Description

Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is a methodology that concerns itself with language use and power relations. The belief is that language use is not constructed within a vacuum, but in a world replete with social, cultural, and psychological frameworks. Within language, social and political relations and issues are reflected, particularly those related to topics of gender, heteronormativity, ethnicity, race, cultural difference, ideology, and identity.

Although there are different views on Critical Discourse methods, by and large, this methodology involves three prominent features. First is the idea that patterns of language and ways of speaking carry clear markers of societal power, hierarchies, and ideologies (e.g. Errington 1998; Schieffelin & Doucet 1998; Silverstein 1996; Spitulnik 1998, as cited by Blommaert & Bulcaen, 2000). Secondly, CDA continues to call into question ideas of inequities, as related to language within society (Bloome, Carter, & Christian, 2004). … differential power relationships and ideological hegemonic structures can be traced their roots to social semiotics. Chiefly, differential power relationships and ideological hegemonic structures can be traced to social semiotics. Last, but not least, such understandings give way to sometimes indirect analyses of “fundamental causes, conditions, and consequences of such issues” (van Dijk, 1993, p. 253). Therefore, as Rodgers (2011) purports, CDA includes descriptions of context but also explains and offers an insight into how discourse actually works.

Hence, Gee (2014) writes that validity for any discourse analysis is constituted by convergence (or the ways in which analysis is supported), agreement, coverage (where it can be applied and related to many sorts of data), and linguistic details (or how tightly it is tied up to the structure of language and communicative functions). CDA is one important methodological approach to contemplate when considering issues of power, voice, and discursive movements in language.Consequently, using a CDA approach would include these ideas but would look at communication in ways that might consider how a conversation and/or utterance are framed, the context of the conversation, the semantic movements within the conversation (what is included and what is omitted), the comparative microanalysis, etc. All of these lead to meaning-making between participants regarding their social standing, power relations of the literacy event itself, and implied power (Bloome et. al, 2004, p. 231). Thus, CDA is one important methodological approach to contemplate when considering issues of power, voice, and discursive movements in language.

References

Blommaert, J., & Bulcaen, C. (2000). Critical discourse analysis. Annual Review of Anthropology, 29, 447-466. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/223428

Bloome, D., Carter, S. P., & Christian, B. M. (2004). Discourse analysis and the study of classroom language and literacy events : A microethnographic perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates.

Gee, J. P. (2014). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method (4th ed.). New York: Routledge.

Rodgers, R. (2011). An introduction to critical discourse analysis in education (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

van Dijk, T. A. (1993).  Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society.  4(2), 249-283.

Key Research Books and Articles on Critical Discourse Analysis Methodology

Bloome, D., Carter, S. P., and Christian, B. M. (2004). Discourse analysis and the study of classroom language and literacy events: A microethnographic perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

This book uses a microethnographic approach to consider literacy events in the classroom. A majority of the book focuses on use of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) to understand issues of cultural action, social construction of identity, and power relations in the classroom. The authors clearly situate their positionality by stating they “reject” the notion of the existence of a “real” or “true” event (or that this is the point of using CDA). Rather, the aim of CDA is to focus on people’s reactions and actions towards one another, wherein worlds and identities are created or recreated. As Bloome et. al (2004) discuss, researcher positionality is key to understanding one’s line of inquiry, and this positionality is based on one’s “perspective,” which is “not given, nor can [it] be assumed; rather they are constructed, argued, and negotiated” (p. 235). As such, much of the work in this edited collection showcases the use of transcripts to illustrate the multiple research techniques and methods of analysis for using CDA to look at classroom literacy events. The first chapter is particularly helpful for understanding the context of literacy events and classroom language, giving specific theoretical tools for a “microethnographic approach” to analysis.

Gee, J. P. (2014). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method (4th ed.). New York: Routledge.

This book is highly accessible across disciplines and  is an excellent beginner’s tool for those who are new to learning about discourse Analysis. Gee uses a unique approach that includes a method of research and theory of language-in-use. No matter the discipline or perspective, this useful resource can support scholars from a variety of diverse backgrounds as they establish views on discourse and prepare to engage in their own discourse analysis. It is important to note that this work does not solely rest on the shoulders of Gee. In fact, there are many scholars who helped advance this work long before Gee, and subsequent researchers continue to develop and deepen the methodology. Accordingly, Gee suggests readers look at the work of M.K. Halliday, Bakhtin, Fairclough, and Bourdieu amongst others (pp. 13, 78, 182). Chapter Eleven, entitled “Sample of Discourse Analysis”, is especially helpful. In it, Gee shows an interview as sample discourse data, and contextualizes how socially-situated identities are co-constructed through language, or “distinctive social language”, a process of “norming and socialization” (pp. 172, 183). Last, but not least, the book includes a helpful glossary with detailed definitions of words such as “Figured Worlds,” “Stress,” Meaning,” etc., which are helpful to not only learning discourse analysis (and thereby CDA), but for assisting in writing literature reviews and theoretical frameworks.

Lewis-Beck, M. S., Bryman, A. and Futing Liao, T. (2004). The SAGE encyclopedia of social science research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. 

