Author: smanuels

While being apart of the dominant secondary discourse of dentistry there are ways of transferring.It is possible for someone to transfer the ideas, or values learned to a different part of the discourse. In dentistry there are subunits within the discourse. This sub units use the same language to make connections between specific practices within dentistry. Understanding the language in a discourse is important because it shows ways of fluency, which is important for identity. This  identity is commonly shown by a DMD, that is required for everyone that is in the dentistry discourse. Although not everyone has to participate in the same practices in order to be fluent in a discourse. As talked about there are many sub units in dentistry that require different techniques. These techniques are offered by specialties that all require that identity of a DMD, but can have a certification in ; orthodontics ;maxillofacial surgery; pediatrics ;etc. The connections between these subunits and the overall discourse are shown through a common language. Having a accredited DMD, shows that you are a part of a dominant secondary discourse, but having a speciality certifications allows you to practice in different aspects of the discourse. However, being a dentist, orthodontist, or any other personal that holds a DMD will have an honorable name in their community, which can be a way of prestige. This prestige shows that they are specifically a part of  dominant secondary discourse according to the scholar Gee.time on task: 25 mins

Does my analysis of this particular Discourse have components that do not quite fit into a straightforward application of Gee’s ideas? What are they? (If so, perhaps you have something important to ADD to – or even CHALLENGE Gee’s sense of – the ways that Discourses work.)

The idea of connections, doesn’t automatically come to my mind when I think about the discourse of dentistry. Although the idea of transferring did, which made me think of the building task connections. I really think that the building task connections will add to Gees ideas of transferring within the discourse. I think this is important because if it wasn’t for the connections between the different levels within one discourse, not every patient would be taken care of properly. I think this being one of my main claims, would benefit my paper.

Are there reasons to consider the ways your Discourse works very similarly to other, perhaps related Discourses? Maybe your Discourse is a subset of a broader set of Discourses. (If so, perhaps your analysis may be able to tell us about this broader set of Discourses.)

It depends if I do being a dentist as a separate discourse as an orthodontist or any other dental specialty then get they do work very similar because they work together through the connections they have in the separate discourse. I do think that my discourse can be the broad term of dentistry then talk about how their are sub parts of this discourse that are still within the same discourse by the building task of connections and knowledge. Although the ways of practicing and doing aren’t totally the same because one might be better in one part of the discourse than one other. Also not everyone within the same discourse have to have the same ideas are another in the discourse.

Our Discourse analyses are all limited by the source material from which we’ve drawn. Hopefully, you’ve chosen really good artifacts that help you reveal some key features of the Discourse. But there are probably some important LIMITATIONS that you can see. What are they? These are possibly areas for further inquiry should one pursue the project further.

I think I need to find some better artifacts to explain the connections between the sub parts of the discourse. I think some of my artifacts need to be changed to better my explanation between the connections with the other building task. Also how they differ, but are still a part of the same general discourse of dentistry. Time on Task 30 mins

Point 1: In the first body paragraph my main claim is showing the discourse I will be discussing is a dominant secondary discourse.

Point 2: I currently talk about identifies and relationships, but I want to change that to changing it to the ideas of connections throughout a discourse. Also mention Gees Ideas of transferring.

Point 3: I would then change just discourse the filtering to instead talking about the similar ways of identities within the subunit and the overall discourse.

Point 4: I would then like to discuss how that even though they practice different they overall use the connections to bring the best care to each patient, by referring them to to someone with better knowledge in that specific part of a discourse.

time on task: 20 mins

collreadwrit2e

overall time on task 1hr and 15 mins ishhh

While being apart of the dominant secondary discourse of dentistry there are ways of transferring.It is possible for someone to transfer the ideas, or values learned to a different part of the discourse. In dentistry there are subunits within the discourse. This sub units use the same language to make connections between specific practices within dentistry. Understanding the language in a discourse is important because it shows ways of fluency, which is important for identity. This  identity is commonly shown by a DMD, that is required for everyone that is in the dentistry discourse. Although not everyone has to participate in the same practices in order to be fluent in a discourse. As talked about there are many sub units in dentistry that require different techniques. These techniques are offered by specialties that all require that identity of a DMD, but can have a certification in ; orthodontics ;maxillofacial surgery; pediatrics ;etc. The connections between these subunits and the overall discourse are shown through a common language. Having a accredited DMD, shows that you are a part of a dominant secondary discourse, but having a speciality certifications allows you to practice in different aspects of the discourse. However, being a dentist, orthodontist, or any other personal that holds a DMD will have an honorable name in their community, which can be a way of prestige. This prestige shows that they are specifically a part of  dominant secondary discourse according to the scholar Gee.

