Bloome, David; Carter, Stephanie Power; Christian, Beth Morton; Madrid, Samara; Otto, Sheila; Shuart-Faris, Nora & Smith, Mandy (with Susan Goldman and Douglas Macbeth). (2008). Discourse Analysis in Classrooms: Approaches to Language and Literacy Research. Reviewed by Pat Gross, University of Scranton

Bloome, David; Carter, Stephanie Power; Christian, Beth Morton; Madrid, Samara; Otto, Sheila; Shuart-Faris, Nora & Smith, Mandy (with Susan Goldman and Douglas Macbeth). (2008). Discourse Analysis in Classrooms: Approaches to Language and Literacy Research. NY: Teachers College Press Pp. 176         ISBN 978-0807749142 Reviewed by Pat Gross University of Scranton July 10, 2009 As the sixth volume in the National Conference on Research in Language and Literacy (NCRLL) series, published by Teachers College Press, this book serves to challenge readers to move beyond isolated discourse analysis frameworks. The authors select a single classroom literacy event to demonstrate multiple possible interpretations that are shaped by four different discourse perspectives. In the Introduction, the authors explain that they set these approaches “against each other as a means for opening up the research imagination and redefining traditionally understood constructs and processes” (p. 15). The book is divided into four chapters. Chapter One describes four broad discourse analysis frameworks. Chapter Two offers definitions of discourse as a noun and as a verb. Chapter Three provides precise readings of the four different discourse analysis approaches of a single literacy event in a ninth grade language arts classroom. Chapter Four stresses the importance of building knowledge across research studies. As an area of language study, discourse analysis considers texts, written or spoken, from various perspectives of the communication producers and receivers. In education, discourse analysis views teacher thought as dialogic, tapping into socially constructed beliefs and individually developed understandings (Bahktin, 1981). Silverman (1993) noted that discourse analysis-based research studies “provide important insights into institutional talk based on pressing sociological and practical concerns” (p. 124), while Gee (1996) asserted that discourses only have meaning in relation to one another. More recently, Widdowson ( 2007) detailed an integral relationship between texts and contexts, arguing that “processing texts depends upon shared knowledge, relating the text to the context to “bring about reference, force, and effect” (p. 77). In this book, the authors explain that the working consensus in educational field-based discourse analysis research must be made visible because literacy learning is shaped by the dynamic and changing social relationships, language and history of any given context. Chapter One provides detailed descriptions of four broad discourse analysis frameworks. The first addresses linguistics in social sciences, attending to the complexities and subtleties of how people use language to act and react. The second features local events and their relationship to broader cultural and social processes (i.e. micro and macro level approaches) to consider a literacy event in relation to daily personal, institutional, cultural, and knowledge interactions. The third involves the importance of social and historical contexts to include the socially constructed relationships among people, culture, institutions, and policies. The fourth focuses on recognizing power relations inherent in discourse processes, imbedded in situatedness, skills and opportunity. These distinctions serve to raise awareness that researchers themselves operate from contexts that shape the studies they undertake. Chapter Two explains the breadth of possible definitions, and the consequences within each, for discourse analysis. The authors assert that when discourse is used as a verb, it “foregrounds how people act on and interact with the complex, confounded, indeterminate, and meandering meanings, significances, and consequences of an event, social practice, or text” (p. 43). They argue that when discourse is used as a verb, questions surface regarding who or what discourses or is discoursed. In contrast, the authors propose that discourse as a noun encompasses different theoretical assumptions regarding contexts of production and contexts of consumption in light of creative language, structural and shared knowledge, identity issues and social situations. They caution that “discourse is a system of concepts, ideas, and social practices, an ideology that appears natural, obvious, and without question” (p. 55), raising concerns regarding hegemonic power that privileges some and dismisses others. These well-defined distinctions remind researchers to be ever vigilant in their approaches to discourse analysis. Chapter Three applies the variations discussed earlier in the book. Using a single literacy event, discussion about the impact and nature of people’s names, as sparked by an excerpt from Sandra Cisneros’ The House on Mango Street, four researchers provide four distinct lenses - interactional sociolinguistic, sociocognitive, ethnomethodological, or black feminist perspectives. The authors demonstrate how the resulting analyses “contextualize the target lesson segment differently, and they focus on different aspects of the target segment (highlighting the fact that classroom events are not monolithic experiences” (p. 72). Data analysis, theory building, and audience conceptualization in each example reflect the framework employed. This chapter proffers a convincing argument for researchers to stretch beyond single discourse analysis frameworks in order to develop more comprehensive understandings of any single literacy event study. Chapter Four stresses the authors’ contention that researchers need to build knowledge across research studies, introducing the concept of “laminating discourse analyses of language and literacy events in classrooms” (p. 128) as “social construction and rhetorical processes” (p. 129). They advocate that each study retain its quality but then add to its value by relating it to multiple studies. Four kinds of relationships among research studies are identified as complementary, parallel, null, or antagonistic. Narratives are divided into those that are assimilating (subscribing to dominant views) or adapting (creating a new narrative beyond extant analyses). Overall, this book serves as a helpful resource to assist researchers in making their individual lenses more explicit and transparent to themselves and others. Acknowledging the discourse analysis frameworks in use enables researchers and readers of studies to establish a clear perspective of the primary constructs being presented and of the possible relationships with other frameworks and research studies that could enhance understanding. References Bahktin, M.M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays by M.M. Bahktin. Michael Holquist, Editor. Austin: University of Texas Press. Gee, J. P. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discussions. London: Taylor & Francis. Silverman, D. (1993). Interpreting qualitative data; methods for analyzing talk, text, and interaction. London: SAGE Publications. Widdowson, H.G. (2007). Discourse analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. About the Reviewer Patricia A. Gross, Ed.D., is an associate professor of Education at the University of Scranton. A qualitative researcher, she has studied literacy coaching on the secondary level for the last few years, presenting findings at the National Reading Conference and the American Educational research Association annual conferences.