- Email: [email protected]
Discourse in mba Seminars: Towards a Description for Pedagogical Purposes
\
Pergamon
English for Specific Purposes, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 63–80, 1999 © 1998 The American University. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd All rights reserved. Printed in Great Britain 0889-4906/98 $19.00+0.00
PII: S0889-4906(97)00049-5
Discourse in MBA Seminars: Towards a Description for Pedagogical Purposes Helen Basturkmen Abstract—The subject of this paper is a data-driven description of studentled discussion in seminars on a MBA course. Qualitative description of the language of discussion is needed on which to base realistic pedagogical materials for EAP. Using evidence from a small corpus of academic seminars, data is presented to illustrate some language features in student-led talk. These features are then considered in relation to syllabus content. The fruitfulness of a discourse-based approach to both the description of formal spoken language genres and to classroom methodology is discussed. © 1998 The American University. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved
1. Introduction Two major modes of instruction in Higher Education are lectures and seminar/discussion type classes. These modes of instruction are practised widely in universities both in English-speaking countries and in many developing countries which use English as the medium of instruction and base instructional practice on Western models. Although lectures often predominate at the lower levels of instruction, as students progress, classes often become smaller and discussion in them more widespread. In education generally, the view of students as receivers of knowledge from instructors has been replaced by a view of learners needing to be actively involved in the learning process (Wilson, 1989: 49). This perception is reflected in a range of modes of instruction requiring students to take on a more active and interactive role (see Curzon (1990) on various modes of instruction). Lectures themselves often involve or are followed by question and answer periods similar to discussion in seminars, if shorter in length. The ability to participate in and follow academic discussions can be critical for students. However, such participation can appear particularly daunting to non-native speakers. Mauranen (1994) finds that Finnish exchange students in the UK consider their greatest difficulty to be participation in seminar discussions. — –––––––––––––––––––– Address correspondence to: Helen Basturkmen, The University of Auckland, Inst. of Language Teaching & Learning, The Faculty of Arts, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand.
63
64
H. Basturkmen
Jordan (1989) reports on research in the Middle East showing students’ perception of speaking as their most pressing need. Research in the UK (Furneaux et al., 1991) reveals the high anxiety level of non-native speaker students in regard to their performance in seminars and discussion classes. Carter and McCarthy (1995) argue that genre-sensitive descriptions of spoken language are needed. As yet the discourse of only a few academic spoken genres has been explored: lectures (Flowerdew, 1992; Baka, 1989), research presentations (Dubois, 1980; Weissberg, 1993) and classroom interaction (Sinclair and Coulthard, 1985, 1992). In regard to academic discussion, such as question and answer periods following presentations or tutorials, research interest has been focused mainly on social aspects of interaction, such as participant expectations (Mauranen, 1994), identity needs (Tracy and Naughton, 1994), the relative dominance of sub-groups (Bashiruddin et al., 1990), differences between native and non-native speaker production (Lynch and Anderson, 1991, Furneaux et al., 1991), and differences in native and non-native speaker production specifically in business studies courses (Westerfield, 1989; Micheau and Billmyer, 1987). Language description of the discourse of discussion classes per se has been less extensive although some research has been done in this area (Basturkmen, 1995; Tapper, 1992). In contrast, research into discourse features of written genres has been more extensive and identification of patterns and features in specific academic and professional genres has fed into pedagogy in recent years (e.g. Swales, 1990; Bhatia, 1993). Swales (1990), for instance, demonstrates patterns of moves in genres such as dissertations, theses and prospectus articles. Such identification and description is important for the specification of syllabus content in English for Specific Purposes (ESP) and EAP (English for Academic Purposes) since curriculum designers may wish to target the specific genres and communicative skills learners are likely to encounter in their work or study. Language descriptions of spoken academic genres has been limited, and published pedagogical materials on academic speaking can be of questionable value. Lynch and Anderson (1991) point out that available materials may offer unrealistic language description, while English and Ohta (1995) argue that some materials give a false impression of the realities of the target situation. Jordan notes the lack of basic description: ‘‘Coupled with the need for . . . materials (specific material for discussion skills), is the need for data on the content of seminars, both in procedures followed and language used.’’ (1989:155)
An initial survey (Basturkmen, 1995) of published materials found the presentation of language of academic discussion to be mainly limited to lists of functional categories, such as disagreement and making contributory statements, and ‘‘useful phrases’’ for each category in the form of entry
Discourse in MBA Seminars
65
prefaces such as I disagree or I didn't understand your point about. However, in light of my initial observations of seminars and tutorials, the limitations of such language description were clear. Observation showed that turns in academic discussion could be lengthy and complex and thus the textbooks’ focus on turn entry prefaces offered a very limited insight. In addition, observation showed a tendency for turns in discussion to be full and indirect rather than short and transparent in meaning as implied by the textbooks surveyed. For teaching purposes, the presentation of chunks of language rather than fragments is needed. There is a need to show not only what the components of academic discussion are but also how these components are typically strung together. In order to present such language, genre-specific, data-driven descriptions of academic and professional spoken genres are needed. Without description, teaching spoken language in ESP and EAP can veer towards a ‘‘slinging the mud on the wall’’ approach in which the specification of language content (what language to target) plays a minor role compared to activities for how to get learners to speak. The aim of this paper is to present a description of discourse in the specific genre of MBA seminar classes. Such description can be of value to EAP course designers in defining syllabus objectives for business studies courses. Moreover, course designers in other social studies areas and disciplines may find the description useful (although they would need to observe discussion classes in their own environments to check for the degree of convergence of categories and features). The objective is to offer a partial view of what the language content of an academic speaking syllabus might comprise. Three aspects of discourse are described: acts for initiating discussion, components of turns, and discourse signalling devices.
2. Procedure The present study is part of a wider investigation into discourse in university seminars, specifically those from an MBA course. The investigation centered on both interactional structures, and features and strategies of discourse. A central feature of seminar/discussion classes is the expectation and desire for student-initiated interaction, and the study focused on this rather than instructor-led interaction. The general procedure of the study involved the collection of a corpus of authentic spoken texts of seminars and academic discussions. This was followed by transcription of the texts, and the identification and quantification of patterns and features. Interactive sequences set up by unsolicited student moves were identified using the approach to analysis of Sinclair and Coulthard (1975, 1992). In the system of analysis, a conversational exchange is made up minimally of two moves (one by each of two speakers). Moves comprise acts, the smallest discoursal elements. Moves comprise minimally one head act (an elicit, inform, or directive), the significant element driving the talk. Moves
66
H. Basturkmen
often, however, contain other supportive acts. In this paper, the term turn is also used to refer to slots in the exchange structure. The definition of turn is taken from Edmondson (1981:7): the opportunity taken by an interactant to take the position of speaker at any one point in the talk and what is done during the time the interactant continuously holds that position. A corpus of approximately 30,000 words in length was collected from video recordings of naturally occurring seminar and discussion classes forming part of the MBA course at Aston University, UK. These classes were designed for students in the distance learning program of the MBA program. Approximately one quarter of the students in the in-house MBA program have a non-English-speaking educational background. Eighteen texts of largely complete class sessions were selected to represent a range of seminar and discussion type classes given by various instructors and in a range of course modules. The following symbols are used in the transcription of texts: S1, S2, etc. P1, P2, etc. I
" +
The beginning of turns of different students The beginning of turns by different presenters The beginning of a turn by an instructor Overlap where a speaker takes a turn from another before completion and marks where overlap begins Turns that started simultaneously Noticeable pause
3. Findings In this section of the paper, data are presented concerning: , acts used by students to initiate discussion; , components of turns initiating discussion; , devices used to signal discourse topic and activity. 3.1. Acts Used to Initiate Talk A categorization of students’ initiating acts is shown in Table 1. The two main acts used by students to initiate discussion were identified as ‘‘elicits’’, i.e. acts which set up the expectation of a response from another interactant. 3.1.1. Elicits of information and elicits of confirmation. Not surprisingly, student-led discussion was seen at core to be about the exchange of information and ideas. It was observed to be motivated by either the eliciting of information/ideas from another interactant or the proffering of ideas/ information for other-party verification, i.e. eliciting new information or eliciting confirmation of information/ideas given. Elicits of information have been described by Tsui (1994) as discourse acts functioning to ask the other speaker to supply missing information about which the speaker does not have assumptions. In our data WH-forms
Discourse in MBA Seminars
67
TABLE 1 Categorization of Main Initiating Acts in Student-led Talk Discourse Act
Form
Examples
1. elicit information
WH & How interrogatives
What was their marketing strategy? How much of your output is tied in with these co-partnership arrangements?
