Wenwen_Tian_Transcription_of_supervisory_discourse

					Designing a Transcription System for Face-
  to-face PhD Supervisory Discourse: A
        Selective-specificity Model




 Presenter: Wenwen Tian

 Co-authors: Dr. Pattamawan Jimarkon
             Asst. Prof. Dr. Wareesiri Singhasiri

                                                    22nd April 2011
                 Outline

1.   Rationale
2.   Overview of data
3.   Theoretical background
4.   Procedures
5.   Conclusion
6.   Reflections &Implications




                                 2
1. Rationale


               -   What should be transcribed?
               -   How is it transcribed?
               -   Who should do it? Why?
               -   Research interests & data analysis focus?
               -   Principles & conventions?

                           ????……………………………………..




                                                               3
1. Rationale (Cont’d)


    Recent research has been dominantly focused on
     reviewing transcription principles and comparing
     transcription conventions (e.g., Cook, 1995; Dressler &
     Kreuz, 2000; Du Bois, 2010; O’Connell & Kowal, 1999,
     2010).

    Qualitative studies normally end up with several words
     (e.g., “verbatim” or “detailed” transcription was completed)
     documenting the transcription process as a take-for-grant
     method rather than the result of a series of choices
     (Davidson, 2009; Ochs, 1979).

    Empirical accounts of transcription process are needed
     (Davidson, 2009; Lapadat & Lindsay, 1998).

                                                                    4
2. Overview of data


 Type: Audio-taped face-to-face supervisory meetings

 Time: June – September 2010

 Participants: supervisors & PhD candidates

 Setting: international doctoral program in Applied Linguistics

 Medium language: English

 Research purposes (PhD thesis research):
  To investigate knowledge building & power manifestation
  by exploring linguistic features & supervisory discourse patterns


                                                                      5
    3. Theoretical background

3.1 Transcription as theory—Theoretical decisions

    Transcription is a selective process reflecting theoretical goals
     and definitions” (Ochs,1979, p. 44).

     Researchers make decisions about transcription that imprint the
      discourse theories they hold (Lapadat & Lindsay,1998).

     A continuum of discourse theories (Oliver, et al., 2005):

          Naturalism_----------------- _denaturalism

                             Be dynamic/reflective by
                                interacting with data



                                                                         6
3. Theoretical background (Cont’d)

  3.2 Transcription as a method—Methodological decisions




- A series of methodological choices to seek, select, and
  thereby develop a transcription system for specific
  research purposes (Du, Bois, 1991; Ochs, 1979).

 How to organize the layout the transcripts?
 What conventions should be used?
 How paralinguistic and nonverbal information should be symbolized?




                                                                       7
3. Theoretical background (Cont’d)
 3.3 Transcription as a tool for data analysis




  Psathas and Anderson (1990) view that the process of
   transcribing is analytical.

  Bucholtz (2000) argues that transcription is a reflective
   discourse analysis involving both interpretive and
   representational processes.

  Bailey (2008) perceives transcription as an interpretive
   process therefore the first step in analyzing data.




                                                               8
   4. Procedures
4.1 Stage one: Select basic principles for designing a transcription
     system (Fixed menu vs. buffet) --- Being selective & specific

                 Table1. A summary of four current transcription systems

    Author                  Title                         Principle                             Maxims
 Du Bois          Transcription design     Transcription is a broad-to-narrow         - Category definition
 (1991, 1993)     principles for spoken    way of understanding and                   - Accessibility
                  Discourse research ( DT) representing data.                         - Robustness
                                                                                      - Economy
                                                                                      - Adaptability
 Ehlich (1993)    Heuristic Interpretative    Transcription is interpretative, and    - Simplicity and validity
                  Auditory Transcription     segmentation and commentary of           - Good readability and
                  (HlAT)                     data are based on researchers’             correctability
                                             reflective knowledge.                    - Minimum of transcriber
                                                                                        and user training
 Jefferson        Transcription notation      Transcription is practical for          - Explanatory
 ( 1984, 1989)                               apprehending naturally occurred          - Readability
                                             conversation and making it               - Systematic
                                             available for extended analysis
 MacWhinney       Codes for the Human        Making the data compatible for           - Readability
 (1991)           Analysis of Transcripts    computer data entry                      - Clarity
                  (CHAT)
                                                                                                                  9
                                                                       (See details in O'Connell & Kowal, 2010)
4. Procedures (Cont’d)
    Stage two: Tuning in data

   Listen to data back and forth---1st step to analyze data
    - To interact & understand data
    - To categorize/group data

   Example 1
    C2’s session: 2
    Date: 06-07-2010, 1:30 am
    Length: 17 minutes and 18 seconds
    Note: C2 recorded her session and transferred data to R immediately
          after her supervisory meeting. It should be noted that her 5-year-
          old son was sick that day and the young boy was playing alone
          outside A’s office when C2 had her supervision.



