DP views thinking/learning as socially constructed through interactions, not internal cognition. It was used as a "sensitizing frame" rather than standalone method. This perspective challenged cognitivist competency notions.

State University of New York at Binghamton

- Discursive Psychology as a "Sensitizing Frame"
- Multimodal Discourse
- Post-Critical Ethnography
- Methodological Synthesis
- Field Notes Limitation

Research Design and Methods: The study's methodological approach, innovations, and constraints

- Discursive Psychology as a "Sensitizing Frame"
- Dis/ability Notation
- Systematic Instruction Ideology

Theoretical Foundations - Core concepts framing the disability construction argument

Lester, J. N. (Ed.). (2021). Discursive Psychology and Disability. Palgrave Studies in Discursive Psychology. Springer Nature Switzerland AG.

Reference For: Discursive Psychology and Disability

Reliance on field notes vs. audio/video recordings limited DP analysis. Researchers couldn't repeatedly listen to interactions as is typical. Data became researcher constructions rather than objective records.

Field Notes Limitation

Discursive Psychology (DP) as a "Sensitizing Frame"

The study defined discourse broadly beyond language. Gestures, eye gaze, spatial positioning counted as valid communicative actions. This captured non-linguistic ways students expressed themselves.

Multimodal Discourse

This is a three-year study in a Southeastern US separate school setting. Used constant comparative analysis with multiple data sources (field notes, interviews, artifacts). Combined macro thematic and micro discourse approaches.

Research Design: Post-Critical Ethnography

This study innovatively combined DSE frameworks with DP approaches. Jefferson and Mondada techniques captured environmental factors usually ignored. This mixing raised questions about DP's compatibility with other methods.

Methodological Synthesis

Applied behavior analysis principles drove educational practices. This ideology permeated all classroom interactions. The authors argue it harms both students and teachers.

Systemic Instruction Ideology

Schools sustain a rigid binary between ability and disability based on medicalized conceptions. This dichotomy positions students categorically as "abled" or "dis/abled" with hierarchical implications. The binary naturalizes the idea that some students are competent while others are incompetent. Fixed categories prevent recognition of disability as socially constructed.

Learn Before

Related