Discourse Analysis
10.2.13
Conversation Analysis –
Hutchby and Wooffit – Chapter 4-6
“The conversation
analytic mentality involves more a cast of mind, or a way of seeing, that a
static and prescriptive set of instructions which analysts bring to bear on the
data” (p. 89).
I like that there is
some structure to the analysis, but not a lock step “mandate” for how the
analysis is done. I think the same can
be said for RR teaching and teacher leadering.
There is a “way of seeing” and “being” that is not prescriptive, but is
analytical and similar from RR Teacher and Teacher Leader. This way of seeing and being is cultivated
over time. I am thinking that CA might
be similar.
Three procedures/stages
of Conversation Analysis
1)
Locate potentially interesting
phenomenon in the data – ‘unmotivated looking’
2)
Describe one of the instances (collect
many) formally and concentrate on the sequential context
3)
Return to the data to see if other
instances can be described in terms of this account.
The purpose of this
work is to formally describe large amounts of the data which can explain all
the examples which have been collected. This quote sums it up… “In other words,
conversation analysts aim to be able to describe the specific features of
individual cases, and at the same time bring those specifics under the umbrella
of a generalized account of some sequential pattern or interactional device”
(p.90).
As I have been
re-transcribing my video, I have been thinking of these “interactional devices”
and potentially interesting examples. A
few ideas have come to me:
1)
I use commands a lot when I talk to “Jimmy”. This might be interesting to look at.
2)
He also says, “Let’s see” or “Hmm” a
lot, and I feel like this is buying him some time. He is thinking, working, and is seeming to
communicate that to let me know he is doing some work.
3)
We also laugh a great deal. Sometimes, the laughter is around
misunderstandings, and other times, I am just reacting to something he does.
4)
I am not sure where this fits, but his
language is really interesting. Rarely
does he speak in complete and grammatically correct sentences. He speaks using individual words or short phrases
that are not standard English. I noticed
that I almost instantly implant the “correct” grammatical phrase he is
attempting. (This is definitely a
practice in Reading Recovery, but I am wondering if this is something that can
be examined through a DA lens too).
Page 92 outlines three
important principles of the CA method
1)
The insistence on rigorous, formal
descriptions
2)
The attempt to maximize the generalizability
of analytic accounts
3)
The serious attention given to ‘deviant’
cases
This would be a good
overall question to be asking of our interactions…
“What interactional
business is being mediated or accomplished through the use of a sequential
pattern or device; and how do participants demonstrate their active orientation
to this business?”(p. 98). “Jimmy” and
I clearly have a routine in our interactions.
It will be interesting to see how an utterance is responded to in the
next turn – so, I can look at how Jimmy responds to what I ask, or vice versa.
On page 106, the authors
say, “In other words, it is absolutely necessary that conversation analysts are
either members of or have a sound understanding of, the culture from which
their data have been drawn.” I agree
that this would be very important in order to make sense of the context. However, so much of what I know about RR is “invisible”
to me. It might be difficult for me to
do “unmotivated looking” because I have been looking in a motivated way through
a Reading Recovery lens for a very long time.
I also noticed a great
deal of overlapping talk in my video with Jimmy. Sometimes, I have him read with me or say something
with me in order to practice a particular language structure etc. Other times, he jumps in to read with me or
do something with me. I direct some of
the instances, and he joins in with others.
The talk in RR is
most definitely ‘institutional’. There
is similarity between teachers and lessons across varying context…there are
certain roles and ways of interacting that all RR lessons hold in common.
I think that your interactions with Jimmy will be an interesting "single case" to look at in detail just to see what is going on. Then later you could look for patterns across larger collections. At least that is how I am envisioning everyone going forward with their data from here. Then with Gee of course we will have additional analytic approaches to try.
ReplyDelete