Search results

The purpose of this study is to seek answers to how receiving his PhD at the University of Alabama influenced the author’s ongoing academic discourse socialization as an international graduate student coming from Turkey. To that end, the author incorporates second language and academic discourse socialization theories with the concept of “desire” in TESOL.

In this autoethnographic paper, the author discusses his academic discourse socialization as an international graduate student in the form of an evocative autoethnography of socialization. The author uses data gathered through his personal memory in the form of self-reflections. Using Chang’s “chronicling the past strategy” (2008, p. 72), the author prepared a data chart, which included information regarding the data source, its mode, time, venue and stories gleaned. The author used this data chart as a self-generated document to guide him through the selection process of his personal memories in an organized way while writing mystory.

The findings show that his academic discourse socialization was mainly influenced by the attitudes of local US citizens’ and existing members of international communities in both on- and off-campus settings. Over time, his academic discourse socialization turned out to be a complex process where the author oftentimes found himself struggling to find an entry point in extracurricular conversations and interactions.

The author recommends further research to focus on the inner worlds of both old(er) timers and newcomers to understand the challenges, emotions and nuances that are at play in both L2 socialization and academic discourse socialization of international students.

In this autoethnographic study, the author offers a unique example of an international PhD student’s transnational socialization experiences. Future international students, higher education administrators, faculty members and local graduate students may learn from his autoethnography and approach their future academic relationships in a more informed way.

This study aims to examine how teacher candidates (TCs) in Türkiye and the USA navigate their intercultural communication skills in a telecollaboration project.

Forty-eight TCs participated (26 in Türkiye and 22 in the USA) in the study. TCs discussed critical issues in multicultural education on an online learning platform for six weeks. Their discussions were analyzed using content and discourse analysis.

The findings indicated that TCs approached the telecollaborative space as a translingual contact zone and positioned themselves and their interlocutors in the discourse by using the personal pronouns; I, we, you and they. When they positioned themselves using we (people in Türkiye/USA), they spoke on behalf of everyone included in the scope of we. Their interlocutors responded to these positionings either by accepting this positioning and responding with a parallel positioning or by engaging in translingual negotiation strategies to revise the scope of we and sharing some differences/nuances in beliefs and practices in their community.

When TCs talk about their culture and community in a singular manner using we, they frame them as the same across every member in that community. When they ask questions to each other using you, the framing of the questions prime the respondents to sometimes relay their own specific experiences as the norm or consider experiences from different points of view through translingual negotiation strategies. A singular approach to culture(s) may affect the marginalized communities the most because they are lost in this representation, and their experiences and voices are not integrated in the narratives or integrated with stereotypical representation.

Teachers and teacher educators should first pay attention to their language choices, especially use of pronouns, which may communicate inclusion or exclusion in intercultural conversations. Next, they should prepare their students to adopt and practice language choices that communicate respect for cultural diversity and are inclusive of marginalized populations.

Speakers’ pronoun use includes identity construction in discourse by drawing borders around and between communities and cultures with generalization and particularity, and by patrolling those borders to decide who is included and excluded. As a response, interlocutors use pronouns either to acknowledge those borders and respond with corresponding ones from their own context or negotiate alternative representations or further investigate for particularity or complexity. In short, pronouns could lead the direction of intercultural conversations toward criticality and complexity or otherwise, and might be reasons where there are breakdowns in communication or to fix those breakdowns.

This study shows that translingual negotiation strategies have explanatory power to examine how speakers from different language backgrounds negotiate second and third order positionings in the telecollaborative space.