2. elicit confirmation (weak)
positive polarity
Do you feel there’s a segment of the market they are missing out on? Does he want to make his company to or does he want to? Weren't you just re-inventing the wheel here? But they may have added value to it before they consumed it themselves. That would still produce the equation I have given you would still produce the GDP because it would include the value of exports, wouldn't it?
alternatives (strong)
negative polarity
(strong)
statement
(strong)
tag
(who, what, when, how long, etc.) were identified as functioning for this purpose. Some WH-type questions were seen to be indirectly realized as shown in Example 1, which could be re-worded: How does that approach contrast with your approach? Example 1 S4===and I just wondered about the contrast of that approach with your approach
Elicits for confirmation, on the other hand, can be defined as requests for information/ideas about which the speaker has assumptions and for which the speaker is seeking confirmation. In academic discussion these acts allow interactants to contribute ideas and information. So, for example, in the elicit Was the strategy specifically developed for the UK market?, the speaker is suggesting that the strategy was developed for the UK market and asking if the other interactant agrees. 3.1.2. Varying levels of commitment in elicits of confirmation. Elicits of confirmation involve varying levels of speaker commitment to the ideas or information proffered. Weak. Some elicits of confirmation show fairly low levels of speaker commitment to the propositional content and thus relatively little potential loss of face. This subgroup involves polarity forms, e.g. Did they . . .? Are there . . .? Has it been . . .? and also alternative type forms, i.e. Is it X or Y? A
68
H. Basturkmen
number of unfinished alternative forms were observed in the data either with the speaker trailing off mid-flow or the other speaker interrupting and taking the floor (see Example 2 below). In weak elicits of confirmation, speakers offer tentative proposition as suggestions. Thus, in Example 3, S3 proposed indirectly that GDP is attributable to a country’s economic state. Example 2 S1===If someone wanted to make an exit and he’s part of the management team after two years does he make a clause in the agreement or would it//be P //He can’t Example 3 S3 If GDp can be explained as it were an indicator of a country’s economy would it be an acceptable answer
Strong. Other elicits of confirmation involve a higher level of speaker commitment to the propositional content. Three forms, negative polarity forms, declaratives and tag questions, were seen to function this way. The use of these forms shows an assertiveness in offering ideas and information for conformation in discussion. These forms also tend to indicate a negative orientation to a point made by a previous speaker. Sometimes distinctly negative in tone, it seems part of the seminar politeness game to clothe even disagreement and dissatisfaction in the appearance of questions, such as the negative polarity form. Example 4 Negative Polarity S3 Aren't these companies just aberrations of the system that creates them ===
Teaching materials (e.g. James, 1984) have tended to present disagreement acts as prefaced with tokens such as I completely disagree with you . . . or I couldn't disagree more . . . Our data showed instances when talk was prefaced in such direct ways. However, speakers were also observed to use negative polarity forms, tag questions and fairly mildly toned declaratives (often incorporating markers such as surely, presumably, and though) to realize critical moves. Examples from one text showed turn-initial critical moves prefaced as follows: You've got to look at it seriously though because . . ., It's not true to say . . ., I think you've got to look at . . ., Didn't you feel that . . ., I think it's irrelevant . . ., I thought one of the main criteria . . ., I didn't say . . . I said . . ., and That depends on structure though . . .
3.1.3. Interchangeability of statement and interrogative forms. The elicits used interrogative and, to a lesser extent, statement forms. Either form was seen to elicit a response. For language studies, the idea of the interchangeability of statements and interrogatives in this capacity is not novel
Discourse in MBA Seminars
69
(see Sinclair and Coulthard, 1992; Tsui, 1994). However, pedagogical materials have tended to distinguish ‘‘questions’’ from ‘‘contributions to discussion’’. Example 5 demonstrates the use of statements in a seminar discussion to elicit a reply. In the example, S1 at first view seems to be simply giving information (statement forms, no perceptible question-like intonation). However, the unfolding discourse shows that S1 is not simply giving information because when P1 does not give a full reply (as would be expected by eliciting acts), S1 elicits again and this time P1 gives a full reply and the exchange can continue. Example 5 S1 I asked the question because one thing that wasn’t in the case study was the male market and I would suggest a lot more male fragrances are bought by females P1 Yeah S1 As presents rather than by males personally P1 Yes but I'm not really sure internationally maybe =
3.2. Components of Turns Initiating Discussion Turns initiating discussion rarely consist simply of one ‘‘question’’ utterance. Speakers mainly formulate complex turns comprising varied components and structures. Some turns initiating academic discussions (Examples 6–8) are shown to illustrate the complexity that may occur. Example 6 S2 you mentioned the possibility of a merger but did you consider the possibility of an alliance with other organizations. I noticed one or two of the larger supermarkets like Safeways have now got dry cleaning franchises in them so that services are like where people are rather than attracting people to them. Example 7 S3 yes I have a question you talked earlier about how they segmented the market in a number of ways that you said were relatively successful you said it wasn’t they hadn’t cut it down demographically but in a number of ways do you feel they could have made better use of psychographic profiles of their customers. Example 8 S4 but the technology side seems to keep up with the machines and chemicals I’m interested to know how much technology he keeps up with in terms of the garments themselves and the materials who does it is it the suppliers who say well there’s this new materials ‘‘rayon x’’ which you have to treat in such a fashion.
3.2.1. Build-ups of elicits. One feature of these turns is the potential for a piling up of elicits. In Example 8, we see the utterances how much technology he keeps up with, who does it and is it the suppliers who say there's this new
70
H. Basturkmen
material . . .? These are complex, multiple questions and they cannot be assigned to a single intention. In terms of pedagogical implications, the frequency of build-ups of this nature indicate the need for learners to practice producing and decoding strings of elicits in turns in discussion. Learners need to be made aware of the potential multi-targeted nature of turns and to avoid just homing in on one act in a turn. In subject-specific EAP classes, learners can be exposed to recordings of discussions from their subject area and asked to identify the number of questioning acts in lengthier turns. They could also be asked to plan questions they themselves would ask, and then practice putting together complex questioning moves. In multi-discipline EAP classes, discussions of texts from subjects of more general interest or mini-samples from discussions in a range of disciplines may be used. 3.2.2. Giving justification and evidence. Speakers rarely just produce to-thepoint elicits for information and confirmation. They tend to demonstrate the validity of their elicits by supporting them with acts giving additional information, examples, justifications, etc. One of the conventions in academic discussion is for the speaker to justify taking a turn and the elicit(s) made (see Examples 9 and 10). Example 9 Just out of interest on building the Rover mark which you were putting emphasis right at the beginning of the talk what effect did the fact that the vehicle was a Japanese derivative have on the difficulty you must have had evaluating == Example 10 I'm just curious if any of you were familiar with the products to start with
The above examples appear as formulaic or conventionalized politeness routines, perhaps with no intrinsic meaning other than as a way of gaining the floor. They refer to the speaker’s state of mind or his or her curiosity and act as excuses for asking the question. These devices may also double up in function to mark topic as in Example 9 above. Brown and Levinson (1987) argue for the universality of the phenomenon of politeness strategies and demonstrate parallelisms in diverse languages. However, specific linguistic realizations may vary in diverse discourse communities and parts of the English-speaking world. EAP course designers and students can observe discussions or study transcripts to determine what routines and realizations are typically used in discourse communities relevant to them. In addition to entry justification devices, a number of elicits themselves were seen to be supported with additional acts, such as additives, causals, restates and qualifies (acts which give extra information, reasons, paraphrases, and modifications in relation to the main elicits). In Example 11 below, the speaker supports the elicits by asking how the approach would transfer to younger companies and industries with causal acts, i.e. because it is easier to experiment, they can make mistakes and recover, they tend to
Discourse in MBA Seminars
71
have an educated workforce. In Example 12 below, the speaker requests confirmation that an alliance with another company is a distinct possibility as well as a merger. The speaker supports this proposition with an additive, i.e. the observation that some supermarkets have dry cleaning franchises. Example 11 ==um we’re interested in how you approached the company because I’m sure the philosophy’s been there from the start and therefore in a younger and a growth market it’s relatively easy to experiment to make mistakes and recover with an educated workforce who might be thinking in a mind like to yourself how do you suggest your thoughts on empowerment would transfer across to a much more mature industry say the coop or the health service Example 12 You mentioned the possibility of a merger but did you think about alliances with other organizations I noticed that 1 or 2 of the larger supermarkets like X have now got dry cleaning franchises in them so that services are like where the people are rather than attracting the people and the dry cleaning to them.
With this strategy of building up acts to provide the justification for elicits, speakers make confirmation by the other interlocutor more likely due to the weight of evidence supplied and show speakers as logical and informed in the moves they make in these public situations. In terms of pedagogy, learners’ need to become aware of the support typically given to elicits and responses in discussion and the lack of abruptness. 3.3. Devices Used to Signal Discourse Topic and Activity Turns in seminar discussion are often fairly extensive, and textual signalling devices are used more often than might be the case in conversational exchanges. Topic Discourse topic has been categorized as continuous topic, whereby speakers collaborate or incorporate previously occurring subjects into their talk, and discontinuous topic, whereby speakers introduce or re-introduce subject matter (Keenan and Schieffelin, 1975). Two prevalent overt markers of discontinuous topic seen in seminar discussion are termed back-referencing and titling devices. Both devices tend to be turn-initial. Back-referencing devices (see Examples 13 and 14) loop back to previous topics, often those involved in the presentation. Example 13 I: Actually you focused on the role of the company was actually the role developed with the European market in view or was it specifically developed first for the U.K. Example 14 S1 You say the management team often involved a number of employees how does it complicate things
72
H. Basturkmen
Devices resembling written titles also function to indicate a discontinuous topic. McCarthy (1991:51–52) notes the phenomenon of left-displaced subjects, saying that although this device is common in spoken language it tends not to be presented in pedagogical texts. In seminar discussions, especially post-presentation discourse, topics are often the reason for talk and titling devices function to orient the interlocutor and audience to the subject. Intonational features observed in the data included stress and a pause after the topic name (see Examples 15 and 16). Example 15 S4 Yes eh your pan European policy then + has it been to so to take say a video shot in == Example 16 S3 One thing you hear quality of service + you mentioned eh the convenience eh the convenience shops open from early morning ==
Discourse activity. The idea that speakers forward and indicate discourse is expressed through the concept of prefaces (Stubbs 1983: 181–82). Stubbs describes the function of these devices as ‘‘displaying an analysis of a preceeding or following utterance . . . (which) give hearers clues as to both the illocutionary force and propositional content of the coming utterance.’’ Example 17 S2 //But the point that I'm making is that you’re saying that’s the strength of the organization at BTR the chief executive officer is that particular charismatic individual without that person will the company continue the path it’s trodden so well over recent years Example 18 S1 Can I just come back in with another question it’s really just to turn all this on its head and ask your comments on the sceptic’s view of this partnership purchasing which is the big companies dumping on the small companies.
In Example 17, the marker involves the phrase make a point and yet following there is both a statement about the strength of the individual, which can be seen as a point and also a question about the future of the company. In Example 18, the speaker forewarns of a question but follows through with what might be described as a criticism. To an extent then, some turn-initial markers may be misleading. Some pedagogical materials (e.g. James, 1984) present turns having one overall and specific communicative function, such as disagreeing or asking a question, indicated by turn-initial prefaces. This, however, does not adequately represent the nature of these devices and oversimplifies what an interactant may do within a turn in discussion. In academic discussion, topic indicators (or prefaces) have both a descriptive and a strategic function: they may indicate illocutionary intention but they may simply be a means to take the floor or attempt to render its taking less abrupt and more polite.
Discourse in MBA Seminars
73
4. From Description to Pedagogy The above section attempted to show that the analysis of spoken texts helps give a realistic overview of the language of discussion in use. To what use can data-driven description be put in terms of a syllabus for this specific discipline or for others? What should such a syllabus consist of and is there an alternative to the conventional approach of listing functional categories or ‘‘useful phrases’’? McCarthy and Carter (1994) argue for a discoursebased approach to syllabus design and suggest a framework of discourse strategies as the basis of such a syllabus. A syllabus for seminar discussion strategies can be specified in terms of discourse goals. Some discourse goals indicated by the present study are as follows: By the end of the course learners will be able to function in interchanges in which they: 1. take part in short exchanges to get or give information or confirmation; 2. form and are able to follow exchanges involving complex elicitations and responses; 3. manage exchanges in which there are communication breakdowns and inter-turn repair sequences; 4. extend exchanges until a satisfactory outcome is achieved.
These goals can be broken down into more micro-level objectives matched to specific language realizations and features of discourse, as shown below: Learners will be able to: 1. contribute to discussion through elicitation —by supporting elicits with subsidiary acts —by justifying elicits —by using topic signalling devices 2. follow complex elicitations —by recognizing signalling devices —by identifying main and subsidiary discourse acts —by identifying attitudinal features within turns —by recognizing extended exchange patterns —by identifying markers of saliency
These goals and micro-level objectives were derived from analysis and modeling of discussion data from a business studies program. EAP course designers in other subjects can use them to see if there are any important differences between them and the practice of seminars in their own environment and also to collect specific instances of linguistic realizations common to their specific discourse communities. Some of the categories and objectives are of a fairly general nature (e.g. elicits of information and confirmation) and it may be the case that many of them are relevant to discussion classes in other social studies areas or even quite distinct disciplines. The approach to teaching seminar skills can also be discourse based with learners observing and analyzing discourse so that they themselves become
74
H. Basturkmen
actively involved in recognizing features and typical realizations. Riggenbach (1990) proposes that learners act as language researchers themselves by transcribing and analyzing their own and others’ text, interviewing protagonists of texts and discussing variations in texts, and providing some teacher input through the introduction of terms and concepts from discourse analysis to help structure learners’ analyses. Two practical means of focusing learners’ attention to discoursal features of academic speaking are outlined below.
4.1. Learners are Guided in Transcribing and Observing Features of Spoken Texts Videos can be used to teach seminar skills. However, the verbal discourse of discussion is complex and subtle and by listening alone learners may come away only with an overall impression of what happened or remember only a few phrases rather than develop a deeper understanding of how language is used and how parts are strung together. Listening alone does not afford the learner with the opportunity to identify patterns and features of discourse at any but a fairly superficial level. One way for learners to be able to scrutinize spoken discourse is for them to transcribe parts of spoken text, e.g. one exchange. The part can be identified either by the teacher before class or by the learners themselves, e.g. part of the discussion they were particularly interested in or didn’t understand. Following transcription, the teacher can introduce some terms to help learners identify or analyze elements within the sample and ask key questions to enable learners to enhance their understanding of the features of spoken discourse. A further possibility is for materials writers to develop materials around video sequences of academic discussion, e.g. partial transcriptions or jigsaw activities of turns in a complex exchange. Teacher’s notes can be provided to help them illustrate typical features and patterns. In the following example, a video recording of a presentation by a group of students followed by questions from the floor is shown. The teacher then guides the learners in transcribing parts of the text and identifying features of the discourse in the discussion section. Directions Listen to the first question from the audience following the presentation. 1. Write down the turn. What question is asked? Is this a ‘‘difficult’’; or ‘‘critical’’ question? How do you know? What is the function of the prior utterance? 2. Write down the presenter’s response to the question. How does she respond? How does she support her rejection of the question? What restatement is used and why? Recording Presentation followed by first question from the floor and presenter’s response
Discourse in MBA Seminars
75
(first question) S1 The previous group seem to have far more stress on the technology importance than yourselves. Didn’t you feel that as a factor? P I think it’s irrelevant you don’t need it you don’t buy a TV on the basis of technology I think you need to keep up with it because if they get well down their competitors can use it against them but I don’t think it’s important.
4.2. Learners are Provided with Task-based Activities Language awareness of learners can be raised by use of tasks. Prahbu (1983) proposed a task-based approach in which a task is provided, some ways demonstrated for tackling it, and then learners attempt the task themselves and receive feedback on their performance. A major tenet of the approach is that language is best learnt when learners are focused on meaning in the deployment of language. Swales (1990: 76) defines tasks as ‘‘a set of differentiated, sequenceable and goal-directed activities’’ the aim of which is to engage learners in cognitive and communicative procedures which are ‘‘relateable to the acquisition of pre-genres and genre skills.’’ Examples of genre-based tasks are given by Swales (1990) and Bhatia (1993). The examples involve awareness raising of discourse in written tasks. However, the approach can be adapted to teaching spoken genres. Although spoken genres are less clearly structured in terms of moves and acts than written discourse, study of spoken texts has brought to light predictable structures and components of the discourse with potential pedagogical applications. A sample lesson is given in the appendix. It illustrates an attempt to integrate raising learners’ awareness of spoken discourse into a task-based activity. The objectives are to provide a task, to engage learners in analyzing for themselves a sample of discourse and in trying to understand the strategies employed by ‘‘expert’’ genre users to realize communicative aims. The utility for the latter has been argued by Bhatia (1993). The task replicates the kind of seminar event in which a presentation is given by students (in this case Business Management students) and this is followed by questions from the floor. The main aim of the lesson is to sensitize learners to some of the ways seminar participants make difficult, critical questions and presenters deal with them after a presentation. In general, this data-driven description of discourse in discussions in MBA classes shows the amount of conversational work speakers put into making contributions to discussion full and quite indirect rather than brief and tothe-point, as pedagogy may seem to sometimes suggest. Typically speakers use a measure of supporting and other ‘‘non-core’’ linguistic items to enhance their contributions to discussion. It can be expected that similar conversational work characterizes other spoken academic and professional genres, such as problem solving, one-to-one meetings, and interviews. A discourse focused, data-driven approach to research in specific genres
76
H. Basturkmen
should continue to yield realistic descriptions to feed into syllabus design in ESP. The description presented in this paper was derived from texts from an MBA course. However, the discourse categories and features described are fairly general and may well be relevant to discussion genres and in other social studies areas and other disciplines, such as the natural sciences. However, further research is needed to verify this. This discourse based approach to teaching specific genres has been advocated as a means of fostering awareness of the subtleties and complexities of situated talk. Further research can also be directed to ways in which a discourse-based approach can be successfully incorporated into teaching practice.
