Recherches - univ-alger.dz

Recherches Numéro 10-Tome 2

Décembre 2016

Revue semestrielle

Le numéro parait dans deux tomes

Université d’Alger 1

Recherches Revue semestrielle, chaque numéro parait

dans deux tomes

- Adresse : 02 , Rue Didouche Mourad , Alger , Algérie - Tél : 00 213 . 21 . 63.77.27 - Courier électronique : [email protected]

Les opinions exprimées dans les articles publiés dans la revue ne reflètent que l’avis de leurs auteurs et

engagent leur responsabilité

Dépôt légal : 278 – 1992

ISSN : 1111 – 44 - 28

Comité scientifique

Abdelaziz KADRI: Professeur à la faculté de droit, Université d’Alger 1

Chérif BENNADJI: Professeur à la faculté de droit, Université d’Alger 1

Abdellah OUHAIBIA: Professeur à la faculté de droit, Université d’Alger 1

Ghenima LAHLOU KHIAR: Professeur à la faculté de droit, Université d’Alger 1

Houcine YOUCEF: Professeur à la faculté des sciences islamique, Université d’Alger 1

Mohamed ABDENNABI: Professeur à la faculté des sciences islamique, Université d’Alger 1

Ammar DJIDEL: Professeur à la faculté des sciences islamique, Université d’Alger 1

Noureddine ABBASSI: Professeur à la faculté des sciences islamique, Université d’Alger 1

Fatma Zohra GHENASSI: Professeur à la faculté de médecine, Université d’Alger 1

Malika MEDDAD: Professeur à la faculté de médecine, Université d’Alger 1

Mohamed Ben Souliman MANSOURI: Professeur à la faculté de médecine, Université d’Alger 1

Abdelmadjid MEZIANE: Professeur à la faculté de médecine, Université d’Alger 1

Comité de lecture

Ahmed BEN NACER: Professeur à la faculté de droit, Université d’Alger 1

Farida MOHAMADI: Professeur à la faculté de droit, Université d’Alger 1 Mouloud MANSOUR: Professeur à la faculté de droit, Université d’Alger 1

Naima AMIMAR: Professeur à la faculté de droit, Université d’Alger 1 Abdelghani AKA: Maître de conférences à la faculté de droit, Université d’Alger 1 Chafia SEDDIK: Professeur à la faculté des sciences islamique, Université d’Alger 1

Lakhdar HADDAD: Professeur à la faculté des sciences islamique, Université d’Alger 1

Mohamed HAMOUCH: Professeur à la faculté des sciences islamique, Université d’Alger 1

Abdelkader BEN AZZOUZ: Professeur à la faculté des sciences islamique, Université d’Alger 1

Tahar ANANE: Professeur à la faculté de médecine, Université d’Alger 1

Merzak GHERNAOUT: Professeur à la faculté de médecine, Université d’Alger 1

Abdelhakim BOUDISSE: Professeur à la faculté de médecine, Université d’Alger 1

Malika BOUDAOUD: Professeur à la faculté de médecine, Université d’Alger 1

Objectifs de la revue :

Recherches de l’Université d’Alger 1, est une revue scientifique internationale qui parait deux fois par an sous forme électronique et en papier. Sa mission principale est la publication de la production scientifique et intellectuelle des enseignants et chercheurs ; afin d’une part à les inciter à promouvoir la recherche scientifique et les études approfondies et d’autre part leur permettre une contribution mutuelle d’ordre scientifique et intellectuelle. La revue se base particulièrement sur les thèmes ayant des liens avec les sciences juridiques, islamiques, médicales et techniques.

Conditions de Publications :

Toute étude présentée à la revue pour publication doit obéir aux dispositions ci-après :

doit être approfondie et se caractérisant par son originalité, d’autre part l’auteur doit être objectif et doit se conformer à la méthodologie scientifique ;

ne doit pas provenir des polycopiés de cours destinés aux étudiants, ni de partie de thèse de doctorat ;

doit être rédigée dans l’une des langues : arabe, française, anglaise ou russe ;

Les bas de pages doivent être porté à la fin de l’article ; La liste bibliographique utilisée doit comporter toutes

l es références voulues ; L’étude doit comporter au minimum 10 pages et

maximum 20 ; Les études en langues arabe doivent être rédigées sous

forme (Word) caractère (Traditional arabic) police N° 16. Le caractère gras est réservé aux titres, quant aux bas

de pages, ils seront rédigés en caractère (Traditional arabic) police N° 12 ;

