LIST OF TABLES
4.7 CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
83 SH3
SH3 reflected that it “was very insightful and got me thinking about the different communities on campus and how they interact with one another”. However, noted that “some of the
questions seemed to be pretty much the same, but other than that nothing needed to be improved on”.
LGBTI Co 2 LGBTI Co 2 reported that “the session was very informative.
It was great seeing other LGBTI community member expressing similar thoughts”. LGBTI Co 2 also added that
“To involve other people outside the LGBTI communities to hear point of view concerning the community. I feel as if more
information as to how to transform the campus/university would be received/gathered”.
LGBTI Co 3 LGBTI Co 3: “Today’s session was very lively and I enjoyed it because I had to open up how I as a gay person feel And also raise my opinions on how to educate university students
about LGBTI community. Also, I think we should invite more heterosexual people/straight people by saying this I mean they can learn more from our session and understand how
we feel”.
SH5 23/08/2018 SH5: “Today’s session taught me that you mustn’t judge a person by his/her behavior, gender or the way he looks. It showed me that everyone is important in his way. To make this session more attractive, I think it should be runned as a
debate or talk show”.
Consolidated meeting: Date is not yet finalized after the study completion, to discuss the final feedbacks with research team.
84
involves looking beyond the existing studies and strategically mapping out a unique theory of discovery to improve on incoming research thus logically advancing social transformation and wellbeing. Originality and authenticity to me, is structuring of a study in a total different way; “using a framework that no researcher has ever used;
drawing a study specifically as a study appears by the findings without adding or subtracting data collections to make the study more attractive, otherwise”, there is no originality and authenticity, based on Anney (2014) and Gunawan (2015) maintained that research worthiness could be identified through its reflexivity nature;
transferability, confirmability and dependability for transformation. Otherwise, extend beyond recycling and policing of previous studies.
Then, Gonsalvez (2013, p. 49) asserted that “CDA” is based on the social theory of language, which states that discourse is an important element in socialization which is based on communicative and interactive practices in a network of individuals, and the goals and purpose of socializing are achieved through discourse”. While, Fairclough (2013) professed that CDA be defined as a fundamental lens that is concerned with issues of discrimination, power and control, as manifested in language, and CDA aims to investigate critically social inequality as it is expressed, signalled, constituted, and legitimized by language use (or in discourse).
In congruence, Darder (2015) and Greener (2011) stated that CDA served as an interdisciplinary approach on textual study and aims to avert abuses of power promoted by those texts. Therefore, researcher teams are freely in a position to decide how their information is transmitted to the researcher, either by voice taking or textually. Texts are interpreted by analyzing linguistic or semiotic factors in the larger social and political contexts of circulation. In addition, Dieronitou (2014, p. 12) stated,
“CDA” attempts to bring together text analysis with contemporary social, political and cultural theory and involves evaluation of force, power and relations in formation within the ever-changing, non-discursive global processes, such as economic, political and cultural processes. Based on the preceding discussions, Huckin, Andrus and Clary- Lemon (2012) concur that “CDA” often is used to analyze data since it relates in accordance to Bronnfrennbrener ecological systems (the theoretical framework for this study) and PAR (as data generation method for this study). Ecological systems theory, PAR and CDA conceptualized based on a discourse of social component, through
85
emergence of transformative and democratic practices concerned with embracing structural relationships to normalize dominance, discrimination, power and control among university students. Ecological systems theory, PAR and CDA deal with contemporary social, political and cultural theory and evaluation of force, power and relations within a transformative approach on global praxis such as economic, political and cultural processes. The researcher concur with Gonsalvez (2013, p. 50) and Huckin et al. (2012, p. 108) that Ecological systems theory, PAR and CDA discourse negotiates power among individuals involved in the discursive process towards transformative approach.
According to Rahimi and Riasati (2011), discourse analysis approaches methods seeking to identify hegemony and emancipate marginalized individuals and ideas. In congruence, Dieronitou (2014, p. 12) and Oliver (2010) averred that CDA formed part of emancipatory critical social science, which determine a transformative platform to the achievement of a just social order through a critique of dialogues. Moreover, Gonsalvez (2013, p. 46) purported that “CDA is a way of understanding the meanings of the texts in order to determine areas of inequality, domination and marginalization, and discourse cannot only shape society, but it can also reproduce or recreate societies; it is often used to expose inequities, domination and outright oppressions”.
Based on the preceding discussions, the researcher contends that CDA is aimed at emancipating the marginalised, by encouraging their engagement in a discourse in order to reshape the society. The emancipation nature of CDA suits the transformative aim of Ecological systems theory and PAR.
This aspect of the study has been themed based on the data findings that unfold within the subject explored as grounded by Braun and Clarke (2006, p. 78), Alholjailan (2012, p. 40) maintain that thematic analysis helps researcher to give credibility to flexibility on a research phenomenon and ensure that themes enhance analytical methods to provide clearer interpretation for the audience. The researcher found it helpful to apply this for adequate clarification and gain maximum understanding of this study.
The researcher found that these methods of data collection could give insights to develop different means that may be used interchangeably within the study premise like; script writings, body language interpretations and Whatsapp chat data to avoid researcher grounded on the project.
86