REFERENCES Baka, F. (1989). The Discourse of Biology Lectures: Aspects of its Mode and Structure. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Aston. Bashiruddin, A., Edge, J., Hughes-Pelegrin, E. et al. (1990). Who speaks in seminars? Status, culture and gender at Durham University. In R. clark et al. (Eds.), Language and Power (pp. 74–84). BAAL. Basturkmen, H. (1995). The Discourse of Academic Seminars: Structures and Strategies of Interaction. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Aston. Bhatia, V. K. (1993). Analyzing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. London: Longman. Brown, P., & Levinson, S.C. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Carter, R., & McCarthy, M. (1995). Grammar and the spoken language. Applied Linguistics, 16(2), 141–158. Curzon, L. B. (1990). Teaching in Further Education: An Outline of Principles and Practice. London: Cassel. Dubois, B. L. (1980). Genre and structure of biomedical speeches. Forum Linguisticum, 5, 140–169. Edmondson, W. (1981). Spoken Discourse: A Model for Analysis. London: Longman. English, F., & Ohta, A. (1995). Bridging the gap. A paper presented at BALEAP Conference, Nottingham University. Furneaux, C., Locke, C., Robinson, P., & Tonkyn, A. (1991). Talking heads and shifting bottoms: the ethnography of academic seminars. In P. Adams, B. Heaton, & P. Howarth (Eds.), Socio-Cultural Issues in English for Specific Purposes (pp. 75–88). Modern English Publications. James, K. (1984). Speak to Learn: Oral English for Academic Practices. London: Collins. Jordan, R. R. (1989). English for academic purposes. Language Teaching, 22(3), 150–164. Keenan, E. O., & Schieffelin, B. B. (1975). Topic as a discourse notion: a
Discourse in MBA Seminars
77
study of topic in the conversations of children and adults. In C. N. Li (Ed.), Subject and Topic (pp. 335–384). New York: Academic Press. Lynch, T., & Anderson, K. (1991). Do you mind if I come in here?—a comparison of EAP seminar/discussion materials and the characteristics of real academic interaction. In P. Adams, B. Heaton, & B. Howarth (Eds.), Socio-Cultural Issues in English for Academic Purposes (pp. 88–99). Modern English Publications. McCarthy, M. (1991). Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mauranen, A. (1994). Two discourse worlds: study genres in Britain and Finland. Finnish Journal of Applied Linguistics, XIII, 1–40. Micheau, C., & Billmyer, K. (1987). Discourse strategies for foreign business students: preliminary research findings. English for Specific Purposes, 16(2), 87–97. Prahbu, N. S. (1983). Procedural Syllabuses. Paper presented at SEAMEO Eighteenth Regional Seminar, Singapore. Riggenbach, H. (1990). Discourse analysis and spoken language instruction. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, II, 152–163. Sinclair, J. Mch., & Coulthard, R. M. (1975). Towards an Analysis of Discourse: the English Used by Teachers and Pupils. London: Oxford University Press. Sinclair, J. Mch., & Coulthard, R. M. (1992). Towards an Analysis of Discourse. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Advances in Spoken Discourse Analysis (pp. 1–34). London: Routledge. Stubbs, M. (1981). Discourse Analysis: The Sociolinguistic Analysis of Natural Language. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Swales, J. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tapper, J. (1992). Oral Academic Discourse on International College Students. Ph.D., dissertation, University of Arizona. Tracy, K., & Naughton, J. (1994). The identity work of questioning in intellectual discussion. Communication Monographs, 61, 281–302. Tsui, A. B. M. (1994). English Conversation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ventola, E. (1987). The Structure of Social Interaction. London: Pinter. Weissberg, B. (1993). The graduate seminar: another research process genre. English for Specific Purposes, 12, 23–35. Westerfield, K. (1989). Improved linguistic fluency with case and video method. English for Specific Purposes, 8(1), 75–83. Wilson, K. (1989). The pattern, range and purpose of higher education: a moral perspective. In C. Ball & H. Eggins (Eds.), Higher Education in the 1990s: New Dimensions (pp. 38–50). Milton Keynes: SRHE and Open University Press. Helen Basturkmen is Head of the Office of Consultation and Training at Kuwait University Language Center. She has a Ph.D. from Aston University, UK in Academic Discourse. Previously, she was a teacher trainer for the Diploma course at Bilkent University in Turkey.
78
H. Basturkmen
Appendix Sample material of a task-based activity Student A Stage One: Explanation of aims By the end of the session you will have learnt about some of the ways people make ‘‘difficult questions’’ and presenters deal with them after a presentation. You will also have practised formulating responses to ‘‘difficult questions’’. Stage Two: Task Preparation You are going to present a three minute presentation and deal with some questions from the audience after it. The Moritsu company is currently deciding whether to produce the G4X or G2X engine. Your group will read the notes provided on both products and company background and prepare a case presentation in which your group explains why your company should produce G4X. Read the case study notes provided. Note down your arguments for this product and plan your presentation briefly. Stage Three: Language focus Some members of the audience will question your decision to produce the G4X. In your group predict what arguments they may make. Write down two of the questions they may ask. How would you respond? Make notes in your group. Consult the two text samples, A and B, of questions and responses. 1. What is similar in the student questions in samples A and B? 2. Do the presenters in samples A & B accept the audience members’ criticisms? How do they respond to these criticisms? — How does A structure his response and how does B? — What components can you see in the responses? 3. What strategies does presenter A choose and why? 4. Can you think of any other ways that A and B might formulate their responses? Stage Four: Application 1. Now you have seen how a speaker dealt with a difficult question. Go back to the difficult questions you predict that you may be asked about your choice of product G4X and plan how you would respond. 2. Give your presentation on your choice of G4X to the other group. Afterwards take questions. The interaction will be recorded. Stage Five: Evaluation 1. Listen to the recording. Can you identify the difficult questions? What
Discourse in MBA Seminars
79
were they? How did you deal with them? How did you formulate your responses and why? 2. If you were to respond to those question again, what, if anything, would you do differently? 3. Write the questions and your responses on a OHT and explain to the class how they were formulated and what strategies you used. Explain any alternatives you think might have been better. Stage Six: Discussion on discourse and culture 1. Would the interaction have been different in your country? 2. What kinds of strategies do you have in your culture for making and dealing with ‘‘difficult questions’’ in this kind of event? Sample A S I think one point I know it’s rare for you to have the pleasure of hearing my voice but nevertheless one point I think needs raising. You mentioned one of the strengths of both these companies was its chief executive directors. By the very nature of them being the main individuals concerned with the success of these what happens when they reach the age of maturity and decide to leave or whatever. They might die or whatever happens I mean I would suggest that is a major weakness. That I would suggest is a major weakness. P Well I mean in both cases they’d be replaced. And the evidence would suggest that there would still be Hanson there in the subsidiary. The guy is still very much in control. So I would suggest there is a risk but he’s probably been well groomed and knows exactly what’s required. Sample B S The previous group seem to have far more stress on the technology importance than yourselves. Didn’t you feel that as a factor? B I think I think it’s irrelevant. You don’t need it. You don’t buy a TV on the basis of technology. I don’t think you buy it on the technology. I think you need to keep up with it because if they get well down their competitors can use it against them. But I don’t think it’s important. Notes: 1. A cassette recorder is needed for each group. 2. B students would argue the case for producing G2X. 3. Stage Six of this activity may be less important for some groups of learners, e.g. those who are studying English for university courses in their own countries. 4. Stage Two could begin by being teacher-led with teacher questions to check understanding of the task and comprehension of the written notes.
80
H. Basturkmen
Students could then work in groups with the teacher monitoring and helping structure the mini-presentations. 5. In Stage Two, the groups of students may need discouraging from overplanning their presentations as presentation giving is not the main aim of this session. Teachers may find it useful to set time limits to this. 6. In Stage Three, the students look at samples in interaction. This stage may need to be teacher-led and a teacher’s handbook could guide the teacher in drawing learners’ attention to what is happening, the components in the turns and subtle uses of language such as hedging. Examples of discourse features in sample A the teacher may wish to draw students’ attention to are: the amount of restating, hedging and personal attribution and also the back-referencing in the question and in the response to the agreement preface before but and rejection of the idea. In Sample B, the teacher might also highlight the use of negative polarity forms to illustrate an opposite view. In the response, the teacher could draw attention to the use of prefacing disagreement with agreement, i.e. I think you need to keep up with it . . . but Teachers could use copies of the text samples on overhead transparencies for ease of illustration of the different points. 7. As follow-up to this or other speaking skills sessions, students can be asked to listen to discussions outside the EAP classroom (e.g. television interviews/forums, classes in the university if possible) and record examples of the feature(s) focused on in the EAP class.
