Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T21:05:08.175Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Contextualization cues in the classroom: Discourse regulation and social control functions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2008

Donald W. Dorr-Bremme
Donald W. Dorr-Bremme
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Education, University of California, Los Angeles
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Under certain circumstances, contextualization cues become powerful means of achieving social order. The social organization of a daily group meeting in an American primary grade classroom is closely examined. Participants recurrently generate certain contexts within the meeting in varying sequence from day to day. Transitions from one to another regularly occur smoothly and unremarkably as interaction unfolds. On some occasions, however, this does not happen. Order breaks down, and the teacher and students implicitly negotiate what the context will be. On the surface, these contrasting patterns seem to arise unpredictably as students choose either to “behave” or “misbehave.” That is how the teacher accounts for them. Nevertheless, a closer analysis shows that they are explainable with reference to some subtle contextualization cues that the teacher, without being consciously aware of it, routinely provides but occasionally omits at context boundaries. Students routinely act on the presence and absence of these cues, which thus become a tacit, jointly constructed means of discourse regulation and social control. Their inadvertant “omission” becomes a recurrent source of interactional trouble. (Context, contextualization cues, classroom discourse, ethnography of speaking)

Type
Articles
Information
Language in Society , Volume 19 , Issue 3 , September 1990 , pp. 379 - 402
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Apple, M. W. (1982). Education and power. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Ballantine.Google Scholar
Birdwhistell, R. L. (1970). Kinesics and context. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Bremme, D. W., & Erickson, F. (1977). Relationships among verbal and nonverbal classroom behaviors. Theory into Practice 16:153–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cazden, C. B. (1988). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cicourel, A. V. (1974). Interpretive procedures and normative rules in the negotiation of status and role. In Cicourel, A. V. (ed.), Cognitive sociology. New York: Free Press. 11–14.Google Scholar
Dorr-Bremme, D. W. (1982). Behaving and making sense: Creating social organization in the classroom. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University. (UMI #82–83, 203).Google Scholar
Erickson, F. (1975). Gatekeeping and the melting pot: Interaction in counseling encounters. Harvard Educational Review 45:44–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erickson, F. (1976). One function of proxemic shifts in face-to-face interaction. In Kendon, A., Harris, R., & Key, M. S. (eds.), The organization of behavior in face-to-face interaction. The Hague: Mouton. 175–87.Google Scholar
Erickson, F., & Shultz, J. (1981). When is a context? Some issues and methods in the analysis of social competence. In Green, J. L. & Wallat, C. (eds.), Ethnography and language in educational settings. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. 147–60.Google Scholar
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. New York: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Giroux, H. (1983). Theories of reproduction and resistance in the new sociology of education. Harvard Educational Review 53:257–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Goodenough, W. H. (1964). Cultural anthropology and linguistics. In Hymes, D. (ed.), Language in culture and society: A reader in linguistics and anthropology. New York: Harper & Row. 36–39.Google Scholar
Gumperz, J. J. (1972). The speech community. In Giglioli, P. P. (ed.), Language and social context. Harmondsworth: Penguin. 219–30.Google Scholar
Gumperz, J. J. (1976). Language, communication, and public negotiation. In Sanday, P. R. (ed.), Anthropology and the public interest. New York: Academic. 273–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gumperz, J. J. (1977). Sociocultural knowledge in conversational inferences. In Saville-Troike, M. (ed.), Linguistics and anthropology (Georgetown University Roundtable on Languages and Linguistics, 1977). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. 191–211.Google Scholar
Gumperz, J. J. (1982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gumperz, J. J., & Cook-Gumperz, J. (1982). Introduction: Language and the communication of social identity. In Gumperz, J. J. (ed.), Language and social identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1–21.Google Scholar
Hymes, D. (1974). Foundations of sociolinguistics. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Keenan, E. O., & Schieffelin, B. B. (1976). Topic as a discourse notion. In Li, C. (ed.), Subject and topic. New York: Academic. 1–67.Google Scholar
Kendon, A. (1977). Studies in the behavior of social interaction. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
McDermott, R. P. (1976). Kids make sense: An ethnographic account of the interactional management of success and failure in one first-grade classroom. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mehan, H., & Wood, H. (1975). The reality of ethnomethodology. New York: Wiley Interscience.Google Scholar
Philips, S. U. (1972). Participant structures and communicative competence: Warm Springs children in community and classroom. In Cazden, C., Hymes, D., & John, V. (eds.), Functions of language in the classroom. New York: Teachers College Press. 370–94. Reprinted by Waveland Press, 1985.Google Scholar
Philips, S. U. (1983). The invisible culture: Communication in classroom and community on the Warm Springs Indian reservation. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Pike, K. (1967). Language in relation to a unified theory of the structure of human behavior. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheflen, A. (1973). Communicational structure: Analysis of a psychotherapy transaction. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Scheflen, A. (1974). How behavior means. New York: Anchor.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. (1972). Sequencing in conversational openings. In Hymes, D. & Gumperz, J. (eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics: The ethnography of communication. New York: Holt, Rine-hart & Winston. 346–80.Google Scholar
Shultz, J., & Florio, S. (1979). Stop and freeze: The negotiation of social and physical space in a kindergarten-first grade classroom. Anthropology and Education Quarterly 10:166–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, J. McH., & Coulthard, R. M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse: The English used by teachers and pupils. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Weber, M. (1978). The nature of social activity. In Runciman, W. C. (ed.), Weber: Selections in translation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 7–32. (Originally published in M. Weber, Wertschaft und gesellschaft, Vol. 1., Tübingen, 1922. 1–14.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar