The Application of Discourse Analysis to Materials Design for Language Teaching

Ben Fenton-SmithPresented by: Mehran Daghestani

What we knowThe term ‘discourse’ was invoked to refer to text in a wider sense - as language with meaning in context. This altered focus, towards texts with communicative purposes in the social world, underlies both contemporary discourse analysis and CLT. The influence of discourse analysis on materials design is evident in many ways (to the extent that most CLT tasks are effectively discourse analysis activities).

To begin with, texts of various shapes and sizes have become objects of study. When focused on formal properties, sentences or clauses are reasonable base units of analysis, since grammar is conveniently and tightly packed there. However, from a discourse perspective, texts of all shapes and sizes have recognizable identities and purposes. Even a single, muffled grunt from a sleeping person could constitute a complete, fully comprehensible, and culturally familiar text - for example, when interpreted as someone expressing unease over a bad dream. Equally. PhD dissertations and Russian novels are recognizable discourse units.

Spoken discourse is particularly free-flowing and was neglected in language teaching, at least in comparison to its written counterpart, until developments in discourse analysis elevated its status. Burns et al.(1996)point out that in the past many teaching materials, such as contrived versions of spoken texts, were ‘based on traditional grammars of written English’(p.44).

Differences between Spoken and Written Discourse

Grammatical intricacy (speech tends to have a more complex architecture of clauses)

Lexical density (written discourse tends to have a higher ratio of content words to grammatical words)

Nominalization (the repackaging of actions/events as nouns rather than verbs is a feature of written discourse)

Explicitness (indirectness and inference are common in spoken discourse)

Contextualization (spoken and written genres vary in the extent to which a shared context is required to make sense of the text)

Spontaneity (spoken discourse has less opportunity for conscious planning)

What We Think We KnowIn some ways, however, discourse knowledge has further complicated the language teaching field. Three areas of continuing contention are grammar, authenticity and critical pedagogy.

GrammarAttempts to place CLT within a theory of ‘communicative competence’ have troubled over a suitable approach to lexicogrammar. As Canale(1983) concedes: 'It is still not clear that any current theory of grammar can be selected over others to characterize this competence nor in what ways a theory of grammar is directly relevant for second language pedagogy’

In a sense CLT has become decoupled from discourse analysis because the essential link between the internal encodings of the language and the contexts m which these resources can be appropriately realized has been neglected. Widdowson views the 'central issue of CLT' as being how learners can be made aware of ‘how this relationship works‘.

AuthenticityThe most common definition of the word ‘authentic’ by Morrow(1997):

‘ a stretch of real language, produced by a real speaker or writer for a real audience and designed to convey a real message of some sort’.

The discourse approach gels with the use of authentic materials because it makes naturally occurring language the focus of learners’ attention. As Burns et al. (1996) state: Contrived materials rarely reflect the structure of

natural spoken discourse

Contrived materials are usually based on materials writers’ unreliable intuitions about what natural discourse is

Contrived materials are often based on traditional grammars of written English

Contrived materials are often designed around target structures or functions to suit syllabi

What are some arguments and counter arguments around the concept of authenticity?

Gilmore(2007) adds that authentic materials are often preferred in the belief they are more motivating for learners, although he notes there is little empirical evidence to support this.

Several points have been raised by Widdowson (1994, 1998, 2007a) in opposition to preference for authentic materials.

First privileging the authentic can privilege native speakers since exemplars will inevitably be native speaker productions, such as newspaper reports and advertisements.

Second, non-native teachers, who for many reasons are better suited to instructing fellow non-natives, will be sublined, lacking the capability to handle nuanced, idiomatic discourse

Another of Widdowson's arguments is that discourse is authentic only in the context it originates: that is, for students, language-made-for-learning is real for their context. While this may be so, Gilmore (2007) is right to insist that we need to limit the definition of authenticity to some 'objectifiable criteria since, once we start including subjective notions such as learner authentication, any discourse can be called authentic and the term becomes meaningless' (p 98)

The last of Widdowson's objections is a common sense (but sometimes overlooked) reminder that a piece of language is not necessarily the most appropriate for learners just because it has been performed. The primary guiding principle for materials design should always be the learning purpose. Thus, believing that learners benefit from exposure to real language does not preclude the use of contrived material, and indeed most discourse analysis books contain made- up examples too.