Pergamon
English for Specific Purposes, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 63–80, 1999 © 1998 The American University. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd All rights reserved. Printed in Great Britain 0889-4906/98 $19.00+0.00
PII: S0889-4906(97)00049-5
Discourse in MBA Seminars: Towards a Description for Pedagogical Purposes Helen Basturkmen Abstract—The subject of this paper is a data-driven description of studentled discussion in seminars on a MBA course. Qualitative description of the language of discussion is needed on which to base realistic pedagogical materials for EAP. Using evidence from a small corpus of academic seminars, data is presented to illustrate some language features in student-led talk. These features are then considered in relation to syllabus content. The fruitfulness of a discourse-based approach to both the description of formal spoken language genres and to classroom methodology is discussed. © 1998 The American University. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved
1. Introduction Two major modes of instruction in Higher Education are lectures and seminar/discussion type classes. These modes of instruction are practised widely in universities both in English-speaking countries and in many developing countries which use English as the medium of instruction and base instructional practice on Western models. Although lectures often predominate at the lower levels of instruction, as students progress, classes often become smaller and discussion in them more widespread. In education generally, the view of students as receivers of knowledge from instructors has been replaced by a view of learners needing to be actively involved in the learning process (Wilson, 1989: 49). This perception is reflected in a range of modes of instruction requiring students to take on a more active and interactive role (see Curzon (1990) on various modes of instruction). Lectures themselves often involve or are followed by question and answer periods similar to discussion in seminars, if shorter in length. The ability to participate in and follow academic discussions can be critical for students. However, such participation can appear particularly daunting to non-native speakers. Mauranen (1994) finds that Finnish exchange students in the UK consider their greatest difficulty to be participation in seminar discussions. — –––––––––––––––––––– Address correspondence to: Helen Basturkmen, The University of Auckland, Inst. of Language Teaching & Learning, The Faculty of Arts, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand.
63
64
H. Basturkmen
Jordan (1989) reports on research in the Middle East showing students’ perception of speaking as their most pressing need. Research in the UK (Furneaux et al., 1991) reveals the high anxiety level of non-native speaker students in regard to their performance in seminars and discussion classes. Carter and McCarthy (1995) argue that genre-sensitive descriptions of spoken language are needed. As yet the discourse of only a few academic spoken genres has been explored: lectures (Flowerdew, 1992; Baka, 1989), research presentations (Dubois, 1980; Weissberg, 1993) and classroom interaction (Sinclair and Coulthard, 1985, 1992). In regard to academic discussion, such as question and answer periods following presentations or tutorials, research interest has been focused mainly on social aspects of interaction, such as participant expectations (Mauranen, 1994), identity needs (Tracy and Naughton, 1994), the relative dominance of sub-groups (Bashiruddin et al., 1990), differences between native and non-native speaker production (Lynch and Anderson, 1991, Furneaux et al., 1991), and differences in native and non-native speaker production specifically in business studies courses (Westerfield, 1989; Micheau and Billmyer, 1987). Language description of the discourse of discussion classes per se has been less extensive although some research has been done in this area (Basturkmen, 1995; Tapper, 1992). In contrast, research into discourse features of written genres has been more extensive and identification of patterns and features in specific academic and professional genres has fed into pedagogy in recent years (e.g. Swales, 1990; Bhatia, 1993). Swales (1990), for instance, demonstrates patterns of moves in genres such as dissertations, theses and prospectus articles. Such identification and description is important for the specification of syllabus content in English for Specific Purposes (ESP) and EAP (English for Academic Purposes) since curriculum designers may wish to target the specific genres and communicative skills learners are likely to encounter in their work or study. Language descriptions of spoken academic genres has been limited, and published pedagogical materials on academic speaking can be of questionable value. Lynch and Anderson (1991) point out that available materials may offer unrealistic language description, while English and Ohta (1995) argue that some materials give a false impression of the realities of the target situation. Jordan notes the lack of basic description: ‘‘Coupled with the need for . . . materials (specific material for discussion skills), is the need for data on the content of seminars, both in procedures followed and language used.’’ (1989:155)
An initial survey (Basturkmen, 1995) of published materials found the presentation of language of academic discussion to be mainly limited to lists of functional categories, such as disagreement and making contributory statements, and ‘‘useful phrases’’ for each category in the form of entry
Discourse in MBA Seminars
65
prefaces such as I disagree or I didn't understand your point about. However, in light of my initial observations of seminars and tutorials, the limitations of such language description were clear. Observation showed that turns in academic discussion could be lengthy and complex and thus the textbooks’ focus on turn entry prefaces offered a very limited insight. In addition, observation showed a tendency for turns in discussion to be full and indirect rather than short and transparent in meaning as implied by the textbooks surveyed. For teaching purposes, the presentation of chunks of language rather than fragments is needed. There is a need to show not only what the components of academic discussion are but also how these components are typically strung together. In order to present such language, genre-specific, data-driven descriptions of academic and professional spoken genres are needed. Without description, teaching spoken language in ESP and EAP can veer towards a ‘‘slinging the mud on the wall’’ approach in which the specification of language content (what language to target) plays a minor role compared to activities for how to get learners to speak. The aim of this paper is to present a description of discourse in the specific genre of MBA seminar classes. Such description can be of value to EAP course designers in defining syllabus objectives for business studies courses. Moreover, course designers in other social studies areas and disciplines may find the description useful (although they would need to observe discussion classes in their own environments to check for the degree of convergence of categories and features). The objective is to offer a partial view of what the language content of an academic speaking syllabus might comprise. Three aspects of discourse are described: acts for initiating discussion, components of turns, and discourse signalling devices.
2. Procedure The present study is part of a wider investigation into discourse in university seminars, specifically those from an MBA course. The investigation centered on both interactional structures, and features and strategies of discourse. A central feature of seminar/discussion classes is the expectation and desire for student-initiated interaction, and the study focused on this rather than instructor-led interaction. The general procedure of the study involved the collection of a corpus of authentic spoken texts of seminars and academic discussions. This was followed by transcription of the texts, and the identification and quantification of patterns and features. Interactive sequences set up by unsolicited student moves were identified using the approach to analysis of Sinclair and Coulthard (1975, 1992). In the system of analysis, a conversational exchange is made up minimally of two moves (one by each of two speakers). Moves comprise acts, the smallest discoursal elements. Moves comprise minimally one head act (an elicit, inform, or directive), the significant element driving the talk. Moves
66
H. Basturkmen
often, however, contain other supportive acts. In this paper, the term turn is also used to refer to slots in the exchange structure. The definition of turn is taken from Edmondson (1981:7): the opportunity taken by an interactant to take the position of speaker at any one point in the talk and what is done during the time the interactant continuously holds that position. A corpus of approximately 30,000 words in length was collected from video recordings of naturally occurring seminar and discussion classes forming part of the MBA course at Aston University, UK. These classes were designed for students in the distance learning program of the MBA program. Approximately one quarter of the students in the in-house MBA program have a non-English-speaking educational background. Eighteen texts of largely complete class sessions were selected to represent a range of seminar and discussion type classes given by various instructors and in a range of course modules. The following symbols are used in the transcription of texts: S1, S2, etc. P1, P2, etc. I
" +
The beginning of turns of different students The beginning of turns by different presenters The beginning of a turn by an instructor Overlap where a speaker takes a turn from another before completion and marks where overlap begins Turns that started simultaneously Noticeable pause
3. Findings In this section of the paper, data are presented concerning: , acts used by students to initiate discussion; , components of turns initiating discussion; , devices used to signal discourse topic and activity. 3.1. Acts Used to Initiate Talk A categorization of students’ initiating acts is shown in Table 1. The two main acts used by students to initiate discussion were identified as ‘‘elicits’’, i.e. acts which set up the expectation of a response from another interactant. 3.1.1. Elicits of information and elicits of confirmation. Not surprisingly, student-led discussion was seen at core to be about the exchange of information and ideas. It was observed to be motivated by either the eliciting of information/ideas from another interactant or the proffering of ideas/ information for other-party verification, i.e. eliciting new information or eliciting confirmation of information/ideas given. Elicits of information have been described by Tsui (1994) as discourse acts functioning to ask the other speaker to supply missing information about which the speaker does not have assumptions. In our data WH-forms
Discourse in MBA Seminars
67
TABLE 1 Categorization of Main Initiating Acts in Student-led Talk Discourse Act
Form
Examples
1. elicit information
WH & How interrogatives
What was their marketing strategy? How much of your output is tied in with these co-partnership arrangements?
