What exactly do we mean
           by academic discourse?

"Imagine that you enter a parlor. You come late. When you arrive, others have long preceded you, and they are engaged in a heated discussion, a discussion too heated for them to pause and tell you exactly what it is about. In fact, the discussion had already begun long before any of them got there, so that no one present is qualified to retrace for you all the steps that had gone before. You listen for a while, until you decide that you have caught the tenor of the argument; then you put in your oar. Someone answers; you answer him; another comes to your defense; another aligns himself against you, to either the embarrassment or gratification of your opponent, depending upon the quality of your ally's assistance. However, the discussion is interminable. The hour grows late, you must depart. And you do depart, with the discussion still vigorously in progress."

Kenneth Burke, The Philosophy of Literary Form 110-111

Academic discourse is a form of symbolic action characterized by Kenneth Burke's metaphor for joining a conversation. One enters a room where a discussion is going on, listens until the issues and different positions make some sense, and then joins in. To do that, in any academic discipline, requires a fair amount of specialized vocabulary and understanding of general and specific principles.

Why?

Did you ever try to jump a rope two other people were turning? You find yourself working ahead of time to pick up the necessary rhythm and speed, knowing that until you get good at it, you're likely to get slapped by the rope. Once you get good at it, that very rarely happens. Academic discourse in any subject is very much like that for undergraduates. When you first come in, you don't know the game or its moves. You need to acquire not only key ideas and vocabulary, but also a sense of the expected tone of the discussion and the important personalities involved.

In most academic work, reading and writing are literally inseparable: we work through what we believe, think, and understand by writing about it in the context of a community of similarly trained and interested people: we think in conversation, in discourse. Most of that work is done in writing because it allows us to be more considered and precise. Disputes are normal, and work usually takes place one small step at a time as scholars build upon or refute the work of others.

In such a community, civility is important. However, as Rebecca Chopp, "No matter what nook or cranny of the republic we examine, we are not doing a great job of keeping our conversations civil in America today. From TV talk shows where opponents out-shout each other, to blogs where anything can be posted as truth without supporting evidence or facts, to political debates that make a mockery of persuasive rhetoric, we are awash (and perhaps drowning in) uncivil conversation." [1] As a result, many Americans mistake incivility and dominance displays for rigorous intellectual exchange. Academic discourse (at least at its best) does not work that way.

Academics need to examine ideas and evidence rigorously because otherwise we cannot acquire a better understanding of the subject. Sometimes, that can cause real discomfort. Think how alarmed people have been over the centuries by theories indicating that the earth goes around the sun, space/time is relative, species evolve, the earth is warming. The rigorous examination of a thesis and its supporting evidence should not lead to incivility and ad hominem attacks.

[top]

What is Civil Discourse?

Civil discourse is defined as human discourse that stays within the realm of rational decency. For a discourse to stay within those boundaries, the people involved must follow the requirements of sound rational thinking enough to fit the occasion - even when conforming is inconvenient. Civil discourse is a non-totalitarian approach to mutual problem solving. It is a looser term than 'sound rational thinking' but presupposes enough commitment to sound reasoning to resolve the problem at hand in a cordial manner. Civil discourse can accommodate minor infractions and still be civil. Civil discourse is a moral interaction because it presupposes ethical standards that those involved should follow.[2]

What is a Discourse Community?

James Porter defined the discourse community as: “a local and temporary constraining system, defined by a body of texts (or more generally, practices) that are unified by a common focus. A discourse community is a textual system with stated and unstated conventions, a vital history, mechanisms for wielding power, institutional hierarchies, vested interests, and so on.”[3]

As you participate in class discussion and peer review, you are responsible to all other members of the course's community. We all have a responsibility to help maintain a civil and tolerant learning environment, to show respect for the rights of other held opinions differing from our own, and to promote free and civil inquiry. However, both slavishly making nice and aggressively being mean can have a negative effect on the energetic development and examination of ideas. Academic discourse requires both reason and respect.

[top]

Rules of Engagement: In this class always

A. Recognize a person's right to advocate ideas that are different from your own.

Civil discourse is "an alternative to physical violence. It is predicated on the assumption that it's possible to disagree agreeably, that it's better to laugh than cry, that one can vigorously contest the positions of one's adversary without questioning his or her personal integrity or motivation, and that parties to a debate are entitled to the presumption that their views are legitimate if not correct."
                                        -Thomas Mann [4]

There is an unfortunate tendency to assume that civil discourse has occurred whenever two or more people are nice to each other, say something, and don’t get into an argument.

The emotional flavor of discourse neither increases nor decreases the quality of its data/conclusions, though good work tends to be discouraged by discourse at either extreme of emotional temperature. Discussion that does not engage the emotions at all tends to concern things that don't in the least matter to us, so we're bored. Hot button issues can become rather intractable to analysis, leading to endless restatements of biases.

