Reflections on the Book about Teachers’ Identity
杨丽
Rationale and significance of the present study
The purpose of the present study is to explore how teachers’ identity is constructed in specific classroom teaching context through linguistic choices. The choice of the present topic is motivated by the following considerations:
Firstly, identity has undergone great changes from essentialism to constructivism which points out identity is dynamic and multi-faceted, identity in professional context deserves our attention and exploration. But a great number of identity studies focus on written discourse, while identity studies on spoken discourse are still far from desirable. In addition, it is sensed that there is a considerable gap between identity studies abroad and in China.
Secondly, teachers’ identity is also constructed through teachers’ discourse in classroom, however, most scholars abroad who are devoting to studying teachers’ identity are mainly concerned with the narrative construction of teachers’ identity. Few scholars have set foot in specific classroom discourse, and with insufficient linguistic recourses, their research is not persuasive enough.
Thirdly, since teachers’ identity is dynamic, complex, and changing from situation to situation, teachers should be aware of their own identities and position themselves in accordance with the professional context. In China, middle school English classrooms are the very place for the large number of English learners to study. So teachers’ discourse in classroom teaching is of vital importance, which is closely related to the construction of teachers’ identity .
Thus the author aims to get a full understanding of the discursive construction of teachers’ identity in middle English classroom in particular, with the aim to arouse teachers’ awareness of their identities.
In addition, the present study is expected to have both practical ad theoretical significance.
It first gives some guidance to English teachers in China concerning their professional identity. As we know, with such a large population of English learners in China, classroom teaching is of vital importance. Thus understanding teachers’ identity seems especially important. Against the background of curriculum reform in recent years, English teachers are facing great challenges relating to their own professional identity. However, in China, English teachers are still very confused about their own identity with such concerns as “who am I”, “how can I do” and “why should I do”. Teachers are wondering how to behave properly to maintain their identity as an authority, the teacher in traditional sense, while still keeping close relationship with students. Therefore, this study strives to guide the teachers to have a better understanding of themselves and their classroom teaching, thus leading a healthy career development.
Theoretically, this study contributes to fill in the theoretical gap in China. With empirical analysis of sufficient naturally occurring teachers’ discourse, the study is persuasive enough to have a comprehensive understanding of teachers’ identity. Consequently, the result is expected to support that identity can be discursively constructed and negotiated in the interactive classroom teaching context. The concrete realization of the sub-identities through categorized linguistic resources also adds some insights to the present theory on teachers’ identity. What’s more, the discussion of the interplay between the two sub-identities fully reflects the dynamic and multifaceted features of teachers’ identity which may be applied to identity theories in other professional contexts as well.
Literature review
1. Overview
In this chapter, we will briefly review previous studies on perspectives of the interaction between the teacher and students, on identity and teachers’ identity. Comments are attached to those previous studies which can be served as a point of departure for the present study and highlight the importance of the present research.
2. A brief overview of different perspectives on language classroom interaction
Since classroom is an institutional setting where face-to-face conversation between the teacher and students take place, teachers’ identity is discursively constructed through interaction with students in the classroom teaching context. Thus it’s necessary for us to have a brief overview of those previous studies on language classroom interaction which are carried out from different perspectives, including discourse analysis approaches, communicative approach, ethnography, and conversation analysis institutional-discourse perspective.
2.1 Discourse analysis approaches
Levinson (1983:286) puts forward two major approaches to the study of naturally occurring interaction: DA and CA. Many previous approaches to L2 classroom interaction are based on a DA approach. However, Seedhouse (2004: 56) holds that DA approach is actually used in practice as one integral component of CA and should be integrated into a CA approach. According to Chaudron (1988:14), DA uses principles and methodology which is typical of linguistics to analyze classroom discourse in structural-functional linguistic terms.
