International Association of Educators   |  ISSN: 1949-4270   |  e-ISSN: 1949-4289

Original article | Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 2020, Vol. 15(2) 25-40

Critical Discourse Analysis: An Effective Tool for Critical Peace Education Informed by Freirean Dialogue

Gülistan Gürsel-Bilgin

pp. 25 - 40   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2020.251.2   |  Manu. Number: MANU-2002-05-0002.R1

Published online: June 20, 2020  |   Number of Views: 199  |  Number of Download: 394


Abstract

This study emphasizes that research and practice regarding employing dialogue as transformative pedagogy should be investigated and cultivated by peace educators in ways relevant to various contexts. In this regard, Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) has a valuable potential to contribute to the development of this relatively new scholarly field by providing effective tools to problematize and analyze social practices. This paper explores critical peace education as it is informed by the dialogical method of emancipatory education, and scrutinizes the promising potential of CDA as an essential tool for on-going research in the field. Towards this goal, this paper includes two subsections. The first section discusses Freirean dialogue and his six preconditions (i.e., love, humility, faith, hope, trust, and critical thinking) as fundamental constructs for critical peace education. The second section explores how the theories, goals, and methods of CDA in current discourse studies connect to constructs in Freirean dialogue and peace education. This section concentrates on four prominent approaches developed by Scollon, Gee, Kress, and Fairclough to underline their key aspects from a Freirian dialogic perspective. The final section discusses the possible affordances and limitations for employing CDA in the study of critical peace education.

Keywords: Critical Peace Education, Freirean Dialogue, Critical Discourse Analysis, Dialogue as Peace Pedagogy, Transformative Pedagogy


How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Gursel-Bilgin, G. (2020). Critical Discourse Analysis: An Effective Tool for Critical Peace Education Informed by Freirean Dialogue . Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 15(2), 25-40. doi: 10.29329/epasr.2020.251.2

Harvard
Gursel-Bilgin, G. (2020). Critical Discourse Analysis: An Effective Tool for Critical Peace Education Informed by Freirean Dialogue . Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 15(2), pp. 25-40.

Chicago 16th edition
Gursel-Bilgin, Gulistan (2020). "Critical Discourse Analysis: An Effective Tool for Critical Peace Education Informed by Freirean Dialogue ". Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 15 (2):25-40. doi:10.29329/epasr.2020.251.2.

