Competing discourses in the classroom: a Post-structuralist Discourse Analysis of girls' and boys' speech in public contexts

Abstract

This article responds to Billig's (2000) call for new forms of writing that might challenge the `linguistic orthodoxies' of the critical paradigm. It also responds to Van Dijk's appeal in this journal for more examination of the differences between Conversational Analysis and Critical Discourse Analysis. It argues that Post-structuralist Discourse Analysis (PDA)¹ offers an alternative account of spoken interactions to those of CA and CDA, in that it explores how fluctuating power relations between speakers are continuously reconstructed through competing discourses. This approach is exemplified by a comparative analysis of girls' and boys' talk in a secondary English class, which was being assessed for its effectiveness in public contexts. The study reveals a link between the more powerful discursive positioning of boys, and the extent to which they were adjudged more `effective' than girls as public speakers. However, a post-structuralist analysis shows that because girls are multiply located in discourse and not constituted as victims, they can be taught to resist certain dominant classroom practices.

Keywords

competing discourses Conversation Analysis Critical Discourse Analysis gender Post-structuralist Discourse Analysis speech in public contexts subject positions

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bakhtin, M. (1981) The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. Austin: University of Texas.

Barnes, D. , Britton, J. and Rosen, H. (1965) Language, the Learner and the School. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Barthes, R. (1993) Mythologies. London: Penguin.

Baxter, J. (2000) Teaching Girls to Speak Out: An Investigation of the Extent to Which Gender is a Pertinent Discourse for Describing and Assessing Girls' and Boys' Speech in Public Contexts, PhD thesis, The University of Reading.

Belsey, C. (1980) Critical Practice. London: Methuen.

Billig, M. (1999) `Whose Terms? Whose Ordinariness? Rhetoric and Ideology in Conversation Analysis', Discourse &Society 10: 543-58.

Billig, M. (2000) `Towards a Critique of the Critical', Discourse & Society 11: 291-2.

Bing, J.M. and Bergvall, V.L. (1998) `The Question of Questions: Beyond Binary Thinking' , in V.L. Bergvall , J.M. Bing and A.F. Freed (eds) Rethinking Language and Gender Research: Theory and Practice, pp. 495-510. Harlow : Addison Wesley Longman.

Bousted, M. (1989) `Who Talks?', English in Education 23 (3): 41-51.

10.

Coates, J. (1995) `Language, Gender and Career', in S. Mills (ed.) Language and Gender. London: Longman.

11.

Davies, B. and Banks, C. (1992) `The Gender Trap: A Feminist Post-Structuralist Analysis of Primary School Children's Talk about Gender', Curriculum Studies 24: 1-25.

12.

Derrida, J. (1976) Of Grammatology. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.

13.

Derrida, J. (1987) A Derrida Reader: Between the Blinds. Brighton: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

14.

Fairclough, N. and Wodak, R. (1997) `Critical Discourse Analysis', in T. van Dijk (ed.) Discourse as Social Interaction , pp. 258-84. London: Sage.

15.

Fishman, P. (1980) `Conversational Insecurity', in D. Cameron (ed.) The Feminist Critique of Language. London: Routledge.

16.

Foucault, M. (1972) The Archaeology of Knowledge and the Discourse of Language. New York: Pantheon .

17.

Foucault, M. (1980) Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings.1972-1977. New York: Pantheon .

18.

Francis, B. (1998) Power Plays: Children's Constructions of Gender, Power and Adult Work. Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham Books.

19.

Holmes, J. (1992) `Women's Talk in Public Contexts', Discourse & Society 3: 131-50.

20.

Jenkins, N. and Cheshire, J. (1990) `Gender Issues in the GCSE Oral Examination: Part I', Language and Education 4: 261-92.

21.

Jones, A. (1993) `Becoming a "Girl": Post-Structuralist Suggestions for Educational Research', Gender and Education 5: 157-66.

22.

Linstead, S. (1993) `From Postmodern Anthropology to Deconstructive Ethnography', Human Relations 45: 97-120.

23.

Schegloff, E.A. (1997) `Whose Text? Whose Context?', Discourse & Society 8: 165-87.

24.

Schegloff, E.A. (1999) `Schegloff 's Texts as Billig's Data: A Critical Reply', Discourse & Society 10: 558-70.

25.

Simpson, A. (1997) `It's a Game! The Construction of Gendered Subjectivity' , in R. Wodak (ed.) Gender and Discourse. London: Sage .

26.

Spender, D. (1992) Learning to Lose. London: The Women's Press.

27.

Swann, J. (1992) Girls, Boys and Language. Oxford : Blackwell.

28.

Swann, J. and Graddol, D. (1988) `Gender Inequalities in Classroom Talk', English in Education 22: 48-65.

29.

Swann, J. and Graddol, D. (1995) `Feminising Classroom Talk?', in S. Mills (ed.) Language and Gender, pp.135-48. London: Longman.

30.

Tannen, D. (1995) Talking from 9 to 5: Women and Men at Work: Language, Sex and Power. London: Longman.

31.

Walkerdine, V. (1990) Schoolgirl Fictions. London : Verso.

32.

Weedon, C. (1997) Feminist Practice and Post-Structuralist Theory . Oxford: Blackwell.

33.

Wetherell, M. (1998) `Positioning and Interpretative Repertoires: Conversation Analysis and Post-structuralism in Dialogue', Discourse & Society 9: 387-412.

34.

Wilkinson, A. , Davies, A. and Berrill, D. (1990) Spoken English Illustrated. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.