2. elicit confirmation (weak)
positive polarity
Do you feel there’s a segment of the market they are missing out on? Does he want to make his company to or does he want to? Weren't you just re-inventing the wheel here? But they may have added value to it before they consumed it themselves. That would still produce the equation I have given you would still produce the GDP because it would include the value of exports, wouldn't it?
alternatives (strong)
negative polarity
(strong)
statement
(strong)
tag
(who, what, when, how long, etc.) were identified as functioning for this purpose. Some WH-type questions were seen to be indirectly realized as shown in Example 1, which could be re-worded: How does that approach contrast with your approach? Example 1 S4===and I just wondered about the contrast of that approach with your approach
Elicits for confirmation, on the other hand, can be defined as requests for information/ideas about which the speaker has assumptions and for which the speaker is seeking confirmation. In academic discussion these acts allow interactants to contribute ideas and information. So, for example, in the elicit Was the strategy specifically developed for the UK market?, the speaker is suggesting that the strategy was developed for the UK market and asking if the other interactant agrees. 3.1.2. Varying levels of commitment in elicits of confirmation. Elicits of confirmation involve varying levels of speaker commitment to the ideas or information proffered. Weak. Some elicits of confirmation show fairly low levels of speaker commitment to the propositional content and thus relatively little potential loss of face. This subgroup involves polarity forms, e.g. Did they . . .? Are there . . .? Has it been . . .? and also alternative type forms, i.e. Is it X or Y? A
68
H. Basturkmen
number of unfinished alternative forms were observed in the data either with the speaker trailing off mid-flow or the other speaker interrupting and taking the floor (see Example 2 below). In weak elicits of confirmation, speakers offer tentative proposition as suggestions. Thus, in Example 3, S3 proposed indirectly that GDP is attributable to a country’s economic state. Example 2 S1===If someone wanted to make an exit and he’s part of the management team after two years does he make a clause in the agreement or would it//be P //He can’t Example 3 S3 If GDp can be explained as it were an indicator of a country’s economy would it be an acceptable answer
Strong. Other elicits of confirmation involve a higher level of speaker commitment to the propositional content. Three forms, negative polarity forms, declaratives and tag questions, were seen to function this way. The use of these forms shows an assertiveness in offering ideas and information for conformation in discussion. These forms also tend to indicate a negative orientation to a point made by a previous speaker. Sometimes distinctly negative in tone, it seems part of the seminar politeness game to clothe even disagreement and dissatisfaction in the appearance of questions, such as the negative polarity form. Example 4 Negative Polarity S3 Aren't these companies just aberrations of the system that creates them ===
Teaching materials (e.g. James, 1984) have tended to present disagreement acts as prefaced with tokens such as I completely disagree with you . . . or I couldn't disagree more . . . Our data showed instances when talk was prefaced in such direct ways. However, speakers were also observed to use negative polarity forms, tag questions and fairly mildly toned declaratives (often incorporating markers such as surely, presumably, and though) to realize critical moves. Examples from one text showed turn-initial critical moves prefaced as follows: You've got to look at it seriously though because . . ., It's not true to say . . ., I think you've got to look at . . ., Didn't you feel that . . ., I think it's irrelevant . . ., I thought one of the main criteria . . ., I didn't say . . . I said . . ., and That depends on structure though . . .
3.1.3. Interchangeability of statement and interrogative forms. The elicits used interrogative and, to a lesser extent, statement forms. Either form was seen to elicit a response. For language studies, the idea of the interchangeability of statements and interrogatives in this capacity is not novel
Discourse in MBA Seminars
69
(see Sinclair and Coulthard, 1992; Tsui, 1994). However, pedagogical materials have tended to distinguish ‘‘questions’’ from ‘‘contributions to discussion’’. Example 5 demonstrates the use of statements in a seminar discussion to elicit a reply. In the example, S1 at first view seems to be simply giving information (statement forms, no perceptible question-like intonation). However, the unfolding discourse shows that S1 is not simply giving information because when P1 does not give a full reply (as would be expected by eliciting acts), S1 elicits again and this time P1 gives a full reply and the exchange can continue. Example 5 S1 I asked the question because one thing that wasn’t in the case study was the male market and I would suggest a lot more male fragrances are bought by females P1 Yeah S1 As presents rather than by males personally P1 Yes but I'm not really sure internationally maybe =
3.2. Components of Turns Initiating Discussion Turns initiating discussion rarely consist simply of one ‘‘question’’ utterance. Speakers mainly formulate complex turns comprising varied components and structures. Some turns initiating academic discussions (Examples 6–8) are shown to illustrate the complexity that may occur. Example 6 S2 you mentioned the possibility of a merger but did you consider the possibility of an alliance with other organizations. I noticed one or two of the larger supermarkets like Safeways have now got dry cleaning franchises in them so that services are like where people are rather than attracting people to them. Example 7 S3 yes I have a question you talked earlier about how they segmented the market in a number of ways that you said were relatively successful you said it wasn’t they hadn’t cut it down demographically but in a number of ways do you feel they could have made better use of psychographic profiles of their customers. Example 8 S4 but the technology side seems to keep up with the machines and chemicals I’m interested to know how much technology he keeps up with in terms of the garments themselves and the materials who does it is it the suppliers who say well there’s this new materials ‘‘rayon x’’ which you have to treat in such a fashion.
3.2.1. Build-ups of elicits. One feature of these turns is the potential for a piling up of elicits. In Example 8, we see the utterances how much technology he keeps up with, who does it and is it the suppliers who say there's this new
70
H. Basturkmen
material . . .? These are complex, multiple questions and they cannot be assigned to a single intention. In terms of pedagogical implications, the frequency of build-ups of this nature indicate the need for learners to practice producing and decoding strings of elicits in turns in discussion. Learners need to be made aware of the potential multi-targeted nature of turns and to avoid just homing in on one act in a turn. In subject-specific EAP classes, learners can be exposed to recordings of discussions from their subject area and asked to identify the number of questioning acts in lengthier turns. They could also be asked to plan questions they themselves would ask, and then practice putting together complex questioning moves. In multi-discipline EAP classes, discussions of texts from subjects of more general interest or mini-samples from discussions in a range of disciplines may be used. 3.2.2. Giving justification and evidence. Speakers rarely just produce to-thepoint elicits for information and confirmation. They tend to demonstrate the validity of their elicits by supporting them with acts giving additional information, examples, justifications, etc. One of the conventions in academic discussion is for the speaker to justify taking a turn and the elicit(s) made (see Examples 9 and 10). Example 9 Just out of interest on building the Rover mark which you were putting emphasis right at the beginning of the talk what effect did the fact that the vehicle was a Japanese derivative have on the difficulty you must have had evaluating == Example 10 I'm just curious if any of you were familiar with the products to start with
The above examples appear as formulaic or conventionalized politeness routines, perhaps with no intrinsic meaning other than as a way of gaining the floor. They refer to the speaker’s state of mind or his or her curiosity and act as excuses for asking the question. These devices may also double up in function to mark topic as in Example 9 above. Brown and Levinson (1987) argue for the universality of the phenomenon of politeness strategies and demonstrate parallelisms in diverse languages. However, specific linguistic realizations may vary in diverse discourse communities and parts of the English-speaking world. EAP course designers and students can observe discussions or study transcripts to determine what routines and realizations are typically used in discourse communities relevant to them. In addition to entry justification devices, a number of elicits themselves were seen to be supported with additional acts, such as additives, causals, restates and qualifies (acts which give extra information, reasons, paraphrases, and modifications in relation to the main elicits). In Example 11 below, the speaker supports the elicits by asking how the approach would transfer to younger companies and industries with causal acts, i.e. because it is easier to experiment, they can make mistakes and recover, they tend to
Discourse in MBA Seminars
71
have an educated workforce. In Example 12 below, the speaker requests confirmation that an alliance with another company is a distinct possibility as well as a merger. The speaker supports this proposition with an additive, i.e. the observation that some supermarkets have dry cleaning franchises. Example 11 ==um we’re interested in how you approached the company because I’m sure the philosophy’s been there from the start and therefore in a younger and a growth market it’s relatively easy to experiment to make mistakes and recover with an educated workforce who might be thinking in a mind like to yourself how do you suggest your thoughts on empowerment would transfer across to a much more mature industry say the coop or the health service Example 12 You mentioned the possibility of a merger but did you think about alliances with other organizations I noticed that 1 or 2 of the larger supermarkets like X have now got dry cleaning franchises in them so that services are like where the people are rather than attracting the people and the dry cleaning to them.
With this strategy of building up acts to provide the justification for elicits, speakers make confirmation by the other interlocutor more likely due to the weight of evidence supplied and show speakers as logical and informed in the moves they make in these public situations. In terms of pedagogy, learners’ need to become aware of the support typically given to elicits and responses in discussion and the lack of abruptness. 3.3. Devices Used to Signal Discourse Topic and Activity Turns in seminar discussion are often fairly extensive, and textual signalling devices are used more often than might be the case in conversational exchanges. Topic Discourse topic has been categorized as continuous topic, whereby speakers collaborate or incorporate previously occurring subjects into their talk, and discontinuous topic, whereby speakers introduce or re-introduce subject matter (Keenan and Schieffelin, 1975). Two prevalent overt markers of discontinuous topic seen in seminar discussion are termed back-referencing and titling devices. Both devices tend to be turn-initial. Back-referencing devices (see Examples 13 and 14) loop back to previous topics, often those involved in the presentation. Example 13 I: Actually you focused on the role of the company was actually the role developed with the European market in view or was it specifically developed first for the U.K. Example 14 S1 You say the management team often involved a number of employees how does it complicate things
72
H. Basturkmen
Devices resembling written titles also function to indicate a discontinuous topic. McCarthy (1991:51–52) notes the phenomenon of left-displaced subjects, saying that although this device is common in spoken language it tends not to be presented in pedagogical texts. In seminar discussions, especially post-presentation discourse, topics are often the reason for talk and titling devices function to orient the interlocutor and audience to the subject. Intonational features observed in the data included stress and a pause after the topic name (see Examples 15 and 16). Example 15 S4 Yes eh your pan European policy then + has it been to so to take say a video shot in == Example 16 S3 One thing you hear quality of service + you mentioned eh the convenience eh the convenience shops open from early morning ==
Discourse activity. The idea that speakers forward and indicate discourse is expressed through the concept of prefaces (Stubbs 1983: 181–82). Stubbs describes the function of these devices as ‘‘displaying an analysis of a preceeding or following utterance . . . (which) give hearers clues as to both the illocutionary force and propositional content of the coming utterance.’’ Example 17 S2 //But the point that I'm making is that you’re saying that’s the strength of the organization at BTR the chief executive officer is that particular charismatic individual without that person will the company continue the path it’s trodden so well over recent years Example 18 S1 Can I just come back in with another question it’s really just to turn all this on its head and ask your comments on the sceptic’s view of this partnership purchasing which is the big companies dumping on the small companies.
In Example 17, the marker involves the phrase make a point and yet following there is both a statement about the strength of the individual, which can be seen as a point and also a question about the future of the company. In Example 18, the speaker forewarns of a question but follows through with what might be described as a criticism. To an extent then, some turn-initial markers may be misleading. Some pedagogical materials (e.g. James, 1984) present turns having one overall and specific communicative function, such as disagreeing or asking a question, indicated by turn-initial prefaces. This, however, does not adequately represent the nature of these devices and oversimplifies what an interactant may do within a turn in discussion. In academic discussion, topic indicators (or prefaces) have both a descriptive and a strategic function: they may indicate illocutionary intention but they may simply be a means to take the floor or attempt to render its taking less abrupt and more polite.
Discourse in MBA Seminars
73
4. From Description to Pedagogy The above section attempted to show that the analysis of spoken texts helps give a realistic overview of the language of discussion in use. To what use can data-driven description be put in terms of a syllabus for this specific discipline or for others? What should such a syllabus consist of and is there an alternative to the conventional approach of listing functional categories or ‘‘useful phrases’’? McCarthy and Carter (1994) argue for a discoursebased approach to syllabus design and suggest a framework of discourse strategies as the basis of such a syllabus. A syllabus for seminar discussion strategies can be specified in terms of discourse goals. Some discourse goals indicated by the present study are as follows: By the end of the course learners will be able to function in interchanges in which they: 1. take part in short exchanges to get or give information or confirmation; 2. form and are able to follow exchanges involving complex elicitations and responses; 3. manage exchanges in which there are communication breakdowns and inter-turn repair sequences; 4. extend exchanges until a satisfactory outcome is achieved.
These goals can be broken down into more micro-level objectives matched to specific language realizations and features of discourse, as shown below: Learners will be able to: 1. contribute to discussion through elicitation —by supporting elicits with subsidiary acts —by justifying elicits —by using topic signalling devices 2. follow complex elicitations —by recognizing signalling devices —by identifying main and subsidiary discourse acts —by identifying attitudinal features within turns —by recognizing extended exchange patterns —by identifying markers of saliency
These goals and micro-level objectives were derived from analysis and modeling of discussion data from a business studies program. EAP course designers in other subjects can use them to see if there are any important differences between them and the practice of seminars in their own environment and also to collect specific instances of linguistic realizations common to their specific discourse communities. Some of the categories and objectives are of a fairly general nature (e.g. elicits of information and confirmation) and it may be the case that many of them are relevant to discussion classes in other social studies areas or even quite distinct disciplines. The approach to teaching seminar skills can also be discourse based with learners observing and analyzing discourse so that they themselves become
74
H. Basturkmen
actively involved in recognizing features and typical realizations. Riggenbach (1990) proposes that learners act as language researchers themselves by transcribing and analyzing their own and others’ text, interviewing protagonists of texts and discussing variations in texts, and providing some teacher input through the introduction of terms and concepts from discourse analysis to help structure learners’ analyses. Two practical means of focusing learners’ attention to discoursal features of academic speaking are outlined below.
4.1. Learners are Guided in Transcribing and Observing Features of Spoken Texts Videos can be used to teach seminar skills. However, the verbal discourse of discussion is complex and subtle and by listening alone learners may come away only with an overall impression of what happened or remember only a few phrases rather than develop a deeper understanding of how language is used and how parts are strung together. Listening alone does not afford the learner with the opportunity to identify patterns and features of discourse at any but a fairly superficial level. One way for learners to be able to scrutinize spoken discourse is for them to transcribe parts of spoken text, e.g. one exchange. The part can be identified either by the teacher before class or by the learners themselves, e.g. part of the discussion they were particularly interested in or didn’t understand. Following transcription, the teacher can introduce some terms to help learners identify or analyze elements within the sample and ask key questions to enable learners to enhance their understanding of the features of spoken discourse. A further possibility is for materials writers to develop materials around video sequences of academic discussion, e.g. partial transcriptions or jigsaw activities of turns in a complex exchange. Teacher’s notes can be provided to help them illustrate typical features and patterns. In the following example, a video recording of a presentation by a group of students followed by questions from the floor is shown. The teacher then guides the learners in transcribing parts of the text and identifying features of the discourse in the discussion section. Directions Listen to the first question from the audience following the presentation. 1. Write down the turn. What question is asked? Is this a ‘‘difficult’’; or ‘‘critical’’ question? How do you know? What is the function of the prior utterance? 2. Write down the presenter’s response to the question. How does she respond? How does she support her rejection of the question? What restatement is used and why? Recording Presentation followed by first question from the floor and presenter’s response
Discourse in MBA Seminars
75
(first question) S1 The previous group seem to have far more stress on the technology importance than yourselves. Didn’t you feel that as a factor? P I think it’s irrelevant you don’t need it you don’t buy a TV on the basis of technology I think you need to keep up with it because if they get well down their competitors can use it against them but I don’t think it’s important.
4.2. Learners are Provided with Task-based Activities Language awareness of learners can be raised by use of tasks. Prahbu (1983) proposed a task-based approach in which a task is provided, some ways demonstrated for tackling it, and then learners attempt the task themselves and receive feedback on their performance. A major tenet of the approach is that language is best learnt when learners are focused on meaning in the deployment of language. Swales (1990: 76) defines tasks as ‘‘a set of differentiated, sequenceable and goal-directed activities’’ the aim of which is to engage learners in cognitive and communicative procedures which are ‘‘relateable to the acquisition of pre-genres and genre skills.’’ Examples of genre-based tasks are given by Swales (1990) and Bhatia (1993). The examples involve awareness raising of discourse in written tasks. However, the approach can be adapted to teaching spoken genres. Although spoken genres are less clearly structured in terms of moves and acts than written discourse, study of spoken texts has brought to light predictable structures and components of the discourse with potential pedagogical applications. A sample lesson is given in the appendix. It illustrates an attempt to integrate raising learners’ awareness of spoken discourse into a task-based activity. The objectives are to provide a task, to engage learners in analyzing for themselves a sample of discourse and in trying to understand the strategies employed by ‘‘expert’’ genre users to realize communicative aims. The utility for the latter has been argued by Bhatia (1993). The task replicates the kind of seminar event in which a presentation is given by students (in this case Business Management students) and this is followed by questions from the floor. The main aim of the lesson is to sensitize learners to some of the ways seminar participants make difficult, critical questions and presenters deal with them after a presentation. In general, this data-driven description of discourse in discussions in MBA classes shows the amount of conversational work speakers put into making contributions to discussion full and quite indirect rather than brief and tothe-point, as pedagogy may seem to sometimes suggest. Typically speakers use a measure of supporting and other ‘‘non-core’’ linguistic items to enhance their contributions to discussion. It can be expected that similar conversational work characterizes other spoken academic and professional genres, such as problem solving, one-to-one meetings, and interviews. A discourse focused, data-driven approach to research in specific genres
76
H. Basturkmen
should continue to yield realistic descriptions to feed into syllabus design in ESP. The description presented in this paper was derived from texts from an MBA course. However, the discourse categories and features described are fairly general and may well be relevant to discussion genres and in other social studies areas and other disciplines, such as the natural sciences. However, further research is needed to verify this. This discourse based approach to teaching specific genres has been advocated as a means of fostering awareness of the subtleties and complexities of situated talk. Further research can also be directed to ways in which a discourse-based approach can be successfully incorporated into teaching practice.
