Proofreading a paper

Title missing

After reading the material[DA1] , I found the following evidence to support Swales’s theory[DA2] ; “a discourse community is a group of people who share certain language using practises that can be seen as conventionalised” (year of publication and page number missing) by social interactions within the group and in its dealing with outsiders. It[DA3]  is “bound together primarily by its uses of language, although bounds, perhaps, by other ties as well, geographical, socio-economic, ethnic, professional, and so on[DA4] ” (source acknowledgement missing).

All human activities are culturally mediated. Culture itself mediates human actions in the sense that it is a system of shared meanings or social inheritance embodied in the artefacts of a given social structure. “A discourse community can not be isolated from other discourse communities and can not exist in the absence of a collaborative environment that supports risk-taking and reflection.” (Kelly-Kleese, 2001, p. #).[DA5] 

The discourse community must coexist with the dialectical union of reflection and actions. Reflection is understood as a process that is embedded in every day activities situated in school cultures that are social in nature, where interactions with others are an important medium in which reflection occurs. Teachers interact with colleagues in goal directed activities that require communication and exchange of ideas where reflection itself is not contained wholly in the mind of the individual but is distributed through signs systems and artefacts that are embedded in the social activity of the school community[DA6] .

As teachers participate in the practices of the community and use strategies and artefacts according to the institutional requirements of their school community, reflection itself becomes constrained or supported in particular ways. In the text Theory into Practice by Hoffman–Kipp and et al, it can be seen that discourse communities assert that teachers’ critical reflection without participation is as impossible as thought without language.[DA7] 

Paragraphs shouldn’t be justified.

References

Hoffman-Kipp, P., Artiles, A. J., & Lopez Torres, L. (2003). Beyond Reflection: Teacher Learning as Praxis. Theory into Practice. Retrieved August 2011, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0NQM/is_3_42/ai_108442653

Kelly-Kleese, C. (2001). Editor’s Choice: An Open Memo to Community College Faculty and Administrators. Community College Review. Retrieved August 2011, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HCZ/is_1_29/ai_77481463

Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic Research Settings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Comments: Careful with paragraph length. Papers should be acknowledged. Your name should be included, please. 

Some comments: .

Remember not to justify papers, they should be left aligned.

Your choice of font is not appropriate; remember to use Arial or Times New Roman size 12.

You should leave double space to signal the beginning of a new paragraph.

Remember that your paper needs a header.  Here are some instructions:  Insert a header, inside it, write a shorter version of the title of your paper.  Leave five spaces and write the page number.  In the line below, specify the assignment and draft number, and finally write your surname and name.  Everything needs to be placed in top right corner and right aligned

---

 [DA1]Do you think that this phrase is correct? There is no need to say that, you should show evidence of your reading.

 [DA2]Why did you start a new paragraph?

 [DA3]Not clear reference

 [DA4]Not academic

 [DA5]You are using an in-text citation but you have changed the author’s actual words.

 [DA6]Where did you take this information from? 

 [DA7]These are the author’s actual words, so you need to quote them or paraphrase them.

Towards a Definition of Discourse Community

Many theorists and researchers such as Wenzlaff and Wiesemand (2004), Hoffman-Kipp, Artiles and Lopez Torres (2003) and Kelly-Kleese (2001, 2004) have attempted a definition of discourse community. Namely, Brizzel (1986) explained the term as “a group of people who share certain language-using practices…[that] can be seen as conventionalised by social interactions within the group and in its dealing with outsiders ” (p.222). Swales (1990) defines some criteria in order to consider a discourse community as such:

1. Common goals
2. Participatory mechanisms
3. Information exchange
4. Community-specific genres
5. Highly specialised terminology
6. High level of expertise.

These characteristics have been supported by various authors such as Wenzlaff and Wiesemand (2004) who identified some of these criteria. In their paper, they looked at reflection and sharing views and experiences with other teachers as a way to support teacher professional development. They explained the term ‘teacher learning’ by stating that through the participation in professional communities teachers get the opportunity to work with colleagues, to carry out reflective work and to contribute to the common goals of the group. More evidence in favour of Swales’ (1990) criteria can be found in a research article by Hoffman-Kipp, Artiles and Lopez Torres (2003). They mainly emphasise the idea that reflection is the key to improve teachers’ professional development. The authors express that “teacher reflection is comprised of self awareness often achieved through introspection – both in the moment and after- through journals, scrapbooks, or other repositories of personal experience” (p.3). As it can be seen, in their work there is great support to Swales’ ideas of common goals, participatory approaches and information exchange.

More evidence can be found in two papers written by Kelly-Kleese (2001, 2004). She states that the community college should be considered as a discourse community. This can be supported by the idea that the members of the community college “ share understandings about how to communicate knowledge and achieve shared purposes, and they exhibit a flow of discourse that has a particular structure and style” (2004, p.2). She also clarifies that “the community college can be seen as adopting language that has been given particular meaning within the larger education community” (p. 2). In the same line of thought, Hoffman-Kipp, Artiles and Lopez-Torres (2004) agree on the fact that a situated learning community talks via a “social language” which is to be transformed by teachers (p.7).

All in all, it can be clearly seen that various authors support Swales’ characteristics of discourse communities. It is of paramount importance to have a clear definition of what a discourse community is and what it implies to be part of one. As teachers and professionals, it is essential to understand this concept which implies continuous professional development. From the different articles and authors mentioned, there is enough evidence that supports those features. As a consequence, it is possible to believe that teachers should promote and achieve professionalism, so as to extend knowledge in order to better perform in discourse organisations in the field of education.

References

Bisel, P (1995). Academic discourse and critical consciousness. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press


Hoffman-Kipp, P., Artiles, A. J., & Lopez Torres, L. (2003). Beyond reflection: teacher learning as praxis. Theory into Practice. Retrieved September 2011, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0NQM/is_3_42/ai_108442653


Kelly-Kleese, C. (2001). Editor’s Choice: An Open Memo to Community College Faculty and Administrators. Community College Review. Retrieved September 2011, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HCZ/is_1_29/ai_77481463


Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.


Wenzlaff, T. L., & Wieseman, K. C. (2004). Teachers Need Teachers To Grow. Teacher Education Quarterly. Retrieved September 2011, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3960/is_200404/ai_n9349405