Michaela R. Winchatz, L. Sprain, Saila Poutiainen, Evelyn Y. Ho
{"title":"“我们不会大声说出来”:一个分析语言和社交课堂中困难数据的有根据的实践理论","authors":"Michaela R. Winchatz, L. Sprain, Saila Poutiainen, Evelyn Y. Ho","doi":"10.1080/03634523.2022.2148708","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this article, we use grounded practical theory to develop a practical theory for using “difficult data” in Language and Social Interaction university classes. “Difficult data” are transcribed, audio/video-recorded data that contain language and ideologies that could be offensive, bigoted, or otherwise disturbing. We provide contextual literature for understanding the pedagogical tensions around using these data from communication pedagogy research as well as social theory for handling the language within the data. We base our analysis on various types of data from academia: an international/intercultural pedagogical speech event, student surveys, field notes, interview, and recordings of classroom instruction using difficult data. We provide a practical theory focused on techniques for managing the central problem that instructors want students to analyze the social consequences of interaction without replicating the problematic impacts of discourse that make difficult data difficult. Our theory reveals four techniques including framing the data as difficult, surveying students before the class, using already-published research data, and metacommunicating about these dilemmas. These techniques do not promise inviolability, but instructors can foster deliberative reflection/co-orientation about classroom interaction that considers whether the use of difficult data can help students develop analysis-informed praxis.","PeriodicalId":47722,"journal":{"name":"COMMUNICATION EDUCATION","volume":"72 1","pages":"147 - 167"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“We don’t say that word out loud”: a grounded practical theory for analyzing difficult data in language and social interaction classrooms\",\"authors\":\"Michaela R. Winchatz, L. Sprain, Saila Poutiainen, Evelyn Y. Ho\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/03634523.2022.2148708\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT In this article, we use grounded practical theory to develop a practical theory for using “difficult data” in Language and Social Interaction university classes. “Difficult data” are transcribed, audio/video-recorded data that contain language and ideologies that could be offensive, bigoted, or otherwise disturbing. We provide contextual literature for understanding the pedagogical tensions around using these data from communication pedagogy research as well as social theory for handling the language within the data. We base our analysis on various types of data from academia: an international/intercultural pedagogical speech event, student surveys, field notes, interview, and recordings of classroom instruction using difficult data. We provide a practical theory focused on techniques for managing the central problem that instructors want students to analyze the social consequences of interaction without replicating the problematic impacts of discourse that make difficult data difficult. Our theory reveals four techniques including framing the data as difficult, surveying students before the class, using already-published research data, and metacommunicating about these dilemmas. These techniques do not promise inviolability, but instructors can foster deliberative reflection/co-orientation about classroom interaction that considers whether the use of difficult data can help students develop analysis-informed praxis.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47722,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"COMMUNICATION EDUCATION\",\"volume\":\"72 1\",\"pages\":\"147 - 167\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"COMMUNICATION EDUCATION\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2022.2148708\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"COMMUNICATION EDUCATION","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2022.2148708","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
“We don’t say that word out loud”: a grounded practical theory for analyzing difficult data in language and social interaction classrooms
ABSTRACT In this article, we use grounded practical theory to develop a practical theory for using “difficult data” in Language and Social Interaction university classes. “Difficult data” are transcribed, audio/video-recorded data that contain language and ideologies that could be offensive, bigoted, or otherwise disturbing. We provide contextual literature for understanding the pedagogical tensions around using these data from communication pedagogy research as well as social theory for handling the language within the data. We base our analysis on various types of data from academia: an international/intercultural pedagogical speech event, student surveys, field notes, interview, and recordings of classroom instruction using difficult data. We provide a practical theory focused on techniques for managing the central problem that instructors want students to analyze the social consequences of interaction without replicating the problematic impacts of discourse that make difficult data difficult. Our theory reveals four techniques including framing the data as difficult, surveying students before the class, using already-published research data, and metacommunicating about these dilemmas. These techniques do not promise inviolability, but instructors can foster deliberative reflection/co-orientation about classroom interaction that considers whether the use of difficult data can help students develop analysis-informed praxis.
期刊介绍:
Communication Education is a peer-reviewed publication of the National Communication Association. Communication Education publishes original scholarship that advances understanding of the role of communication in the teaching and learning process in diverse spaces, structures, and interactions, within and outside of academia. Communication Education welcomes scholarship from diverse perspectives and methodologies, including quantitative, qualitative, and critical/textual approaches. All submissions must be methodologically rigorous and theoretically grounded and geared toward advancing knowledge production in communication, teaching, and learning. Scholarship in Communication Education addresses the intersections of communication, teaching, and learning related to topics and contexts that include but are not limited to: • student/teacher relationships • student/teacher characteristics • student/teacher identity construction • student learning outcomes • student engagement • diversity, inclusion, and difference • social justice • instructional technology/social media • the basic communication course • service learning • communication across the curriculum • communication instruction in business and the professions • communication instruction in civic arenas In addition to articles, the journal will publish occasional scholarly exchanges on topics related to communication, teaching, and learning, such as: • Analytic review articles: agenda-setting pieces including examinations of key questions about the field • Forum essays: themed pieces for dialogue or debate on current communication, teaching, and learning issues