REFERENCES Baka, F. (1989). The Discourse of Biology Lectures: Aspects of its Mode and Structure. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Aston. Bashiruddin, A., Edge, J., Hughes-Pelegrin, E. et al. (1990). Who speaks in seminars? Status, culture and gender at Durham University. In R. clark et al. (Eds.), Language and Power (pp. 74–84). BAAL. Basturkmen, H. (1995). The Discourse of Academic Seminars: Structures and Strategies of Interaction. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Aston. Bhatia, V. K. (1993). Analyzing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. London: Longman. Brown, P., & Levinson, S.C. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Carter, R., & McCarthy, M. (1995). Grammar and the spoken language. Applied Linguistics, 16(2), 141–158. Curzon, L. B. (1990). Teaching in Further Education: An Outline of Principles and Practice. London: Cassel. Dubois, B. L. (1980). Genre and structure of biomedical speeches. Forum Linguisticum, 5, 140–169. Edmondson, W. (1981). Spoken Discourse: A Model for Analysis. London: Longman. English, F., & Ohta, A. (1995). Bridging the gap. A paper presented at BALEAP Conference, Nottingham University. Furneaux, C., Locke, C., Robinson, P., & Tonkyn, A. (1991). Talking heads and shifting bottoms: the ethnography of academic seminars. In P. Adams, B. Heaton, & P. Howarth (Eds.), Socio-Cultural Issues in English for Specific Purposes (pp. 75–88). Modern English Publications. James, K. (1984). Speak to Learn: Oral English for Academic Practices. London: Collins. Jordan, R. R. (1989). English for academic purposes. Language Teaching, 22(3), 150–164. Keenan, E. O., & Schieffelin, B. B. (1975). Topic as a discourse notion: a
Discourse in MBA Seminars
77
study of topic in the conversations of children and adults. In C. N. Li (Ed.), Subject and Topic (pp. 335–384). New York: Academic Press. Lynch, T., & Anderson, K. (1991). Do you mind if I come in here?—a comparison of EAP seminar/discussion materials and the characteristics of real academic interaction. In P. Adams, B. Heaton, & B. Howarth (Eds.), Socio-Cultural Issues in English for Academic Purposes (pp. 88–99). Modern English Publications. McCarthy, M. (1991). Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mauranen, A. (1994). Two discourse worlds: study genres in Britain and Finland. Finnish Journal of Applied Linguistics, XIII, 1–40. Micheau, C., & Billmyer, K. (1987). Discourse strategies for foreign business students: preliminary research findings. English for Specific Purposes, 16(2), 87–97. Prahbu, N. S. (1983). Procedural Syllabuses. Paper presented at SEAMEO Eighteenth Regional Seminar, Singapore. Riggenbach, H. (1990). Discourse analysis and spoken language instruction. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, II, 152–163. Sinclair, J. Mch., & Coulthard, R. M. (1975). Towards an Analysis of Discourse: the English Used by Teachers and Pupils. London: Oxford University Press. Sinclair, J. Mch., & Coulthard, R. M. (1992). Towards an Analysis of Discourse. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Advances in Spoken Discourse Analysis (pp. 1–34). London: Routledge. Stubbs, M. (1981). Discourse Analysis: The Sociolinguistic Analysis of Natural Language. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Swales, J. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tapper, J. (1992). Oral Academic Discourse on International College Students. Ph.D., dissertation, University of Arizona. Tracy, K., & Naughton, J. (1994). The identity work of questioning in intellectual discussion. Communication Monographs, 61, 281–302. Tsui, A. B. M. (1994). English Conversation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ventola, E. (1987). The Structure of Social Interaction. London: Pinter. Weissberg, B. (1993). The graduate seminar: another research process genre. English for Specific Purposes, 12, 23–35. Westerfield, K. (1989). Improved linguistic fluency with case and video method. English for Specific Purposes, 8(1), 75–83. Wilson, K. (1989). The pattern, range and purpose of higher education: a moral perspective. In C. Ball & H. Eggins (Eds.), Higher Education in the 1990s: New Dimensions (pp. 38–50). Milton Keynes: SRHE and Open University Press. Helen Basturkmen is Head of the Office of Consultation and Training at Kuwait University Language Center. She has a Ph.D. from Aston University, UK in Academic Discourse. Previously, she was a teacher trainer for the Diploma course at Bilkent University in Turkey.
78
H. Basturkmen
Appendix Sample material of a task-based activity Student A Stage One: Explanation of aims By the end of the session you will have learnt about some of the ways people make ‘‘difficult questions’’ and presenters deal with them after a presentation. You will also have practised formulating responses to ‘‘difficult questions’’. Stage Two: Task Preparation You are going to present a three minute presentation and deal with some questions from the audience after it. The Moritsu company is currently deciding whether to produce the G4X or G2X engine. Your group will read the notes provided on both products and company background and prepare a case presentation in which your group explains why your company should produce G4X. Read the case study notes provided. Note down your arguments for this product and plan your presentation briefly. Stage Three: Language focus Some members of the audience will question your decision to produce the G4X. In your group predict what arguments they may make. Write down two of the questions they may ask. How would you respond? Make notes in your group. Consult the two text samples, A and B, of questions and responses. 1. What is similar in the student questions in samples A and B? 2. Do the presenters in samples A & B accept the audience members’ criticisms? How do they respond to these criticisms? — How does A structure his response and how does B? — What components can you see in the responses? 3. What strategies does presenter A choose and why? 4. Can you think of any other ways that A and B might formulate their responses? Stage Four: Application 1. Now you have seen how a speaker dealt with a difficult question. Go back to the difficult questions you predict that you may be asked about your choice of product G4X and plan how you would respond. 2. Give your presentation on your choice of G4X to the other group. Afterwards take questions. The interaction will be recorded. Stage Five: Evaluation 1. Listen to the recording. Can you identify the difficult questions? What
Discourse in MBA Seminars
79
were they? How did you deal with them? How did you formulate your responses and why? 2. If you were to respond to those question again, what, if anything, would you do differently? 3. Write the questions and your responses on a OHT and explain to the class how they were formulated and what strategies you used. Explain any alternatives you think might have been better. Stage Six: Discussion on discourse and culture 1. Would the interaction have been different in your country? 2. What kinds of strategies do you have in your culture for making and dealing with ‘‘difficult questions’’ in this kind of event? Sample A S I think one point I know it’s rare for you to have the pleasure of hearing my voice but nevertheless one point I think needs raising. You mentioned one of the strengths of both these companies was its chief executive directors. By the very nature of them being the main individuals concerned with the success of these what happens when they reach the age of maturity and decide to leave or whatever. They might die or whatever happens I mean I would suggest that is a major weakness. That I would suggest is a major weakness. P Well I mean in both cases they’d be replaced. And the evidence would suggest that there would still be Hanson there in the subsidiary. The guy is still very much in control. So I would suggest there is a risk but he’s probably been well groomed and knows exactly what’s required. Sample B S The previous group seem to have far more stress on the technology importance than yourselves. Didn’t you feel that as a factor? B I think I think it’s irrelevant. You don’t need it. You don’t buy a TV on the basis of technology. I don’t think you buy it on the technology. I think you need to keep up with it because if they get well down their competitors can use it against them. But I don’t think it’s important. Notes: 1. A cassette recorder is needed for each group. 2. B students would argue the case for producing G2X. 3. Stage Six of this activity may be less important for some groups of learners, e.g. those who are studying English for university courses in their own countries. 4. Stage Two could begin by being teacher-led with teacher questions to check understanding of the task and comprehension of the written notes.
80
H. Basturkmen
Students could then work in groups with the teacher monitoring and helping structure the mini-presentations. 5. In Stage Two, the groups of students may need discouraging from overplanning their presentations as presentation giving is not the main aim of this session. Teachers may find it useful to set time limits to this. 6. In Stage Three, the students look at samples in interaction. This stage may need to be teacher-led and a teacher’s handbook could guide the teacher in drawing learners’ attention to what is happening, the components in the turns and subtle uses of language such as hedging. Examples of discourse features in sample A the teacher may wish to draw students’ attention to are: the amount of restating, hedging and personal attribution and also the back-referencing in the question and in the response to the agreement preface before but and rejection of the idea. In Sample B, the teacher might also highlight the use of negative polarity forms to illustrate an opposite view. In the response, the teacher could draw attention to the use of prefacing disagreement with agreement, i.e. I think you need to keep up with it . . . but Teachers could use copies of the text samples on overhead transparencies for ease of illustration of the different points. 7. As follow-up to this or other speaking skills sessions, students can be asked to listen to discussions outside the EAP classroom (e.g. television interviews/forums, classes in the university if possible) and record examples of the feature(s) focused on in the EAP class.