Discourse Community

Discourse Community: its Six Basic Criteria

            There are different definitions of a discourse community. Most of them coincide with the fact that it is formed by a number of expert as well as apprentice members who create and use a system of speech and writing specific to that particular community, and who have to give not only information but also feedback. Swales proposes six basic criteria that a discourse community should meet in order to be recognized as such.

One of the basic requirements proposed by Swales is that a discourse community must share goals. In her UCLA community college review, Kelly-Kleese (2004) considers college professionals to be a discourse community since they share goals such as asserting their knowledge and power in higher education, all this through discourse with a particular structure and style. Another criterion is the use of participatory mechanisms since its members must give not only information but also feedback. That is, they have to be able to communicate and negotiate meanings, and be critical of the realities represented by others (Kelly-Kleese, 2004). Furthermore, it is necessary for discourse community members to be communicated among them. “Interactions with people in one’s environment are major determinants of what is learned and how learning takes place.(…)”(Wenzlaff, T., Weseman, K.C., 2004. Teachers need Teachers to grow, p.1). In other words, the way members think and express their thoughts can be the result of their interaction over time.

            One more requirement proposed by Swales (1990) is that discourse communities must share specific genres when communicating. According to Kelly-Kleese (2004), discourse community members have developed a common discourse which possesses a particular style and structure. She exemplifies this idea in her review above mentioned, with the discourse employed by administrators - a separate discourse community within the college community in higher education – to communicate and achieve purposes. This involves the use of specialized terminology, which is the fifth requirement proposed by Swales (1990) as regards the establishment of discourse communities. Finally, the discourse group should have a high level of expertise. A writer within a discourse community can have more prestige, more possibilities of exerting power through  his/her discourse if he/she has and demonstrates a high level of knowledge in what he/she is writing about (Kelly-Kleese, 2004).

References

Hoffman-Kipp, P., Artiles, A. J., & Lopez Torres, L. (2003). Beyond reflection: teacher learning as praxis. Theory into Practice. Retrieved October 2007, fromhttp://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 October 2007, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HCZ/is_1_29/ai_77481463

Wenzlaff, T. L., & Wieseman, K. C. (2004). Teachers Need Teachers To Grow. Teacher Education Quarterly. Retrieved October 2007, fromhttp://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3960/is_200404/ai_n9349405

Kelly-Kleese, C. (2004). UCLA community college review: community college scholarship and discourse. Community College Review. Retrieved October 2007, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HCZ/is_1_32/ai_n6361541