Critical Discourse TeachingBy adding ‘critical’ to discourse analysis, the focus shifts from language to society.CDA’s main tenets (Blommaert 2005,pp. 25-6): Discourse is not benign-It is an ideological, non-

transparent ‘instrument of power’ CDA can denaturalize discourse practices through the

analysis of power relationships CDA targets topics where the intersection of language

and social structure have the most impact: for example, politics, racism, gender, economics and media

What is the CDA’s place in a language learning programme-if any?CDA does have a place in language learning. While outright advocacy is odious, excessively anodyne materials can be equally dull. Additionally, any act of materials design constitutes an ideological statement, since all materials represent a worldview of some kind. Letting students in on that secret is a good thing. The function of discourse in constructing and perpetuating social structures is beyond argument and therefore has a place in language programmes. But the teacher's role is to provide the tools for analysis - not prescribe the analysis itself.

What we need to find out

Because discourse perpetually evolves, research on new discourse forms is continually required .This entails estimation of common/significant contexts students will face through their lives and materials that equip learners with the tools (lexicogrammatical, sociolinguistic, generic, etc.) needed to operate in them.

One way we obtain information on language-in-use is by referring to large corpora, such as the British National Corpus and the Corpus of Contemporary American English. The mapping of discourses will be enhanced as corpora relevant to more discourse communities build around the world, along with the technology for using them. But although corpora have the potential to alter language policy and provide resources for materials designers, the extent to which teachers currently utilize them is questionable.

It is dangerous to conceptualize the future of materials design as a dialogue only between academics (discourse analysts) and teachers (including materials designers), as this excludes the student voice. It is possible to conflate one’s teaching philosophies

with students’ learning preferences.The meaning of the term 'discourse’ itself is continually metamorphosing, and this too has repercussions for materials design

An expanded conception of discourse could now include, for example, multimodal forms of expression. Thus Fairclough2010, p 530) argues that education programmes need to incorporate a critical awareness of discourse which includes other forms of semiosis as well as language: visual images in particular are an increasingly important feature of contemporary discourse.

The Current Match Between Published Materials

Most commercial textbooks and resource books display the influence of discourse studies. A representative example is New Headway (Soars & Soars, 2005). It is divided into 12 units, each 8-10pages long, with broadly relevant, inoffensive themes (e. g. 'No place like home’, ‘Forever friends').

On the surface these themes approximate contexts-for-use, but in fact are literary devices. As rationales for otherwise disjointed narratives, they link an array of mini-contexts and text types that have no other necessary connection. Each contrived situation or text is elaborated a variety of language activities.

Yet it is surprising how many books on discourse analysis pay little attention to its connection to language teaching .There is, arguably, an onus(responsibility) on those who convene discourse analysis courses to ask ‘In what profession will my students most likely apply the principles of discourse analysis?' The answer: language teaching.

Suggestions for Materials Development Applications

There are several ways in which discourse analysis can be conceptualized and practiced in materials design, depending on the materials writer's objectives.

1.Form/Function matching exercise. This is the most basic and familiar in commercial textbooks. An example, from New Headway (Soars & Soars, 2005) Unit 3 ("What a story!')

Showing interest and surprise. Students listen to (and fill in the gaps of) a dialogue which interlocutors express interest/surprise about personal news. They then learn how 'echo' and 'reply' questions have been used to fulfil the communicative functions and consider the role of intonation and stress in realizing the question forms. Finally, they complete further dialogues applying the question types.

2. A second type focuses on micro skills while still maintaining a broader discourse perspective. For example:

Vocabulary. Discourse fields are partly defined by the recurrence of lexical items, so learning is facilitated by specialized frequency word lists. For example, Wang et al., (2008) provide a medical academic word list to aid students of medical English.

Pronunciation. In a discourse-driven syllabus, the question is not necessarily whether a learner's pronunciation approximates native-speaker norms. Rather, it is 'Does pronunciation impede( delay, stop) communication in this context?' Materials are developed that raise awareness of this fact or target trouble spots.

3. A third approach is to focus on whole genres, typically of an academic or professional nature: Academic. Some genres are well documented, such

as the traditional five-paragraph (introduction/body/conclusion paragraphs, thesis statements, topic sentences, etc.)- more work is needed on varieties of discipline-specific texts.

Professional. English for specific/professional purposes is a growth area, with an increasing number of genres of professional writing being documented. It is more difficult to obtain or develop models of spoken interactions.

4. The 'systemic-functional' tradition (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004; Martin & Rose, 2003).For example: Clause Structure. Butt el al (2000) present an

introductory, step-by-step guide for learning how to define clause boundaries and clause types, along with texts to work on. The same process can be adapted to any group of learners using different texts that are closer to interests/experiences.