time on task: 25 mins

collreadwrit2e

overall time on task 1hr and 15 mins ishhh

In my revisions my main goal was to clarify my ideas on the building task within the dentistry discourse. In both my paragraphs there was a lack of identifying what discourse dentistry was apart of, so within I made sure to mention clearly what discourse I was identifying.  I also started in the second paragraph that there could be a potential point of trying to wrap in the way that transferring between the discourse, but being still in the same dominant discourse. I started to make the move in the paragraph below, but I am still trying to gather some more data before I go through with this idea in my whole paragraph. This helped me a little bit more on my structuring for my paper. I think this movement of using Gees building task to show the resemblement between the two different practice in the same discourse. I also in both my paragraph tried to apply the formulas. I stated first my ideas I was displaying, then what Gees ideas was, lastly used my data to prove my point. I made sure to analyze my data clearly.

 

Throughout life someone will show a specific discourse they take part in by displaying a set of identities that relate to that discourse. Gee describes a identity, as something “we use [as] language to get recognized as taking on a certain identity or role, that is, to build an identity here and now” (33). It is a task, or way of speaking that shows they are fluent in a Discourse. A common identity of a dentist in a dominant secondary Discourse is someone who has a lot of knowledge, which can be shown by ,“a bachelor’s degree, a dental degree (DDS or DMD)… [and] also was required to get a masters in craniofacial biology”(Meru 1). As a dentist in a dominant secondary discourse they have to understand a variety of terms that will be used in everyday procedure. Not having all this information would not allow the dentist to be able to diagnose a patient properly can would not allow their to be prestige. This prestige can come from a patient, which can allow for a relationship between the doctor and patient with his proper doings of procedures.  

As a dentist in a dominant secondary discourse they use their specific identities to have successful practices throughout their work days. The idea of practice is “social recognized and institutionally or culturally supported endeavor[s] that usually involve sequencing or combining actions in certain ways” (Gee 17). The practices are ways of practicing what is learned, or expected for that specific Discourse. Although there are ways of transferring ideas into different parts of the Discourse, “as one can transfer a grammatical feature from one language to another”(Gee 9). As orthodontist the idea needed are similar, but things can be advanced to be able to practice different things. As an orthodontist their main goal is dealing with “a lot of adult interdisciplinary cases that I treat in conjunction with the dentist, periodontist, prosthodontist and surgeon”(Meru 1). As Gee would explain he is transferring his knowledge in that field to someone in that field that is more specialized in the specific issue. They work in a way that builds a connection in order to make sure each patient is properly taken care of.

collreadwrit2e

1hr 20 mins

While revising my paper it really helped to look at my peer reviewers comments prior to trying to fix anything about my paper. Also after reading the comments made by peers I went back and did the assignments of making an outline, that outlined allowed me to ask and answer the questions in habits of a creative mind. While asking some questions I realized a main issue in my paper is the gap between my scholar information and data. I feel as if my opinion is not very well incorporated, but my data is good. I also am realizing after this editing process that my paper is of path, and its not very well flowed. I really am considering different ways of structuring my paper in order to allow the reader to be less confused with my point. I can tell that I was very lost in my own thoughts. After getting some clarity, I can now develop better thoughts to express what I am saying with my own thoughts, Gee’s ideas, and my data. It also almost goes off a cliff towards the end, as my peer reviewer said my information gets duller as my paper progresses. So this is definitely an area for help, but I think once I restructure my ideas will be clearer. I am most curious on if their is places I can challenge maybe, or even make more complex of a claim or idea. I need to really go back and focus on what TASK are most important to my paper, also make sure everything am saying makes sense in the form of a structure. I want to make my voice known more, because I do think it lacks my own opinion as stated before. Overall I have some areas that need to be worked on, but I think once I did this assignment, and asked the questions from the reading it helped my break down my paper.