The most significant finding relating to the teaching profession which takes this DA approach by Sinclair and Coulthard (1975) is probably the three-part sequence in classroom interaction. This three-part sequence is well known as teacher initiation, learner response, and teacher follow-up or feedback. I also refer to it as the IRF/IRE cycle as others do in this study. On the other hand, the DA approach has been subject to considerable criticism, especially by Levinson (1983:289) who believes that DA models are fundamentally inappropriate to the subject matter. Studies carried out by Seedhouse (2004:63) mention that the point missed in the DA approach is that IRF/IRE cycles perform different interactional and pedagogical work according to the context in which they are operating.
In a word, while the DA approach contribute a lot to the classroom interaction, it is also subject to many criticism, as is shown in what Seedhouse (2004:65) says: “DA tends to conceal the complexity of the interaction and homogenize it, whereas CA tends to reveal its complexity, fluidity, and dynamism”.
2.2 The communicative approach
Seedhouse (2004:66-67) in his study sees communicative approach as an example of a pedagogical approach to L2 classroom interaction and considers this approach to have adopted a monolithic and static perspective on classroom interaction. Nunan (1987) analyzed five exemplary communicative language lessons and found that they were traditional patterns of classroom interaction rather than genuine interaction. Moreover, Nunan (1987:137) also provides a characterization of genuine communication which underlines that in genuine communication, decisions about who says what to whom and when are up for grabs.
Then Seedhouse (2004:69-70) argues that in theory, it is not possible for L2 teachers to replicate conversation in the L2 classroom as part of a lesson and he also holds that only when the learners regard the teacher as a fellow conversationalist of equal status rather than as a teacher can the L2 lesson become the same as conversation. In other words, language classroom, the original institutional setting, becomes noninstitutional, or just as Van Lier( 1988b:267) says, the L2 lesson would therefore have to cease to be an L2 lesson in order to replicate conversation.
In conclusion, the DA and communicative perspectives are just at opposite ends of a methodological continuum. While DA is a purely interactional perspective, the communicative perspective is a purely pedagogical one on L2 classroom interaction. And both of them are operating in invariant perspectives without considering different varieties of L2 classroom interaction.
2.3 Ethnography
Ethnography has been another popular approach to the study of L2 classroom interaction. An initial CA analysis can indicate how participants produce context for their interaction, which can be followed by an ethnographic analysis on institutional and cultural constrains.
Seedhouse (2004:89) agrees with Silverman (1999) that the two approaches may be applied to the same instances of talk; the relationship should be complementary and sequential. For Seedhouse(2004:89), the details of the interaction are analyzed through which interactants can reveal whether they are prone to particular cultural or social issues. What’s more, many scholars have suggested combining the two approaches, notably Moerman’s (1988,1996) culturally contexted CA. Another influential study by Arminen (2000), who argues that conversation analysts inevitably make use of ethnographic or expert knowledge and indeed that their analysis depend on such knowledge.
In a word, it is helpful for conversation analysts to make use of details of the interaction or ethnographic knowledge to analyze the issues on hand.
2.4 A conversation analysis institutional-discourse perspective
Studies of institutional interaction (e.g., Drew & Heritage, 1992a) have focused on the organization of the interaction which is related to the institutional goal and its difference from ordinary conversation. Heritage (1997) also proposes six points to recognize the institutionality of interaction and four different kinds of asymmetries in institutional discourse. Simply speaking, institutional discourse displays goal orientation and rational organization.
CA institutional-discourse methodology not only relates to the overall organization of the interaction, but also individual interactional devices to the core institutional goal (Seedhouse, 2004: 96). Although all varieties of institutional discourse have many common features, they have a unique institutional goal and a peculiar organization of the interaction in accordance with that goal. Take the L2 classroom for example, the organization of the interaction between teachers and students is rational and suited to its institutional aim. Just as Drew & Heritage (1992b:22) put it, “ participants in institutional interaction orient to some core goal, task or identity conventionally associated with the institution in question”.
In this study, the organization and details of the interaction in L2 classroom are also considered to reflect the unequal power relationship between the teacher and students.