Lewis-Beck, Bryman and Futing Liao (2004) compiled a variety of methodological approaches using multiple epistemological stances to define terms in research. We used the Sage Research Publications resource to find an encyclopedia of critical discourse analysis. This resource can be used to enhance your overall understanding of crucial terms and philosophical underpinnings of discourse analysis (p. 60) and Critical Discourse Analysis (p. 48).

Rogers, R., and Mosley Wetzel, M. (2013). Designing critical literacy education through critical discourse analysis: Pedagogical and research tools for teacher-researchers. New York: Routledge.

This book is a great resource for critical literacy educators who seek to use discourse analysis in teacher education as a research and pedagogical tool. Critical literacy is outlined in depth, and critical literacy in teacher education is discussed, including reference to works of LCLE professor emeritus Jerome Harste, and Mitzi Lewison. Chapter 5 of the book, “Practicing Racial Literacy,” focuses on studies of whiteness in critical literacy as teacher educators design an anti-racist pedagogy using Critical Discourse Analysis. The chapter outlines the discourse of a book club and how teacher educators conducted their own critical analysis of the character’s actions and behaviors and engaged in discussions around their racial imaginations.

van Dijk, T. A. (1993).  Principles of critical discourse analysis.  Discourse & Society, 4(2), 249-283. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926593004002006

This seminal piece looks at the principles of Critical Discourse Analysis and positionality used within Critical Discourse Analysis. van Dijk asserts that unlike other forms of discourse analysis, “critical discourse analysts (should) take an explicit sociopolitical stance: they spell out their point of view, perspective, principles and aims, both within their discipline and within society at large” (p. 252). Contextually, looking at not only the pattern but the access to different discourses that social groups have is examined, as this relates to the “micro and macro-levels of social structure” (p. 249). As van Dijk states, we can only “make a significant and specific contribution to critical and social or political analyses if we provide an account of the role of language, language use, discourse, or communicative events in (re)production of dominance and inequality” (p. 35).
 

Recent Dissertations Using Critical Discourse Analysis Methodology

Beneke, M. R. (2017). Race and ability talk in early childhood: Critical inquiry into shared book reading practices with pre-service teachers.  Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (Order Number 1938258231)

Benharris, L. A. (2017). Exploring critical literacy with early childhood educators. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (Order Number 10269886)

Buchholz, B. A. (2015). Authoring time in the classroom: Multiage writers compose communities, relationships, and identities across timescales. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (Order Number 3714881)

Hahn, A. M. (2003). The intersection of language, power and international education: Critical discourse analysis of the international baccalaureate organization. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (Order Number 200410252)
 

Internet Resources

Sage Publications (2018). Sage research methods. Retrieved from http://methods.sagepub.com

This website contains a wealth of resources for aiding students in navigating various methods. We searched ‘Critical Discourse Analysis’ in the search engine and retrieved a list of suggested books, cases, transcripts, sample datasets, handbooks, encyclopedias, and tools. An institutional log-in is required to gain full access to materials, so the research librarian or your faculty advisor may be needed to help you access various tools.

Someone Project. (2016). Corpus-assisted (critical) discourse analysis workshop (CACDA). Retrieved from https://vimeo.com/157071895

This video is from a classroom lecture by Dr. Tieja Thomas and Dr. Vivek Venkatesh, who discuss thoughts on choosing methodologies, especially in the day and age of digital data environments, such as Twitter, hybrid social media forums, etc. This video showcases two methods: (1) CORPUS Linguistics and (2) Critical Discourse Analysis. The speakers argue for a merging of the two to use in data collection. To better understand what Critical Discourse Analysis is, start around the 25 minute mark on the video. To learn more about the speaker’s research regarding social media, go to http://projectsomeone.ca/prejudicedujour

Street, Alexander. (2018). Counseling and therapy in video. Retrieved from https://search-alexanderstreet-com.proxyiub.uits.iu.edu/

Designed for counselors and therapists, this video can also be used to apply theory to practice related to CDA. This website could be especially useful for those who do not have immediate access to a research site or do not have permission to record participants.

Critical Discourse Analysis Software

BUTechWeb. (2018). Qualitative data analysis software comparison. https://www.bu.edu/tech/services/cccs/desktop/distribution/nvivo/comparison/

If you have started gathering data, you have probably asked a colleague what software platform they are using to assess how they are storing, organizing, coding, and processing their data. Frequent names at the top of the list include nVivo, Atlas.ti, or perhaps Inscrib. There is no definitive answer for all qualitative researchers, but rather one based on your own preferences and needs. This website from Boston University’s Information and Technology services outlines some of the main features of each platform in an easy to follow chart. They also include many other less common features. According to their IS&T’s Educational Technology, Training, and Outreach, several ways to support qualitative data analysis exist. NVivo is identified as a favorite among the facilitators because of “its strong local customer support, robust feature set, large current BU user base and the promised availability of an upcoming native Mac version.” The website’s chart might allow researchers who are interested in using and/or purchasing software to better understand their different options and chose the right software for their project.