to a discourse community.

References
Howley, A. & Howley, C. B. (2005). High-quality teaching: Providing for rural teachers’ professional development. The rural Educator. Retrieved 2007, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa4126/is_200501/ai_n13591361
Kelly- Kleese, C. (2004). UCLA community college review: Community college scholarship and discourse. Community College Review. Retrieved October 2007, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HCZ/is_1_32/ai_n636154143
Wenzlaff, T. L. & Wiesemane, K. C. (2004). Teachers need teachers to grow. Teacher Eduction Quarterly. Retrieved October 2007, from
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3960/is_200404/ai_n9349405




Learning by sharing experiences in a respectful atmosphere

As all professionals, teachers need to reflect upon their work. One way to foster reflection is through the critical incidents technique (CIT) which “should be used as sources of analysis and learning” (Pintos & Crimi, 2010, p.9). According to Fernandez, Elortegui and Medina (2003), situations and their causes are analyzed taking into account the context where they occurred. Some solutions for the problem are suggested, thus teachers have the opportunity to share and learn from their peers.
Fernandez et al. (2003) describe the use of critical incidents in Teacher Training Colleges as a strategy for teacher training and professional growth. Providing that teachers are open minded to different situations, this strategy may help teachers’ development and supply support in their practices. But on the other hand, the CIT should be handled with care. As critical incidents are about personal experiences, participants should be respectful when dealing with the incidents in groups in order not to hurt people’s feelings.
As it was mentioned above, the CIT may become counterproductive, unless participants experience an atmosphere where they can learn from their mistakes, laugh with their partners and not at their partners. Pintos and Crimi (2010) warn “tearing down another person’s work will only result in discouragement and hurt feelings” (p. 24). Teachers should be invited to learn, and participate in these kinds of events. This strategy may be useful as far as teachers are allowed to think, reflect, create and share with their peers in the appropriate environment.



References

González, J., Elórtegui Escartín, N, & Medina Pérez, M. (2003). Los incidentes críticos en la formación y perfeccionamiento del profesorado de secundaria de ciencias de la naturaleza. Revista interuniversitaria de Formación de Profesorado, 17-001.Zaragoza, España: Universidad de Zaragoza. Retrieved December 2007, from http://redalyc.uaemex.mx/redalyc/src/inicio/ArtPdfRed.jsp?iCve=27417107

Pintos, V., & Crimi, Y. (2010). Unit 2: Personal narratives in teaching. Retrieved September 2010, from http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=7214



Critical incident

Please, I need a real challenge

Around twelve years ago, in the secondary school where I was teaching, a student of mine had to do a makeup test. This boy whose nickname was Champion was great at any sport he tried. Hence, he was used to taking up challenges. What is more, that evaluation was also a challenge for him.

Every time students had to sit for a test, I tried to ask undemanding questions to help them. They were not only a few questions but too easy as well. This boy had been studying hard to pass the test. He had looked for help, a partner had been teaching him for several days. When it was his turn, I asked him two or three uncomplicated questions, for my astonishment he was angry when I said that he could go. He looked at me and with a grave voice he told me that he had thoroughly studied for the test, so he wanted me to ask him more questions.

How long had I been undervaluing my students’ abilities and potentials? How many times do teachers go to the opposite extreme: demanding too much or being excessively flexible with our students? How harmful both extreme might be? This incident made me more demanding, made me believe in students’ capacity. Because of this situation, I became more demanding with myself.

As a result, I started to require more from my students as far as I tried the best of myself as a teacher. I also concluded that any test at school is a challenge and life is full of complex situations we have to face. Moreover, all throughout life we are confronted with problems; nobody is going to relieve us from the pressure and anxiety caused by these difficulties.





Composing to be heard

Why is it important for members of a discourse community to be acquainted with the conventions of academic writing? If they want to participate actively in their discourse community, they should know the rules and clues which make this kind of texts easy to read. Mac Donald (1994) considers that learning to compose is a “vehicle for constructing and negotiating knowledge claims” (as cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010, p. 10). In other words, learning to compose implies learning to argue and support not only our own beliefs but also what other writers think. This paper examines the use of some writing devices in Myles (2002).
In her analysis of the difficulties which English as second Language (ESL) writers encounter when confronted with this kind of discourse, Myles (2002) composes her text in order to support her ideas and to argue with other English Language Teaching (ELT) authors. For instance, when she examines the models of L1 and L2 writing she argues that “[these] models do not account for growing language proficiency, which is a vital element of L2 writing development” (Myles, 2002, p. 4). After using citations, Myles (2002) tries to give her own point of view. For example, when she illustrates how the difference between L1 and L2 conventions interferes with the writing process in L2:
(. . .) The nature of academic literacy often confuses and disorients students, “particularly those who bring with them a set of conventions that are at odds with those of the academic world they are entering” (Kutz, Groden & Zamel, 1993, p. 30). In addition, the culture- specific nature of the schemata – abstract mental structure representing the knowledge of things, events, and situations can lead to difficulties when students write texts in L2. (Myles, 2002, p.2)
In some paragraphs, Myles (2002) does not use signaling phrases, as it can be seen in the block quotations above; she names the authors, the year of publication and the page number. Nevertheless, the use of inverted commas tells the reader that the message within these punctuation marks is not Myles’ voice. In other paragraphs she chooses reporting verbs which clarify whether the authors she cites argues, claims, or states what is written. As a result, the text has a varied type of quotations which avoids monotony.