3. Previous studies on identity
In the past decades, studies on identity have witnessed enormous increase/growth in such areas/disciplines as anthropology, linguistics, psychology and sociology. Since 1920s, Identity study has undergone great changes from essentialism to constructivism. Constructuralists hold that identity is not stable, but dynamic, multi-faceted, and discursively constructive in specific context, which is against the traditional views of identity as fixed and essential aspect of a person(e.g., Erikson, 1973; Ana & Parodi, 1998:29).
3.1 Concepts and classification of identity
As a complex and fuzzy concept in academia, identity is rich with meaning. And scholars define it from different perspectives.
From the perspective of psychology, Erikson (1973) defines identity as an essential and stable aspect of a person. While in this study, identity is viewed as in line with the interpretation of constructivism. There are various definitions which shed some light on the present study on identity understanding.
Gee(2001:99) regards identity as suggesting a ‘kind of person’ in a particular context and one may have multiple forms of one ‘core identity’. Mathews (2000, p.17) defines identity as “how the self conceives of itself, and labels itself”. Han (2010) asserts that “Identity is constantly on the move, changing from situation to situation, from encounter to encounter and is constructed in the process of linguistic communication in specific social context”. Wenger(1998) defines identity formation as a dual process, involving both identification and negotiability within a community of practice.
Those definitions mainly captures the dynamic and multifaceted nature of identity which is of fundamental importance to the understanding of identity. In a word, identity with multiple forms operating across different contexts can be discursively constructed and negotiated through linguistic choices in specific social context.
Identity is complex and multifaceted. Many scholars abroad have made a systematic categorization of identity from various perspective. I just mention here some influential categories of identity.
Zimmerman (1998) put forward three aspects of identity including discourse identity, situated identity, and transportable identity. Discourse identity refers to the identity recognized as the participants of the ongoing talking activities, such as questioner, story-teller, listener,etc. Situated identity relates to the identity existing in particular situations and in the classroom context, the relevant situated identities are teacher and student. The last one, transportable identity, means that the identity is combined with those features in the daily routines.
Another influential classification of identity is put forward by Gee(2001)who identifies four aspects of identity: nature-identity, institution identity, discourse identity, and affinity-identity. In conclusion, the emphasis of those classifications is put on the multifaceted nature of identity and the possible categorization of the sub-identities can be understood in many ways.
3.2 Identity study in written and spoken discourse
Language plays an fundamental role in the construction of identity. The correlation between language and identity has attracted great interest from scholars. There are many influential studies on the important part language plays in identity construction and maintenance. In the field of education specifically, teachers’ identity is also discursively constructive in specific professional context.
Danielewicz(2001:11) holds that ‘identities are produced through participation in discourse, which means that identity is displayed through language.
Gunn (2007:131) also concludes that ‘Identities are discursively and narratively constructed by the way people relate to the world and to other people, the choices they make, their practices, their use of language and the narratives they hear and tell about themselves and others’.
. De Fina et al (2006) emphasizes that linguistic choices play a fundamental role in the negotiation and construction of identities. Similar conclusions can be seen in the study of doctor-patient interaction by Ruth Wodak (1997) who argues that discourse is constitutive in two levels: one is in the level of sustaining and reproducing social status quo while on the other hand, discourse can help to transform it.
In the remainder of this part, some famous studies on identity construction through language, written or spoken, will be briefly demonstrated as some will be analyzed in detail in the next chapter.
Identity study has witnessed fruitful achievements in written discourse (Han, 2010; Hoey, 1988, 2001; Hyland, 2000, 2004, 2005a, 2005b; Myers, 1999; Thompson & Thetela, 1995; Thompson, 1997, 2001; Zheng, 2011). Among them, Hyland(2005) believes that there’s an interaction between the writer and the target reader, and the writers construct writer identity as well as reader identity through a series of discourse choices to achieve his/her interactive purposes. Similarly, the present study explores how teachers’ identity can be discursively constructed through interaction with students in classroom teaching. Thus, Hyland(2005)’s analytical framework of academic interaction can be applied to the present study to a great extent.
