"Dude, Where’s My Discourse?"
As part of a phonics game, a student sees the letters D-U-D-E on a flash card and pronounces the word "dude." On the way into class, a student asks, "Hey dude, how you doing?" While discussing a book in class, a student says, "The train dudes — the train people wear..."
The assorted potential functions of the word "dude" have often been noted in popular culture, but the instances described above are not simple cases of the same word being used in three different ways. Though they all occur in the same general context — school — each use of the word takes place in a unique and complicated configuration of expectations, identities, and judgments.
Consider how a teacher might respond to each usage. Correctly reading the word would certainly earn a teacher’s approval, but would a teacher object to a student referring to another student as "dude"? Does it matter if it occurs inside or outside the classroom? What if the student calls the teacher "dude"? Should a teacher call attention to the student self-correcting from "train dudes" to "train people"?
Penn GSE Professor Betsy Rymes suggests that close examination of classroom talk like this can improve mutual understanding between teachers and students, leading to improvements in academic achievement. "Patterns in how teachers and students take turns at talk, introduce topics, use multiple languages and language varieties, or tell stories in different ways," Rymes says, "can illustrate how misunderstandings between different social groups in classrooms evolve — and how they can be overcome."
Her recent book Classroom Discourse Analysis: A Tool for Critical Reflection provides teachers with the tools to analyze talk in their own classrooms, including instructions for videotaping and transcribing classroom discourse. Such self-examination helps teachers recognize the localized patterns particular to their classrooms so that they can try to maximize learning.
For example, a teacher might have the impression that certain students in a class dominate discussion while others are shy to contribute. This might lead the teacher to make an assumption that the quiet students are not interested in or are not knowledgeable about the subject. But analysis of classroom discourse might show other things: the teacher might ask questions and expect answers in a way that is confusing or discouraging to some students, the quiet students might be new learners of English uncomfortable with speaking in class, body language or other non-verbal signals could show that the quiet students do understand the material, and so on.
Rymes encourages teachers to consider that "everything said in a classroom is influenced by contexts beyond the classroom." What's more, by adjusting the way they ask questions, respond to unexpected answers or interruptions or narratives, establish rules for participating in discussion, or deliver praise, teachers can change the learning environment drastically.
Self-analysis leads to better teaching, Rymes contends, so each chapter invites readers to engage the material directly through discussion questions, activities, and suggestions for further reading. When teachers take a zoomed-out view and question the assumptions underlying the way people interact in the classroom, they can turn perceived deficits — like the "improper" use of the word "dude" — into opportunities to improve learning.