1 / 24

Literacy practices, academic identities & development

Literacy practices, academic identities & development . SRHE Academic Practice Network 13 th February 2009 Lesley Gourlay Coventry University. Background. Funded by ‘Preparing for Academic Practice’ CETL , Oxford University Focus on experience of early career academics

kimama
Download Presentation

Literacy practices, academic identities & development

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Literacy practices, academic identities & development SRHE Academic Practice Network 13th February 2009 Lesley Gourlay Coventry University

  2. Background • Funded by ‘Preparing for Academic Practice’ CETL , Oxford University • Focus on experience of early career academics • To gain understanding of how literacy practices, roles & identities are interrelated • Questioning dominant models of transition

  3. Transitions • Development tended to focus on generic principles of teaching & learning • Assumption: academic practices known from PhD / communicated in discipline. • Research into academic role: Trowler & Knight 1999, Barkhuizen 2002, Knight, Tait & Yorke 2006 • Transition theorised in ‘apprentice-master’ or ‘communities of practice’ model (e.gWarhurst 2008) assuming novice will learn via ‘legitimate peripheral participation’ (Lave & Wenger 1998). • However, transition more challenging & complex in contemporary HE, identities increasingly fluid & contested (Barnett & Di Napoli 2007, Clegg 2008, Archer 2008)

  4. Tacit knowledge & practices • Transition experiences often characterised by confusion • Tacit knowledge (Polanyi 1966) of disciplinary norms (Becher & Trowler 2001) • engagement with valorised literacy practices of discipline tend not to be explicitly developed (Murray & Moore 2008) e.g. writing journal articles • But also normally overlooked everyday literacy practices (Steirer & Lea 2008) • Linked to identity work & presentation of self in transition  

  5. Archer 2008 • Investigation of nature & formation of contemporary academic identities • Semi-structured interviews • 8 younger academics • 6 female, 2 male • 4 Russell group, 1 pre 92, 3 post 92

  6. Boundaries of ‘authenticity’ • Archer: ‘authenticity’ & legitimacy central to formation of social relations in academy: • Bourdieu 2001: • HE particularly dependent on how it is represented by its agents, so is both object and subject of rival / hostile representations • Looks at how boundaries of authenticity / legitimacy are set up, enacted, policed by powerful actors • Archer: less powerful social actors position themselves in debates around ‘authenticity’ • (Literature of authenticity reviewed by Kreber et al 2007)

  7. Nexus of competing discourses • ‘Younger academics …at nexus of competing discourses around what it means (or might mean) to be an academic’ (Archer 2008: 387) • Uses Colley & James’ (2005) notion of professional identities as disrupted processes involving ‘becoming’ and ‘unbecoming’ • Emphasis on context, role of age, ethnicity, class, gender & status

  8. Inauthenticity • Experiences of inauthenticity were exacerbated by: • Dominant performative ethos, need for fabrication (Ball 2003) • Age, ethnicity, class, gender & status • Struggles for authenticity and success: a desired yet refused identity • Attempts at ‘becoming’ / threat of ‘unbecoming’

  9. Inauthenticity & performativity • Archer: pressure to produce the right outputs • Neoliberal surveillance, audit & assessment (Davies & Petersen 2005) • Self-governance (Butler 1997) • ‘Governmentality of the soul’ (Rose 1990) • 4 RAE-able publications, bids & subject as ‘set of outcomes’ (Archer 2008: 390) • Unfulfilling & soul-destroying, symbolic attacks • Threatening to authenticity, marginalising &‘unbecoming’ of subject

  10. Personal projects • ‘…they constructed their academic identity as a form of ‘principled’ personal project (Clegg 2008: 17) underpinned by core values of intellectual endeavour, criticality, ethics and professionalism. Professionalism was evoked as the embodying of a principled, ethical and responsible approach to work and work relationships, and they all espoused collegiality and collaboration’ (Archer 2008: 397)

  11. ‘Feeling academic’ involved: • ‘Being’: intellectual, critical & knowledgeable; ethical, professional & respectful; collaborative, collegiate & part of wider community • ‘Having’: insider knowledge, credentials • ‘Doing’: research-related activities, writing publications & delivering conference papers

  12. To explore… • How do literacy practices in particular relate to this process (particularly ‘doing’)? • How they relate to emergent identities? • Issues different for mid-career ‘new’ / lecturers in practice & professional disciplines in post-92 context? • What are orientations towards literacy practices, academic discourses & symbolic artefacts?