Although much fewer studies are concerned with spoken discourse, Fairclough(1992) put forward analytical properties of texts: interactional control, modality, politeness, and ethos. And he studied the doctor-patient relationship in medical interviews, reflecting the power relationship between doctors and patients which is, to some extent, similar to the relationship between teachers and students. From those previous studies on identity, we can see that few deal with identities in spoken discourse, if there are any, they mostly focus on public discourse, medical discourse, etc.
4. Previous study on teachers’ identity
In the past 10 years, teachers’ identity study has aroused increasing interest from scholars home (e.g. He, 2010; Li, 2008; Xu, 2010; Ying, 2010) and abroad (e.g. Anna De Fina, 2006:213-232; Beauchamp & Thomas, 2009:175-189; Coldron & Smith, 1999:711-726; Franziska Vogt, 2002:251-264; Gunn Elisabeth Soreide?, 2006:527-547; Gunn Elisabeth Soreide, 2007:129-146; Keith Richards, 2006; Trent & Gao, 2009:253-270) .
When it comes to the definition of teachers’ identity, simply speaking, it refers to teachers’ self notion or self image. Knowles (1992) and Nias (1989) define teachers’ identity as teachers’ concepts or images of self. Wenger (1998) defines identity formation as a dual practice including identification and negotiability in specific context. Varghese et al. (2005) argue that when understanding language teachers we should know who they are which consists of such aspects as professional, cultural, political, and individual identities. Li(2008) holds that identity is a personal understanding of ‘who I am’, ‘why I belong to the specific group’ and teachers’ identity is a continuous, independent, and active process of construction. Coldron & Smith（1999）concludes that the term ‘ professional identity’ is not interpreted as fixed or unitary and (Kelchtermans and Vandenberghe 1994:47) see the notion of self as a complex and dynamic process which develops over time in relation to other people and the context .
We can see that the dynamic nature of teachers’ identity and the interactive context in which teachers’ identity develop over time are fundamental for us to understand teachers’ identity.Since identity is dynamic, multifaceted, and shifting process of construction and reconstruction，teachers’ identity is also characterized by those features and includes many sub-identities that harmonize to some extent.
Thus, In this study, teachers’ identity is defined as ‘ teachers’ self conception of their own professional identity which is constructed through the interaction with students within specific classroom teaching context’ .
Systematic classification of identity can be seen in the study of Gunn Elisabeth Soreide(2007:133) who concludes 21 subject positions and proposes five broad categories of teacher identity such as socially oriented and cooperation-oriented teacher, the knowing teacher, the self-assured, flexible and innovative teacher, etc. which are based on his analysis of policy documents about teachers. Gunn(2006) concluded four types of teachers’ identity: the caring and kind teacher, the creative and innovative teacher, the professional teacher, the typical teacher. Gunn’s classification sheds some light on the classification of the two sub-identities in this study. Taking the power relationship between teachers and students into consideration, there are mainly two sub-identities existing in teachers’ identity in classroom teaching, that is, teacher as authority and teacher as friend.
Scholars at abroad mainly focus on the narrative construction of teachers’ identity(Rodgers& Scott,2008; Van Veen& Sleegers, 2006; Zembylas, 2003). In De Fina, Schiffrin and Bamberg(2006:213-232)’s Discourse and Identity, they employed bottom-up analytical approach to explore the discursive construction of teacher identities in a research interview.
Studies on teachers’ identity are rich with a great variety of understandings on its definition, its features, and its classifications from various perspectives. However, those studies on teachers’ identity mainly focus on teachers’ narration, the exploration of teachers’ identity by way of interviews, or just stay in the theoretical level and simple description. There are few on identity in specific classroom discourse and the insufficient corpus is not persuasive and representative. Thus in the present study, the corpus as sufficient language resources is used.