B. Show respect for others. Discuss policies and ideas, not people.
If the artist painting the image to the right had tried to achieve uniformity, she could easily have done so (imagine a uniform, gray rectangle). Boring discourse can be equally bland and gray. On the other hand, some 'colors' of discourse are factually incorrect or egregiously hurtful. And, we would all agree that all ideas are not equally helpful or to the point. Here are some guidelines for our discourse community:

• Use helpful, not hurtful language.
• Avoid rude and abusive language, including name calling, profanity, and put-downs.
• Give credit (cite sources) for the data you bring to bear, even if you are paraphrasing. That includes ideas you find on the discussion board or other peer resources. Ascribe sources to the material you employ, whether it is a classmate's posting, a professor whose course you took last year, the author of published material (web, print, or other media), or your Aunt Betty.
• Never post names, material, or individual information found on the materials (email, discussion board, etc.) to an outside source (your blog, website, etc.)
• Never slander, libel, or harass anyone.

[top]

C. Speak as you would like to be spoken to.

• Writing is not always transparent and obvious to others, even though you know precisely what you meant. Restate ideas when asked. When responding, clarify what you understood ("I understood you to mean…") and base your further response on that.
• Maintain civility even when debate becomes heated, keeping the difference between the ideas and the person separate in your mind. (I disagree with that statement, and here's why. Not: You're stupid and here's why.)
• Academic discourse deals with issues, not persons. Avoid tone or language that is rude, sarcastic, cutesy or sweet.
• It is O. K. to openly disagree. There is an unfortunate tendency to assume that civil discourse has occurred whenever two or more people are nice to each other, say something, and don't get into an argument. That has the effect of lobotomizing academic discourse.

D. Participation requires thoughtful attention from both parties.

• Recognize that reasonable, thoughtful, intelligent people can have different opinions and can agree to disagree.
• Respectfully hear and listen to differing points of view.
• Be concrete, specific, idea focused. Comments as vague and general as "I liked that" or "It looks fine" are pointless. So are things like, "That's terrible, stupid, a waste of time. It may even be true, but name calling labels are too vague for further response.

E. Speak for yourself, not others (unless, of course, you are chosen as the spokesperson of the group, which must follow the rules corporately)

• Language and ideas are always subjective, though that subjectivity isn't always acknowledged. Your mind set is culturally imbedded. It can be very difficult to really examine ideas or perceive of data that stands outside of that world view. It is, for example, difficult for persons with a different acculturation to get even a tentative sense of what Australian aborigines mean by the 'dream time.'
• Understand and acknowledge that you, of necessity, speak from out of your own experience and your understanding of the scholarship. Value academic discourse as a way to fill in some of the blind spots that subjectivities inevitably produce.
• 'I' statements are always implied, even when they are not explicit ("I think that the ideas presented suggest…" means the same thing as "the ideas presented suggest…".) It doesn't matter if you say, "I think, believe, feel" or just, "This is so." Either way, you are writing what you believe to be true unless you expressly state otherwise. Unless writers are insane or prevaricating, of course they write what they believe to be true, providing information and focus that strengthens argument, if only by choosing to include some things and exclude others.
• The best discourse openly admits and examines bias. Of course you are coming from a given prospective; however, that can lead to blind spots unless you acknowledge and think through the implications of your subjectivity. That's why academic discourse welcomes the analysis and investigation of various perspectives and ideas.

[top]

Bibliography

Arnold, Luch. (n.d.) "Inner Pathways" Mixed Aquamedia. Date found: July 6, 2006 at http://www.lucyarnold.com/Inner%20Pathways.htm.

Bizzell, P. (1992) Academic Discourse and Critical Consciousness. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

Burke, Kenneth The Philosophy of Literary Form. Louisiana State Univ., 1941

Chopp, Rebecca. (2005) "The social value of civil discourse" Colegate University. Date found: July 5, 2006 at http://www4.colgate.edu/scene/sept2005/president.html.

Lexington Mass. (n.d.) "Guidelines for Civil Discourse." Date found: July 6, 2006 at http://ci.lexington.ma.us/NoPlace4Hate/CivilDiscourse.htm.

Limerick, P. N. ( 31 October 1993 ) "Dancing with Professors: The Trouble with Academic Prose." New York Times Book Review. Date found: July 7, 2006 at http://trc.ucdavis.edu/bajaffee/NEM150/Course%20Content/dancing.htm.

Nystrand, M. (1982) What Writers Know: The Language, Process, and Structure of Written Discourse. New York: Academic

Porter, James (1992). Audience and Rhetoric: An Archaeological Composition of the Discourse Community. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Swales, J. M. (1990) Genre Analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Vallee, Virginia. (n.d.) "Terms" The Roots of Sound Rational Thinking. Date found: July 6, 2006 at http://plusroot.com/term.html.  

[top]

Dr. Bonnie Duncan
2004; Last revised June 14, 2008
bduncan@millersville.edu
1-717-871-2080
English Department
Millersville University
Millersville, PA 17551

Other Contacts:
Millersville Information Technology Help Desk:
1-717-871-2371, 1-800-509-9605

Blackboard Help Desk:
Help Desk # for B'board
1-866-334-9174