collreadwrit2e 50 mins

1. When talking with my peers I discussed the ideas of my artifacts with them. My peer reviewers brought it to my attention that my quotes were strong, but the introduction of the quotes wasn’t the best they could be. I was given the advice to try and integrate my idea more before stating the quote. They did agree that the data I used helped benefit my agreement with relation to Gee and his terms on secondary discourse. I am thinking about doing a little bit more research on the topic to maybe find a few more details that can better my paper. Like Carolina helped pointed out, another quote for explaining the ideas of transferring will better support my thought. I do think that organizing my quotes better, and even improving some data is something that I need to work on.
2. As the Habits of the creative minds stated, I do need to do some rethinking of my quotes. Yes, so of them are good, but I think I can find so better ones. It was pointed out by some peers that a quotes is reading something else to them than what I thought it was reading. So maybe going over some of the quotes and better analyzing them could help out my case. I have a lot of thoughts that I would like to help figure after hearing what my peers had to say. I will have to take sometime and analyze my quotes better, or as I said in the first paragraph do some more research. Doing some more research is not really a bad thing. I also want to work on adding some language that we talk about in class to my paper. What I mean by that is adding some but, and, or statements to direct my argument.
3. Overall, my peers agreed that my introduction was very clear on introducing the ideas of Gee. Even throughout my body paragraphs I was told that when I talked about Gee I explained what Gees definitions are clearly, as if they were outsiders of the classroom they could of clearly understood Gees ideas. I do think that maybe my organization of quotes and explanation in my introduction are a little wacky, but I am planning on fixing that. I also want to explore the idea of adding another introduction body paragraph and just focus on what my discourse is because I was told my peer reviewers that it kind of lacked my claim being discussed. Which after looking at I can agree. So I do plan on restructuring my introduction a little bit, and while doing that fixing my papers to form a new body paragraph that I think will benefit me.
4. I think my peer reviewers did answer my question whether or not my ideas where clear enough to the reader. I did think that they also answered my other questions. They even gave me so extra advice which was nice. They did say I was on the right track which is good, because this assignment did confuse me a little bit. Also another thing is that I do think all the advice they gave me is important and I do take the information to heart after I look at the comments. If they take the time to read my paper and give me advice then it clearly means that it is an issue that I can fix. Worse comes to worse is I don’t take their advice, but that is my choice as a writer. In my revision I will have their comments up as I write my second draft to this assignment.
5. time on task 45 mins collreadwrit2e

The main problem I am having is the ability to get my point across. I am unsure if I completely understand the prompt, so if you guys have any advice on whether I am going in the right direction or not that would be greatly appreciated. I feel like I made the point that the dentistry discourse being a dominant secondary discourse is clear. If not then please specify where I should make it more clear. I think I need more help on integrating the building task, if there is any opinions on how I can improve the flow of talking about the building task I would love to hear it. I don’t really know if I am actually introducing them correctly in the paper it is something I know I need to go back too. Also my last paragraph is struggling, I understand. I am honestly at a real lost with this assignment so any help would be greatly appreciated.

collreadwrit2e

time on task 20min

The main problem I am having is the ability to get my point across. I am unsure if I completely understand the prompt, so if you guys have any advice on whether I am going in the right direction or not that would be greatly appreciated. I feel like I made the point that the dentistry discourse being a dominant secondary discourse is clear. If not then please specify where I should make it more clear. I think I need more help on integrating the building task, if there is any opinions on how I can improve the flow of talking about the building task I would love to hear it. I don’t really know if I am actually introducing them correctly in the paper it is something I know I need to go back too. Also my last paragraph is struggling, I understand. I am honestly at a real lost with this assignment so any help would be greatly appreciated.

 

collreadwrit2e

This new artifact is really helpful to my paper, for the reason that it really helps support the ideas of values demonstrated in the dentistry discourse. This article very easily explains that there are three basic values needed. These three values are known as persona growth, prestige, and friendship. When it explains these values it goes in depth about the practice that goes with that specific value. For the value of friendship it it describes the relationship that are needed in order to understand the patient. This relationship that is shown, helps show that there is a status. This status continues to show that there is honor that is shown from the work of the dentist. It is also highly talked about that there is an idea of social goods needed, which are talked as gifts. These gifts are understood as ways of getting a feeling accomplishment when they have a good day at work. A good day at work means that there was clearly some personal growth, for the reason that they feel like they have some more self confidence. This article of just showing value can really help with the saying- valuing idea that Gee explains. There is a lot of significance behind this article and can bring a lot of data to my thoughts of dentistry and its relationship to dominant secondary discourse.

