Abstract
In Chap. 2, we explore how stories are discursively produced. We examine the links between stories, contexts and discourses, and our emphasis in this chapter is to explore how a story might be engaged with via a discourse analysis methodology.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Alvesson, M. (2002). Postmoderism and social research. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Alvesson, M., & Skoldberg, K. (2009). Reflexive methodology: New vistas for qualitative research (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
Anderson, G., & Mungal, A. S. (2015). Discourse analysis and the study of educational leadership. International Journal of Educational Management, 29(7), 807–818.
Buchbinder, D. (1994). Masculinities and identities. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.
Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminisn and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge.
Crowhurst, M., & Emslie, M. (2014). Counting queers on campus: Collecting data on queerly identifying students. Journal LGBT Youth, 11(3), 276–288. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19361653.2013.879466#.U8NcpLE098E
Ezzy, D. (2006). The research process. In M. Walter (Ed.), Social research methods: An Australian perspective (pp. 29–52). South Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press.
Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. New York: Vintage.
Freire, P. (1999). Pedagogy of the oppressed (New revised 20th Anniversary ed.). New York: Continuum.
Gee, J. P. (2004). Discourse analysis: What makes it critical? In R. Rogers (Ed.), An introduction to critical discourse analysis in education (pp. 19–50). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Halperin, D. (1997). Saint Foucault: Towards a gay hagiography. New York: Oxford University Press.
Jacobs, K. (2006). Discourse analysis. In M. Walter (Ed.), Social research methods: An Australian perspective (pp. 135–158). South Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press.
Jaworski, A., & Copeland, N. (2014). The discourse reader (3rd ed.). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Kohler Riessman, C. (2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mansfield, N. (2000). Subjectivity: Theories of the self from Freud to Haraway. New York: NYU Press.
Rasmussen, M. L. (2006). Becoming subjects: Sexualities and secondary schooling. New York and London: Routledge.
Sharp, L., & Richardson, T. (2001). Reflections on Foucauldian discourse analysis in planning and environmental policy research. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 3(3), 103–209.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Youdell, D. (2010). School trouble: Identity, power and politics in education. New York and London: Routledge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Troubling Invitation 2: Knowing From?
Troubling Invitation 2: Knowing From?
-
Where do you know X from?
-
Where do others know X from?
As we discussed in the first troubling section, narratives are engaged with and known from particular places.
Invitation: After having read this chapter and AV’s story we invite you to again think about tertiary education , sexual identity and gender identity. Jot down a series of words that capture some of your thoughts regarding what you think is significant about tertiary education , sexuality and gender identity. What do these words reveal to you regarding where you are thinking from?
Readers might now consider the following:
Are you aware that you have come to know AV’s narrative from somewhere other than the place you initially identified in Troubling Invitation 1?
Michael: I think we’ve done a lot of work in that chapter—and in this invitation section.
Mic: Yes, we’ve covered a lot of ground.
Michael: Hopefully readers are seeing that the way they frame a story might function as a limit, and by implication that if they broaden their framings, this can lend itself to possibilities, not just possibilities located in the future but new ways with story now, a now that if we multiply by time becomes the future.
Mic: I agree and thinking about knowing frames also provides opportunities and possibilities for understanding stories in different and productive ways.
Michael: Yes and I think it’s appropriate to locate this difference —these troubling sections address the reader, the reader that we hope to trouble.
Mic: And two other things come to mind for me and one is that when the reader troubles their knowing frame they might think about what they are drawing upon to do this troubling and that discourses that trouble don’t originate with them.
Michael: Troubling is an effect—and like all effects it is discursively produced.
Mic: My second point is that as well as knowing about knowing frames that people can also think critically about the politics of different ways of knowing—while we’re not using critical theory (Freire, 1999) as it would usually be applied in this book—we don’t shy away from the evaluative edge.
Queer thing on a table under the Microscope Rotation 3 (Crowhurst & Emslie, 2017)
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Crowhurst, M., Emslie, M. (2018). Discourse Analysis. In: Working Creatively with Stories and Learning Experiences. Creativity, Education and the Arts. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69754-3_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69754-3_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-69753-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-69754-3
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)