Les études en langues étrangères doivent être rédigées sous forme (Word) caractère (Times New Roman) police N° 14, le gras ne sera utilisé que pour les titres, quant aux bas de pages, ils seront rédigés en caractère (Traditional arabic) police N° 10 ;

Doit apparaitre clairement au début de l’article le nom et le prénom de l’auteur, son grade universitaire et l’établissement auquel il est rattaché (Université, Faculté ….) ;

L’étude doit être accompagnée d’un résumé dans une langue autre que celle dans laquelle elle doit être publiée, et dans une seule et unique page ;

L’expertise des études :

Les études qui parviennent à la revue seront automatiquement soumises à vérification avant leur publication :

En vue de procéder à la rectification des erreurs et des manquements dans l’article s’ils viennent à exister ;

La revue est libre de porter certaines modifications indispensables dans la forme de l’étude présentée à la publication sans pour autant toucher à son fond.

Mesures administratives :

L’auteur doit signer une déclaration attestant que son article n’a pas était publié dans une quelconque revue ou livre qu’il a précédemment édité ;

L’administration est tenue de lui remettre une attestation de remise d’article ;

L’article remis à l’administration ne sera pas rendu à son auteur qu’il soit publier ou non ;

L’administration remet une promesse de publication à l’issu de l’accord de la commission de lecture ;

La disposition des articles répond uniquement à des considérations d’ordre dispositions

La revue a les droits d’éditions des articles acceptés, et sa réédition par un autre organisme n’est toléré qu’après autorisation écrite délivrée par l’administration de la revue

La revue remet à l’auteur 5 exemplaires du numéro de la revue dans lequel paraitra son article ;

Les articles présentés à la publication dans Recherches de l’Université d'Alger 1 ainsi que toute correspondance relative aux recherches sont à transmettre au service des publications de l’Université d’Alger 1 Benyoucef BENKHEDDA.

Sommaire

09 Préface …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……………………

GHAOUAR Nesrine

10

Assuring Learner Centredness through Effective Classroom- management ……………………………………………………………………………………………….…..……………………………………………

DRISS Mohamed Amine/ MAKHLOUF Abdelkader

22

Ethnography of Communication: A Socio Cultural Perspective to Understand Language Communication through Communicative Competence ………………………………………………….……………………………………………………………………..…………………………

SAHNOUN Abd Razak

38 La nature de la culture organisationnelle ……………………………………….…………………………

Université d'Alger 1

Recherches, N°10-Tome II

Préface :

L’Université d’Alger 1 Ben youcef BENKHEDDA, est fière de mettre à la disposition de ces chers lecteurs, le numéro 10 - Tome 02 de « RECHERCHES». La revue est restée depuis sa création un espace privilégié destiné aux enseignants et chercheurs de différents pays pour la publication de leurs articles ; afin d’approfondir la connaissance, les échanges d’opinion et élargir les discutions scientifiques sur des questions importantes.

Bonne lecture Dr. Souhila GUEMMOUDI

10 Recherches, N°10 -Tome II

Assuring Learner Centredness through Effective Classroom- management

GHAOUAR Nesrine : Lecturer 'B' Faculty of Letters and Languages

University of Badji Mokhtar -Annaba Introduction:

Class management has a central role in developing a learner centred classroom context. Novice teachers and even certain experienced teachers face hard times in managing their classes and assuring learner centredness. In these classes, learners handle the responsibility of their learning in an active way. Teachers are no more the source of knowledge rather they become the facilitator of the learning process. Effective classroom management is the number one element in the list of being an effective teacher. However, the shift from a teacher centred classroom to a learner centred needs certain effective classroom management. Learner-Centered Classroom:

Campoy (2004) sees that effective learning occurs when learners actively process the information in a way that is meaningful to them. Westwood (2008, p. 26) clarifies that learner-centred methods are based on constructivist views of learning, particularly for involving students more actively in acquiring knowledge, skills and strategies. For the constructivists, learners construct their knowledge by using their previous knowledge as an information base for the new knowledge. Further, he (2006, pp.30-40) refers to different approaches in relation to learner centred classroom such as:

(a) Discovery learning ( DL): Students develop knowledge related to a topic largely through their own endeavour, using whatever human and material resources they may need. (b) Discovery- based learning (RBL): Students learn from their own active

processing of information using a range of authentic resources. (c) Project-based learning (PBL): Students work individually, with a partner

or in groups to gather information on a particular topic or to investigate a real-world issue. They then share with others what they have learned.



(d) Problem-based learning (PBL): Also known as ‘issues-based learning’ students are presented with a real-life situation or issue that requires a solution or a decision leading to some form of action.

(e) Task-based learning ( TBL) : Students investigate and report on a contemporary issue, to solve a problem or to collect and collate information around a central theme or topic in a specific subject area.