5. Raise learners’ awareness of the principles of pragmatics through text analysis tasks. For example: Politeness. Students are given a reason for needing

to contact a teacher/lecturer (e.g. to enquire about assignment specifications). They then evaluate a collection of sample emails. which vary in tone, formality, structure, etc. and decide which is the most appropriate. Finally, students compose their own example.

6. Within the critical discourse/critical pedagogy tradition, the objective of the materials designer could be to develop the learner’s capacity to critique society itself. The goal is to understand that language structures reflect and perpetuate sociocultural structures. For example: Identity. Learners examine how individuals/groups are

identified in separate accounts of the same event(e.g. a major speech by a US president, covered in western/non-western news papers), and consider what the date says about the worldviews of the sources.

7. The most readily available source of authentic (but non-native), contextually appropriate, student-centred discourse is students' own work. It is common practice in second language writing classes for students to critique their drafts and those of classmates.

An Example of Materials Development Application

There is an example of materials developed for a large scale EAP project. This was conducted at Griffith University with a student population of 43,000 of whom approximately 20 percent come from overseas. The university executive commissioned the creation of four ‘English language enhancement courses’(ELECs) to boost the oral and written English language skills of international students and to maximize their chances of succeeding in their academic studies.

The courses were aligned with the university’s major academic groupings: English Language and Communication for Business

and Commerce English Language and Communication for Health English Language and Communication for Science,

Environment, Engineering and Technology English Language and Communication for Arts and

Social Sciences

An example of the materials that resulted from this design process is a lesson on the language of academic journal articles for students of health sciences. As preparation for class, students read a model, authentic text (cited by Polit & Beck, 2010, as a good example of the discourse of nursing research):Howell, C., Rice, M., Carmon, M., Pickett Hauber, R. (2007), The relationships among anxiety, anger, and blood pressure in children'. Applied Nursing Research, 20,17-23

Task 11. Prior to coming to Griffith University, how much journal reading experience did you have?Have you had to read many journal articles in your courses so far? How easy/difficult is reading journal articles for you?2. Who reads and who writes the research contained in academic journals? Only academics?3. What are the purposes of these texts?4.Many research articles in academic journals have a predictable structure. What do you think it is? (Hint: the letters IMRaD might help you.)

Students then worked through a number of exercises that guided text analysis at multiple levels, ranging from specific focus on key lexical and grammatical features, to the rhetorical functions of, and relations between, sentences, to the organization of paragraphs/mam sections. Tasks 2-5 demonstrate how this was done for the model text's literature review section. Task 1 focuses on context, purpose, forms and

functions of the overall text.

Task 2What is the overall structure of the literature review in Howell et al. (2007)? Look at Section 2 of the article and complete the pyramid diagram by adding subsection titles. Then decide: Has the literature review been organized according to the methodology of previous studies, the chronology of previous studies or the conceptual focus of previous studies?Task 2 focuses on the overall structure and

function of one stage of the text.

review of literature

a.

c. d. e.

b.

f. g.

Task 3Read the first paragraph of the literature review.a Which sentence identifies a gap in the previous research?b Which sentence uses the identification of a knowledge gap to justify the study?

Task 3 focuses on rhetorical construction at the paragraph and sentence level.

Task 4Look at the first sentences of subsections 2.1.1, 2.1.2 and 2.1.3. What purpose do these sentences serve in the text?

Task 4 focuses on rhetorical construction at the paragraph and sentence level.

Task 5Let us look at patterns of subject + verb in the literature review. Below are two tables containing parts of sentences from that section. In some cases, verbs are missing, in other cases, subjects are missing. Look in the text to complete the missing boxes then write a short answer to 3 question below Table 9.2.

Task 5 focuses on patterns in grammar and lexis. The focus was receptive discourse skills:

understanding and deconstructing texts.

Question related to task 5(Tables 9.1 and 9.2):

Do you notice any patterns in the language? How do the two tables differ?

Objective of the Activities The main objective of the activities was to expose

students to a range of discourse features relevant to their university studies.

Key Features of the Materials

context - understanding how the text links to context but also to users, producers and the learner him/herself.

purpose - understanding the functional motivations of the overall text and of its specific parts

Staging- understanding how the text typically unfolds and the extent to which the stage are variable

lexis and grammar- understanding patterns in wording that typically occur within the text type.

authenticity- understanding what real texts are like in contexts likely to be encountered