According to Pintos and Crimi (2010), other important clues to help the reader understand the text are omissions. Myles (2002) uses them to summarize ideas and lead the reader straight to what she wants to point out. For instance, when she quotes Grabe and Kaplan (1996) she omits part of the text: “By comparing skilled and less skilled writers, the emphasis here is placed on “students” strategic knowledge and the ability to of students to transform information . . . to meet rhetorically constrained purposes.”(p. 2)
The importance of mastering academic literacy may be observed throughout the text which is structured in title and subtitles. Following each subtitle, she develops the main ideas in a new paragraph. This organization helps the reader to focus on the main ideas more easily. Ferris and Hedgcock (1998) suggest that ESL writers should “compose texts for academic readers” (as cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010, p. 12). In other words, writers should take into account who is going to read their writings; if their work is clear enough and may be understood by their audience.

Myles (2002) uses different types of quotations, insertions, and omissions in order to help the person who reads to follow the writing straightforwardly, which makes her work not only entertaining but also enlightening. Besides, she supports her own point of view with quotes from various authors; with whom she may agree, disagree or provide a further comment. Consequently, Myles (2002) may be considered an active member of the discourse community who composes her work for knowledge telling ang knowledge transforming. Therefore, Myles (2002) may be seen as a good example of academic writing.


References

Myles, J., (2002). Second language writing and research: The writing
process and error analysis in students texts. Retrieved September 2010, from
http://www.tesl-ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume6/ej22/ej22a1/

Pintos, V., & Crimi, Y. (2010). Unit 3: Academic writing. Retrieved September 2010, from
http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=7392

Midterm test- final version
Defining a discourse community
A discourse community is a knowledge community who shares certain values, aims, expectations and language-using practices and whose members are held together through a social mechanism (Bizzel, 1986, 1992; Candlin, 1997; Gunnarson, 1997; Herzberg, 1986; Ivanič, 1998; Reid, 1993; Swales, 1990, cited in Pintos and Crimi, 2010 ). Bizzel (1992) points out that the members of this community may have “social-class based or ethnically based discursive practices” (as cited in Pintos & Crimi, 2010).
Kutz (1997) considers the community college as an example of a discourse community. Kutz (1997) states that the members of the community college (. . .) “have, over a period of time, developed a common discourse that involves shared knowledge, common purposes, common relationships, similar attitudes and values (. . .) [ and have] a flow of discourse that has a particular structure and style” (as cited in Kelly-Kleese , 2001, p. #?).
The members of the discourse community may be compared to group of scientists. These professionals share “language beliefs, practices, education, goals, professional initiations (. . .) and judgments” (Kuhn, 1970; as cited in Pintos and Crimi, 2010, p. 13).

References
Kelly- Kleese, C. (2001) Community College Review. Editor’s choice: An Open Memo to Community College Faculty and Administrators, summer, 2001.
Retrieved August 2010, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HCZ/is_1_29/ai_77481463
Pintos, V., & Crimi, Y. (2010). Unit 1: Building up a community of teachers and prospective researchers.
Retrieved September 2010, from
http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=6856






Critical incident: A definition

Rahilly and Saroyan (1997) define a critical incident as any meaningful experience that teachers can encounter in their class. This experience can be used to analyze “qualitative and quantitative data about classroom teaching thinking” (as cited in Pintos, & Crimi, 2010, p. 9).
This kind of writing is being used in countries such as Spain as a strategy for teachers’ development. The incidents are studied and each participant gives his/ her opinion about the teaching topics (Gonzalez, Escartin, & Perez, 2003).
Pintos and Crimi (2010) assert that the critical incident technique should be used as a source of analysis and learning. In other words, these events promote critical thinking; therefore, they are good opportunities to introspect about the profession and get, at the same time, our colleagues’ standpoint.




References
Fernández González, J., Eloartegui Escartìn, E. & Medina Pérez, M. (2003)
Los incidentes críticos en la formación y perfeccionamiento del profesorado de secundaria de las ciencias de la naturaleza.
Revista Universitaria de Formación de Profesorado, 17- 001. Zaragoza, España: Universidad de Zaragoza. Retrieved December 2007, from
http://redalyc.uaemex.mx/redalyc/src/inicio/ArtpdfRed.jsp?iCve=27417107

Pintos, V. & Crimi, Y. (2010). Unit 2: Personal narratives in teaching. Retrieved September 2010, from
http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=7214