Article published In:
Journal of Argumentation in ContextVol. 9:2 (2020) ► pp.283–301
Ideology in positivist research articles on issues of teaching English as a foreign language
The research articles(RAs) as the dominant genre of academic writing can be accounted as the sites of reproduction of unequal power relations and dominance. Through critical discourse analysis of epistemological and ontological underpinnings and subsequently methodological aims and values of positivist paradigm as social structures, this article aims to foreground power and ideology stricken latent aspects of empiricist RAs. Research as a social practice mediates between the social structures and the RAs as social events. Textual analysis of practical arguments presented mostly in the pedagogical implications part revealed that the scientific world views manifest themselves as the premises of these arguments. The premises can provide reasons for actions (Searle’s,2010, social ontology theory). The reasons can signify the empiricist interests as the global concerns. They exclude the rival paradigms or ways of understanding the world. These world views maintain the dominance of Western societies on global academic and social discourses.
Keywords: domination, ideology, positivist, power, practical reasoning research articles
Article outline
- Introduction
- Literature review
- Method
- Method of analysis
- Practical argumentation (reasoning) framework
- Nature of data
- Data sampling
- Procedures
- Quality criteria
- Method of analysis
- Text
- Analysis of the text
- Evaluation of text (normative critique)
- Explanatory critique
- Conclusion
-
References
References
Angus, L. B.
1986 Research traditions, ideology and critical ethnography. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 7:1, 61–77, 
Apple, M. W.
2006 Educating the ‘right’ way: Markets, standards, God and inequality (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Baker, M.
2009 Argumentative interactions and the social construction of knowledge. In Argumentation and education (pp. 127–144). Springer, Boston, MA.
Biesta, G.
2004 Educational research, evidence-based practice and professional judgement in education. Paper presented at the Faculty of Education of Stellenbosch University, Postgraduate Students Colloquium, 26 March 2004, 1–22.
Brickhouse, N. W., Stanley, W. B., & Whitson, J. A.
1993 Practical reasoning and science education: Implications for theory and practice. Science & Education, 2(4), 363–375.
Caterina, D.
2018 Investigating hegemony struggles: Transdisciplinary considerations on the role of a critical discourse analysis of practical argumentation. Critical Discourse Studies, 15(3), 211–227.
Cobb, T.
1997 Is there any measurable learning from hands-on concordancing? System, 25(3), 301–315.
Erduran, S., & Jimenez-Aleixandre, J. M.
2012 Research on argumentation in science education in Europe. In D. Jorde & J. Dillon (Eds.), Science Education Research and Practice in Europe: Retrospective and Prospective (pp. 253–289). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Fairclough, N.
2001 Language and Power (2nd ed.). London: Longman.
1989 Language and Power London: Longmans
2010 Critical Discourse Analysis, London: Longmans
2015 Language and Power (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.
Fairclough, I., and Fairclough, N.
2012 Political discourse analysis: A method for advanced students. London: Routledge.
2013 Argument, Deliberation, Dialectic and the Nature of the Political: A CDA
Perspective. Political Studies
Review, 11 (3). pp. 336–344.
Frederickson, M.
2004 Surveying gender: Another look at the way we teach United States history. The History Teacher, 37(4), 476–484.
Gorur, R., Hamilton, M., Lundahl, C. and Sjödin, E. S.
2019 Politics by other means? STS and research in education, Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 40(1), 1–15,
Hackett, E. J., Amsterdamska, O., Lynch, M., and Wajcman, J.
2008 Introduction. In E. J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch, and J. Wajcman (Eds.), The handbook of science and technology studies, third edition (pp. 1–9). London, England: The MIT Press.
KhosraviNik, M.
2010 Actor descriptions, action attributions, and argumentation: towards a Systematization of CDA analytical categories in the representation of social groups. Critical Discourse Studies, 7: 1, 55–72.
Lim, L.
2014 Ideology, rationality and reproduction in education: a critical discourse analysis, Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 35(1), 61–76,
Lin, T. C., Lin, T. J., and Tsai, C. C.
2014 Research Trends in Science Education from 2008 to 2012: a systematic content analysis of publications in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 36(8), 1346–1372.
Luke, A.
1995/96 Text and discourse in education: An introduction to critical discourse analysis. Review of Research in Education, 21(1), 3–48.
Parkinson, J.
2011 The Discussion section as argument: The language used to prove knowledge claims. English for specific purposes, 30(3), 164–175.
Pennycook, A.
2001 Critical applied linguistics: a critical introduction. London. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc..
Rapanta, C., & Macagno, F.
2016 Argumentation methods in educational contexts: Introduction to the special issue. International Journal of Educational Research, 791, 142–149.
Ramsden, P.
1992 Learning to Teach in Higher Education. London and New York: Routledge.
Rangachari, P. K.
1994 Quality education for undergraduates in pharmacology: a Canadian experiment. Trends in pharmacological sciences, 15(7), 211–214.
Samaie, M., Sahragard, R. and Parhizkar, R.
2006. – A Critical Analysis of Learning and Teaching Goals in Gardner’s Theory of Attitudes and Motivation. Asian EFL Journal, 8(4),151–191.
Swales, J. M.
2004 Research Genres: Explorations and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shaw, P.
2000 Towards Classifying the Arguments in Research Genres. In Trosborg (ed.). Analyzing professional genres. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Searle, J.
2010 Making the social world. The structure of human civilization. New York: Oxford University Press.
Uzuner-Smith, S. and Englander, K.
2015 Exposing ideology within university policies: a critical discourse analysis of faculty hiring, promotion and remuneration practices, Journal of Education Policy, 30(1), 62–85,
van Dijk, T. A.
1998 Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. London. Sage.
2006 Discourse and manipulation. Discourse & Society, 17(3), 359–383.
van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R.
2004 A systematic theory of argumentation. The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
van Eemeren, F. H.
2018 Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
van Eemeren, F. H., Garssen, B. J., and Meuffels, B.
2015 Effectiveness through reasonableness: A pragma-dialectical perspective. preliminary steps to pragma-dialectical effectiveness research. In van Eemeren, H. (Ed). Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse. Springer International Publishing Switzerland.
Waghid, Y.
2006 University education and deliberation: In defence of practical reasoning. Higher Education, 51(3), 315–328.
Walton, D.
2013 Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers.
Wodak, R.
2001 What CDA is About: A Summary of its History. Important Concepts and Its Developments. In Wodak, R. and Meyer, C. (Eds.). Methods of critical discourse analysis. London. Sage Publications Inc.
Yoon, H., & Hirvela, A.
2004 ESL student attitudes toward corpus use in L2 writing. Journal of second language writing, 13(4), 257–283.