                                                                               10
4. Procedures (Cont’d)
      Stage three: Selecting transcription symbols
                   for a broad transcription



   Why: Any established convention is not applicable to the current data.

   How: Select transcription symbols from different conventions

   Purposes:
    - Get a sketch of each supervisory session
    - Note down constraints & problems of using the selected
      transcription symbols


   See Table 2 for selected transcription symbols


                                                                       11
 Table 2 Selected transcription symbols

     Symbols                                                   Descriptions
           …            Three dots indicate a perceptible pause less more than 3 seconds within a turn.

          (.3)          Numbers in parentheses show length of pauses which are more than 3 seconds.

            .           A full stop indicates a sentence-final falling intonation

           ?            A question mark indicates rising inflection not necessarily indicating a question.

         CAPS           Capitals indicate an emphatic tone

            /            A forward slash indicates repeated utterances by a same speaker.

           =            Equal signs indicate latched utterances spoken one after the other without a pause.

           {}           A description enclosed in an empty parenthesis indicates transcriber’s comments

          (?)           A question mark in bracket indicates an unclear fragment on the tape.

           @            An “@” mark indicates laughter of a speaker.




(Selected from: Bucholtz, 2007; Dressler & Kreuz, 2000; Du Bois et al., 1993; Jefferson, 1984, 1989; Schiffrin, 1994; Tannen, 1989)

                                                                                                                                 12
4. Procedures (Cont’d)

      Stage four: Identifying problematic cases and
                  providing solutions



      Case 1: Unexpected visitor(s)
      Case 2: Sensitive information
      Case 3: Overlapped turn
      Case 4: Laughter
      Case 5: Silence gaps within and between utterances
      Case 6: Unclear utterances
      Case 7: Errors and slips

                         (Please see data examples in handouts.)




                                                                   13
5. Conclusion




     Figure 1--A selective-specificity model
     Appendix--Transcription symbols




                                                14
         Figure 1 A selective-specificity model for
                          designing a transcription system


                                     Research interests




                                 Audio-taped recordings



     Decide positions on                                       Being selective and
         discourse theories        Transcription as theory            reflective
         continuum

     Decide transcription         Transcription as method     Being    selective
         principles,                                              and specific
         conventions and
         symbols
                                  Transcription as analysis   Being interpretive
Decide analysis focuses                                           and reflective




                                                                                      15

                                                                               Company Logo
Appendix Transcription Symbols

A                     Main supervisor
B1, B2, B3            Co-supervisor in different supervisory teams
C1, C2, C3            PhD student in different supervisory teams
D. J, O, T, U, W, R   Pseudonyms for people who appear or being mentioned
…                     Three dots indicate a perceptible pause less than 3 seconds.
(.3)                  Numbers in parentheses show a pause more than 3 seconds.
.                     A full stop indicates a sentence-final falling intonation.
?                     A question mark indicates a question or a rising intonation statement.
CAPS                  Capitals indicate an emphatic tone.
/                     A forward slash indicates repeated utterances by a same speaker.
=                     Equal signs indicate latched utterances spoken one after the other without
                         a pause.
{}                    A description enclosed in an empty parenthesis indicates transcriber’s
                          comments.
<>                    Pointed brackets indicate an inserted turn within a stream of talk.
@@@                   One or more “@” indicate quality of laughter of a speaker
(@)                   A “@” mark in a bracket indicates shared-laughter of speakers.
(xxx)                 Three xs in a bracket indicate unclear utterances



                                                                                               16
6. Reflections & Implications

              6.1 Pains & Gains



                                               Lyn Richards,
                                               Adjunct Professor of RMIT
                                               University, Founder of QSR


      Garden Path Analysis— A pleasant
      pathway while playing with data: ‘Here
      are roses, there are jonquils, and
      aren’t daffodils lovely today!’


      Everything seems interesting BUT…!?

                                                                17
6. Reflections & Implications (Cont’d)


    Pains                          Gains

   Transcription process is      Learn how to think & explain
    time-consuming.                logically, reasonably, &
                                   critically in order to cook a
                                   delicious ‘ data soup’

   Problematic cases             Develop a transcription
                                   protocol for recording
                                   procedures and cases

   Gloomy and de-
                                  Interact closely with and
    motivated                      learn from academics

                                                                   18
6. Reflections & Implications (Cont’d)




   Hands-on experience helps to shed lights on the
    process of doing transcription
   Boost novice researchers’ confidence
   Stay open-minded and explore more cases and
    features along the process of doing transcription




                                                        19
THANKS for
your attention!




Your questions,
 comments &
 suggestions,
   PLEASE!

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:2
posted:2/14/2012
language:
pages:20