PDF (Whole Thesis) - USQ ePrints - University of Southern ...

A criticism made by Blommaert that “power relations are often predefined and then
confirmed by features of discourse (sometimes in very questionable ways…)” (2001, p. 15)
has been minimised by ensuring integrity in analysis is maintained by not predicting
outcomes of the data, but rather enabling findings to emerge from a thorough, structured and
explicitly articulated data analysis. The selection of primary and secondary sources analysed
are through “research conducted with a broad commitment to exploring the social and
political implications of findings” (Wetherell, 2001, p. 385). Doing so avoids the claim
Schegloff (who is a conversation analyst) makes of some critical discourse analysts having
“endogenous interpretations” (Wetherell, 2001, p. 386), or as Verschueren colourfully
describes of some analysts “…playing fast and loose with the observable facts in order to
support preconceived claims” (2001, p. 60); and in a direct criticism of an aspect of the work
of Fairclough and Chouliaraki, “…what seems to be transpiring through the interpretativeexplanatory
and evaluative conclusions is likely to be the product of conviction rather than
the result of careful step-by-step analysis that reflexively questions its owns observations and
conclusions” (2001, p. 65, emphasis added). Similar criticisms are lodged at historians when
working with primary source documents, as Evans points out in his criticisms of another
historian who engaged in less-than-scholarly reporting of research findings, claiming:
“Abraham, it seems, had merely scoured the archives for ‘evidence’ that would back it up”
(2000, p. 119). How this type of sloppy work is avoided is outlined both in the historical
methodology section of this chapter, and more specifically in the research design and conduct
section, and continued albeit to a lesser degree in Chapter 4: Data Analysis Introduction.
To move now to define more closely CDA, Luke succinctly writes it is:
…a contemporary approach to the study of language and discourses in social
institutions. Drawing on poststructuralist discourse theory and critical linguistics, it
focuses on how social relations, identity, knowledge and power are constructed
through written and spoken texts in communities, schools and classrooms. (n.d., p. 1)
Drawing on this definition provided by Luke, this project closely examines the power and
social relations contained within official documents such as textbooks, policy documents and
syllabuses to expose how these types of texts have been, and continue to be, used by various
individuals and groups to exert power through their use within schools. CDA is so concerned
with how the broader societal discourses influences the data it analyses, that van Dijk refers
to it as a “sociopolitical discourse analysis” (2001b, p. 300). One aspect considered important
84