“collreadwrit2e”

time on task 1 hr

1. In my discourse of dentistry it can be proven that it is a dominant discourse. Gee indicates that it is “dominant Discourses are secondary Discourses the mastery of which, at a particular place and time, brings with it the (potential acquisition of social “good”, money, prestige, status)”(8). As a dentist in a medical field there is a level of respect that is given from a people outside of that discourse, which would show that a dentist has a status. Which can also be shown in the in the article of “A Day in the life of a dentist” when it explains “you are there to be the doctor who diagnoses, the friend who listens and cares, the psychologist who understands, the mechanic who fixes, the artist who recreates and designs, the manager who leads” (Nguyen, 2). This status of  a doctor shows that you have a set of responsibilities that are expected from a patient when they chose to become your patient, which while bring you social goods. Other people will hear about how great you are as  a doctor when you display good qualities as a dentist. Also it is known that the more patients you have the more successful you are and can bring prestige.
2. Gee defines Discourses as “saying (writing)-doing-being-valuing-believing combinations” (6), in my discourse I see all of those combinations being shown. Although I do see the valuing is being shown the most throughout this discourse. The reason I chose this combination is that a dentist has to have value in order to demonstrate the best possible doing and saying tasks of their discourse. The value needs to first come from the dentist finding interest in the knowledge that they are demonstrating in daily procedures. If they don’t understand how valuable every part of their job is can effect a patient emotionally and physically. Although if a dentist is successful at the practice they are demonstrating through language with the knowledge they have can allow a patient to have a god procedure. The result of a good appointment can also bring value to the dentist name, for the reason that other clients will have pride in their dentist to talk highly of them. Also a dentist needs to have value in his and her clients end product, because that is his or her name on the line. Nguyen says it himself “Every job has its stressors, and dealing with people will always be a challenge, but I love the precision of a job well done. Seeing a patient’s new smile warms my heart, and all my worries drift away” (2). That end result of a successful smile is why he struggled through hard class and takes on long days. It because he find his value in the results of his clients.
3. In this discourse there are many sign systems that are needed to actively participate in this discourse. This sign systems are known as languages that are used throughout the discourse to show that they are fluent. There are many terms that need to be understood in order to understand what others are saying in the specific discourse. If you are not fluent  in the way a dentist talks then you will clearly be lost, because the way a dentist talks is very specific. If you are not apart of a dental discourse then you may not understand what the routine is “cleanings, cleanings, fillings, check-up, review and a treatment plan consult” (Nguyen 2). To keep up with the dentist day then being fluent in all of the possible procedure and terms are needed, so that way time isn’t wasted trying to explain thing that should already be known. Not knowing all the terms a dentist use, or the procedure will the show that you are not apart of this dominant discourse. Information once learned properly can be transferred through really any health discourse because the guidelines are pretty similar with terms and procedures. Although not  knowing certain things in a particular discourse can hold someone up from understand something. As Meru states “think the most crucial part of orthodontics is a wide knowledge of the literature, as well as mechanics and physics such that I can plan cases and set them up for success from the beginning. Hand skills are also very important in orthodontics” (1). This indicates that you do need a wide range of knowledge in different thing in order to be successful in this discourse. Lacking any information, or engagement can cause there to be roadblocks, because information is always up and coming in the health field. Not knowing new trends can effect a doctor from diagnosing certain case as stated, “orthodontics is advancing all the time, and in most recent years we have seen an increase in the use of skeletal anchorage, also known as mini implants. These have helped to replace the use of hated appliances such as headgear and large bulky appliances” (1). Without staying in touch with new advancement would cause patients to not get the best treatment. Therefor lacking to be fluent in the discourse would not staying engaged, not have proper knowledge, and not knowing a routine of a day in dentistry.
4. Time on task: 2hrs and a half hours ishhh
5. collreadwrit2e

Chosen Discourse: Dentistry

Artifacts:

1. Orthodontics

https://www.asdanet.org/life-of-a-dentist/orthodontics.aspx

2. A Day in the Life of A Dentist

https://www.myhealthcareer.com.au/dentistry/a-day-in-the-life-of-a-dentist

Discourse Analysis Worksheets:

Statement: 

In my discourse of dentistry there are many ways of doing, saying, valuing, and believing demonstrated. It was very helpful to point how these things can be shown by doing these worksheets. While doing these worksheets and reading my artifacts it helped me to learn the combinations of this specific discourse known as dentistry. It was shown that there can be many ways of showing value within this discourse. The values that can be shown through satisfaction of a patient’s overall experience and through the pride the dentist takes in an operation through the knowledge they have developed. Also the ways of being a dentist isn’t just about being a doctor, they are also a model for their patients, or even friends in a way. There is an amount of trust gained to form a relationship between a dentist and patient. Although of course they do have to do the task they are expected to do it is easier with a relationship. The doing can vary depending on the type of dentist they are. Which is why there are many combinations in dentistry, such as orthodontics. Depending in the part of dentistry someone is fluent in will depend on the way they speak, or find meaning to certain words. Some do their daily routines different than other. Which is fine because even though they do things differently they are still overall in the dentistry discourse.

Time on Task: 

two and half hours or so

collreadwrit2e