References
  1. Amer, M. (2012). The discourse of homeland: the construction of Palestinian national identity in Palestinian secularist and Islamist discourses. Critical Discourse Studies, 9(2). [Google Scholar]
  2. Bajaj, M. (2008). Critical Peace Education. In M. Bajaj, (Ed.) Encyclopaedia of Peace Education. New York: Colombia Teacher's College.  [Google Scholar]
  3. Bajaj, M. (2010). The Politics, Praxis, and Possibilities of Critical Peace Education. Journal of Peace Education. 7(2).  [Google Scholar]
  4. Bartlett, L. (2008). Paulo Freire and peace education. Encyclopedia of Peace Education, Teachers College, Columbia University.  Retrieved on May 13th 2014 from http://www.tc.columbia.edu/centers/epe/PDF%20articles/Bartlett_ch5_22feb08.pdf [Google Scholar]
  5. Chouliaraki, L., & Fairclough, N. (1999) Discourse in Late Modernity: Rethinking critical discourse analysis. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.  [Google Scholar]
  6. Cissna, K. N. & Anderson, R. (1998).Theorizing about Dialogic Moments: The Buber-Rogers Position and Postmodern Themes. Communication Theory. Pp. 63-104. [Google Scholar]
  7. Diaz-Soto, L. (2005). How can we teach peace when we are so outraged? A call for critical peace education. Taboo: The Journal of Culture and Education, Fall-Winter: 91-96. [Google Scholar]
  8. Fairclough, N. (2003). Analyzing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. Routledge: London and New York.  [Google Scholar]
  9. Fairclough, N. & Wodak, R. 1997 Critical discourse analysis, in T. van Dijk (Ed.)  Discourse as Social Interaction. London: Sage [Google Scholar]
  10. Fairclough, N. (2001).The dialectics of discourse. Textus XIV, pages 231-242. [Google Scholar]
  11. Fairclough, N. (2012). Critical discourse analysis. International Advances in Engineering and Technology (IAET) Vol.7 July 2012 International Scientific Researchers (ISR). Retrieved in May 13th 2014 from http://scholarism.net/FullText/2012071.pdf [Google Scholar]
  12. Fairclough, N. 2009b A dialectical-relational approach to critical discourse analysis in social research. In M. Meyer & R. Wodak (Eds.) Methods in Critical Discourse Analysis. 2nd edition. London: Sage [Google Scholar]
  13. Fairclough, N., Graham, P., Lemke, J. & Wodak, R. (2004). Introduction. Critical Discourse Studies 1(1): 1-7. [Google Scholar]
  14. Foucault, M. (1972). The archeology of knowledge and the discourse on language. New York: Pantheon Books. [Google Scholar]
  15. Foucault, M. (1975). Discipline and Punish: the Birth of the Prison, New York: Random House. [Google Scholar]
  16. Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. New York: Pantheon. [Google Scholar]
  17. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London, Penguin. [Google Scholar]
  18. Freire, P. (1972). Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Harmondsworth: Penguin.  [Google Scholar]
  19. Freire, P. (1998c) Teachers as CulturalWorkers: Letters to those who dare teach. Boulder, CO,Westview Press. [Google Scholar]
  20. Freire, P. (2005) Education for Critical Consciousness. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group. [Google Scholar]
  21. Freire, P. (2013). Pedagogy of the oppressed. In D. J. Flinders and S. J. Thornton (Eds.). The curriculum studies reader. New York: Routledge.  [Google Scholar]
  22. Freire, P., Macedo, D.  (1995). "A Dialogue: Culture, Language, and Race" in Harvard Educational Review, vol. 65, no. 3.  [Google Scholar]
  23. Gavriely-Nuri, D. (2012). Cultural approach to CDA. Critical Discourse Studies, 9(1), 77-85.  [Google Scholar]
  24. Gavriely-Nuri, D. D. (2014). 'Taking peace – Going to war': Peace in the service of the Israeli just war rhetoric. Critical Discourse Studies, 11(1), 1-18. [Google Scholar]
  25. Gee, J (2011). How to do discourse analysis: A tool kit. New York. Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  26. Gee, J. (1990). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology and discourses. New York: Falmer. [Google Scholar]
  27. Gumperz, J. 81982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, UK: [Google Scholar]
  28. Harris, I. (2004). Peace education theory. Journal of Peace Education, 1(1): 5-20. [Google Scholar]
  29. Harris, I. M. & Morrison, M. L. (2003) Peace education. McFarland Company, Inc., Publishers. [Google Scholar]
  30. Hartley, J. (2010). Silly citizenship. Critical Discourse Studies, 7(4), 233-248. [Google Scholar]
  31. Harvey, D. (1996). Justice, Nature and the Geography of Difference. Oxford: Blackwell [Google Scholar]
  32. Holand, D., & Quinn, N. (Eds.). (1987). Cultural models in language and thought. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  33. Hymes, D. (1974). Foundations of sociolinguistics. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.   [Google Scholar]
  34. Kress, G., van Leeuwen (2001). Multimodal Discourse - The Modes and Media of Contemporary Communication.  London: Arnold. [Google Scholar]
  35. Kress, G., van Leeuwen, T. (1997). Reading images: The grammar of visual design. London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  36. Kress, G. (2010) Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication. London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  37. Kress, G. (2011) Multimodal discourse analysis, in J.P. Gee and M. Handford (eds.) Handbook of Discourse Analysis. New York and London: RoutledgeFalmer. [Google Scholar]
  38. Kress, G.R., van Leeuwen, T. (1996). Reading Images: the grammar of graphic design. London: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  39. Labov, W., & Waletzky, J. (1967). Narrative Analysis: Oral versions of person experiences. In J. Helm (Ed.) Essays on the verbal and visual arts: Proceedings of the 1966 Annual Spring Meeting of the American Ethnological Society. Seattle: University of Washington Press. [Google Scholar]
  40. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar]
  41. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]
  42. Macedo, D. (2005). Introduction to the anniversary edition. P. Freire. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Continuum International Publishing Group.  [Google Scholar]
  43. Machin, D., Van Leeuwen, T. (2009). Toys as discourse: children's war toys and the war on terror. Critical Discourse Studies, 6(1), 51-63.  [Google Scholar]
  44. Meadows, B. (2009). Capital negotiation and identity practices: investigating symbolic capital from the 'ground up'. Critical Discourse Studies, 6(1), 15-30.  [Google Scholar]
  45. Meyer, M. & Wodak R. (2009).  Methods in Critical Discourse Analysis. 2nd edition. London:Sage [Google Scholar]
  46. Miller, G. D. (1998). Negotiating Toward Truth: The Extinction of Teachers and Students. The Netherlands: Value Inguiry Book Series.  [Google Scholar]
  47. Mirra, C. (2008). U.S. Foreign Policy and the Prospects for Peace Education.Jefferson, NC: McFarland Press. [Google Scholar]
  48. Montgomery, K. (2006). Racialized hegemony and nationalist mythologies: Representations of war and peace in high school history textbooks, 1945-2005. Journal of Peace Education, 3(1): 19-37. [Google Scholar]
  49. Navarro-Castro, L., Nario-Galace, J. (2010). Peace education: A pathway to a culture of peace. The Center for Peace Education at Miriam College, Quezon City, Philippines. [Google Scholar]
  50. Page, James S. (2008) Peace Education: Exploring Ethical and Philosophical Foundations. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  51. Pêcheux (M.).  1982. Language, Semantics and Ideology. London: Macmillan.Wodak (R.) & Meyer (M.) 2001. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage.  [Google Scholar]
  52. Reardon, B. (1988). Comprehensive peace education. New York and London: Teachers College Press. [Google Scholar]
  53. Reardon, Betty (2001). Education for a Culture of Peace in a Gender Perspective. UNESCO.  [Google Scholar]
  54. Rogers, R. (2011). An introduction to critical discourse analysis in education. New York and London: Routledge.  [Google Scholar]
  55. Rule, P. 2004. Dialogic spaces; adult education projects and social engagement. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 23(4): pp.319–334. [Google Scholar]
  56. Scollon, R. (2001). Mediated discourse: The nexus of practice. London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  57. Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. (1981). Narrative, literacy and face in interethnic communication. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. [Google Scholar]
  58. Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. W. (2002). Why do we need nexus analysis? Talk given at the PARC Forum, Thursday, December 12, 2002. Palo Alto, California.  [Google Scholar]
  59. Strauss, C., & Quinn, N. (1997). A cognitive theory of cultural meanings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  60. van Zoonen, L., Vis, F., & Mihelj, S. (2010). Performing citizenship on YouTube: activism, satire and online debate around the anti-Islam video Fitna. Critical Discourse Studies, 7(4). [Google Scholar]
  61. Wodak, R., Meyer, M (2001). Methods of critical discourse analysis. London: Sage. [Google Scholar]
  62. Wulf, C. (1974). Handbook of peace education. Frankfurt, Germany: International Peace Research Association. [Google Scholar]