  13. Methodology • 5 new lecturers recruited via PgCert at UK post-92 university, to recruit 5 more • Initial interviews: career histories, feelings & experiences of transition • Audio journals over 2 two-week periods, focused on day-to-day practices, experiences of new post & identity. • Audio likely to be less onerous than text, may combine with further evidence • Journals basis for two semi-structured qualitative interviews to provide participant perspective. Case study thematic analysis. • Volunteers offered transcripts to edit, can use as evidence in Pg Cert portfolio. • Small-scale opportunity sample. However, hope depth of qualitative data & semi-longitudinal nature will generate implications/ resonances beyond context / with literature.

  14. Participants • Sophie: experienced healthcare practitioner, going back to practice as experience of HE so negative. • Patrick: was senior manager at another university in UK, now lecturer in practice discipline. MA in humanities subject, MSc by research in practice discipline. • Joanne: was healthcare practitioner in another part of England. • Grace: was specialist nurse. Has Law degree and MSc in Nursing. • Jane: East Asian engineering professional, has MSc & PhD in her specialist field. Lived in UK several years.

  15. Academic literacy practices • RAE / bidding for funding not mentioned • Research reading & writing not engaged in except by Jane • ‘Clever’ and ‘scary’, something to be tackled • Desirable but ‘indulgence’ or ‘selfish’: • time away from family needs (Patrick) • should be married with kids instead (Grace) • should be 100% devoted to patients instead (implied by Grace) • Some interest in pedagogic research • Reading & writing practices orientated to providing good teaching / materials • Emphasis on minimal / skim reading to keep up with good practice, using theory to enhance practice

  16. Data handout • Transitions & crises • Transition & calling • Reactions to academic discourses • Sophie’s article

  17. ‘Boundary’ literacy practices • Patrick: reads & publishes fiction, competes with demands of academic reading & writing. MA on literature & themes of exile, he identifies with due to working class background ‘educated away from my roots’ • Grace: ‘Always having a book on the go’ lead to marginalisation & resentment in practice setting. Published ebook for patients: 'It was a cathartic exercise for us because we sat, and you know we stood on our soapboxes so long that we decided we needed to do it’ • Jane: struggles with academic reading & writing in English threaten her sense of legitimacy as an academic

  18. Textual enactments of academic life • ‘The authoring and authorising of text is the issue in education’ Ruth (2008:99) • Account of production of portfolio, preparation of CV and submission of research assessment report as ‘textual enactments of academic life’ (99) • Illustration of the ‘terrors of performativity (Ball 2003)

  19. Exiles, imposters, traitors, intermediaries? • Isolated, alone in rooms, not seeing anyone all day: ‘lost’, ‘exiled’, ‘in a halfway house’, ‘at the bottom of the tree’, ‘in the dark’, ‘in this glass bowl’, ‘on the moon’, ‘at sea’ • Not clever enough, ‘How did I get here?’, ‘sink or swim’, ‘need a guidebook’, ‘there aren’t any rules’ • ‘Selfish’, different, stuck-up, ‘special’, family pride • Liminal intermediaries between practice & academia • Translators of terminology & specialist discourses • Interpreters of academic literacies to practitioners

  20. Hybridity / ambiguity • Data highlights issues for mid-career, practice discipline lecturers • Hybridity: • Motivations for taking up roles • Values • Complex, situated, personal pressures • Fragility of identities / authenticity • More subtle forms of performativity/governance at play • Roles, practice values vs. academic values • Comfort with practice discourse vs. ‘academic speak’ • Orientation towards / presentation of self via range of literacy practices (research writing/ teaching writing / boundary literacies/reflective writing…)

  21. Academic literacies & wider theory • Maybin (2000) literacy practices & Foucauldian concepts of discourse (1980), Bahktin’s notion of intertextuality (1980) & Faircloughs’ Critical Discourse Analysis (1992) • Bartlett & Holland (2002) literacy practices & linguistic habitus (Bourdieu 1993) • Collins & Blott (2002) practice-based forms of analysis & link them to wider social contexts

  22. Models/lenses on transition • ‘Communities of practice’ inadequately theorises writing (Lea 2005) • Liminality & thresholds: purchase on role ambiguity /struggle in transition (Van Gennep 1909, Turner 1969) • Educational habitus strong explanatory framework for social class (Bourdieu 1993) • Framing (Goffman 1974) & notion of structures of expectation (Tannen 1993) may hold potential for transitions (Penman & Gourlay 2007)

  23. Implications for development of academic practice • ‘Certainties’ / cognitive focus in much HE research increasingly contested (e.g. Malcolm & Zukas 1999, Hussey & Smith 2002, Haggis 2003) • Meaningful academic development: socially situated & sensitive to variation & hybridity of lecturer identities • Orientations to literacy practices - how new lecturer constructs self in relation to institution / field / power / communities? • Issues of literacies, discourse, power & identity foregrounded? • Avoid managerialist / audit discourses • More recognition of increased staff diversity? • Reflective portfolios – more ‘governance of the soul’?

  24. Thank you • Any questions?

More Related