Learning the Trade: A Social Apprenticeship Model for Gaining Writing Expertise

Taylor Stukes

Beaufort, Anne. “Learning the Trade: A Social Apprenticeship Model for Gaining Writing Expertise.” Sage Publications, Inc. WRITTEN COMMUNICATION, Vol. 17 No. 2, April 2000. 185-223. Pdf.

Research Questions:

·         What differentiated simpler from more complex (and higher status) writing tasks?

·         What determined writers’ social roles in this particular community of practice?

·         What methods of socialization were used for writers new to this organization, and to what effect?

Objects of Study:

Primary (ideal): An ideal object of study would be new employees who have not yet or have recently been socialized to an organization. Writing would need to be one of the primary tasks of the employee.  

Secondary (actual): In the article, Beaufort reports on part of her results from a larger ethnography of a nonprofit organization. Two of the organization’s new writers, Pam and Ursula, (at the time of the study) are the subjects of this study.

There is a relationship between the ideal and actual object of study but because of the small number of participants and the size & goals of the nonprofit organization, it would be hard to generalize the study.  

Procedure/Method:

Data collection: weekly interviews (informal and open-ended) & photocopying all of the writing the women complete each week (data collection lasted for one year) Triangulation? Yes. The last paragraph of page 194 explains their process to ensure triangulation.

Analysis: “Data analysis was an iterative process of looking at field notes, interview transcripts, and writing samples for patterns and themes in relation to social roles for writers within the discourse community of [the nonprofit organization]” (193).

This method of data collection did not take into account any coaching, peer relationships, or other attitudes. Beaufort doesn’t really do anything to overcome the problem other than recognize it in the article.  

Theories:

Three theories combined to create the theoretical framework of this study:

1.       Genre Theory – forms of texts are fluid and responsive to the values and purposes of the communities of writers who use them. One type is “discourse communities” in which readers and writers carry out the social goals of the community.

2.       Theories of expertise: (1) global, general knowledge and skills for problem-solving in novel situations; (2) local, context-specific knowledge

3.       The social component in learning processes//theory of the zone of proximal development

It seems that the findings of this study did support the theories above.

 Overall Generalization:

Beaufort states that the data reported provides an “alternative conceptual framework for assessing the complexities of writing tasks, a writer’s developmental paths, and what it means to socialize a writer into a discourse community” (218). This is a pretty hefty generalization. Considering the size of the study, I don’t know that this is an appropriate generalization. Much of the conclusion consists of her discussing the how the theories of the study play into schools and the problem of establishing authentic social purposes for writing, even though that really doesn’t have anything to do with the research questions that she asked. It seems as if Beaufort has started a conversation for further research in the field.