(f) Cognitive strategy training: Students plan what they will do, implement their plan, monitor what they are doing, and modify their thoughts and actions, if necessary, as they proceed.

Kumaravadivelu (2006) sees that the conceptual foundations of learner-centered pedagogy are multidisciplinary; it was based on linguistics, sociology, discourse analysis, anthropology, ethnography, ethnomethodology and pragmatics. He adds that language teaching theory of learner centredness recognized the responsibility of the language teachers in helping learners to be more responsible on their learning. Teacher-centred versus Learner-centred Classrooms:

In contrast to traditional instruction, learner-centered approach to learning focuses on meaning making, inquiry and authentic activity (Garrett, 2008, p. 34). According to her, in teacher-centered classrooms, teacher’s control is of primary importance with highly impersonal relationships with students. These classes are marked by lack of trust, a major focus on the maintenance of order from teacher’ part and an extrinsic motivation from learners’ part. However, the development of interpersonal relationships is an essential component of a learner-centered approach (Garrett, 2008, p. 36). In addition, Harmer (2007, p. 58) emphasizes the importance of involving learners in thinking of their own learning in learner centred classrooms. He clarifies;

Getting students to think for themselves is one aspect of what is often referred to as ‘learner centredness’. Learner-centred classrooms and lessons (where the learners are doing the most of the work, often in pairs and groups) are often seen as opposite to ‘teacher- centred’ lessons, where the teacher is deciding what should happen and where he or she is the center of attention” (Harmer, 2007, p. 58)

Similarly, Minter (2011, p. 749) lists the basic characteristics of teacher centred and learner centred classrooms. In teacher centred classrooms, the focus is on the teacher as teachers talk and learners listen. Teachers answer learners’ questions and choose the learning topics. Teachers evaluate learners’ learning; the classroom is basically quiet and controlled. Hence, learners are extrinsically



motivated. Conversely, in learner-centred classrooms, the focus is on both the learner and the teacher. In these classes, the learners interact with the teacher and the other learners and answer each other’s questions. These learners have some choice of the topics and they evaluate their own learning. These classrooms are often noisy and busy as learners are intrinsically motivated to learn more.

Westwood(2008, p.2) explains that learner centred approach is primarily concerned with bringing about deeper conceptual understandings and changes in students, whereas teacher-centred approach is concerned with effective transmission of information and skills from teacher to learner. Besides. Jones (2007) sees that a student-centered approach helps students to develop a “can-do” attitude;” it is effective, motivating, and enjoyable where the students get more “talking time”” (Idem, p. 1). In a student-centered classroom, the teacher and students are a team working together (Jones, 2007, p. 25).

Class-management: Class management is the basic element of effective teaching. According

to Garrett (2008), classroom management is a multi-faceted concept that includes the organization of the physical environment, by the establishment of rules and routines, the development of effective relationships and the prevention of and response to misbehavior (p. 35). For Oliver (2007) teachers’ ability to organize classrooms and manage their students’ behaviour is critical to achieving positive educational outcomes (p. 1). He adds, “Effectively managing the classroom is much more difficult for new teachers who may not have received sufficient training” (Idem, p. 3). Westwood (2006), views that well class management is number one element of the list of effective teachers in addition to providing students with the maximum opportunities to learn(p. 5). Scrivener (2011) highlights that the skills of creating a successful class may be the key to the whole success of a course (p. 54).

Class management involves some basic components. First, classroom rules establish the behavioural context of the classroom by specifying what behaviours are expected of students, what behaviours will be reinforced, and the consequences for inappropriate behaviour. Therefore, in establishing classroom norms and rules, teachers must reflect on the kinds of knowledge, skills, and materials students will need and then use this information to plan rules and procedures.

Second, Routines are more flexible than rules; “routines or procedures” are specific ways of doing things that, for the most part, vary little during the course of the day or the year” (Strone, Tucker & Hindman.2004, p.67).



Routines shape the classroom atmosphere as they include how to enter and leave the classroom, take attendance, secure materials, turn in assignments and change from one activity or location to another. In fact, classroom routines responsibilise learners for their behaviours and learning. Practicing classroom procedures routines set from the beginning of the year will make class-management easier along the academic year. Raising learners’ awareness of classroom procedures will facilitate their learning and the classroom will smoothly function.

Third, flexible room arrangements, the spatial environment should be designed to facilitate collaboration. It includes: furniture arrangements and location of materials. Finally, handling conflict, teachers will face situations of conflict among students as a result of a classroom discussions and different opinions. Besides, there are conflicts that rise out of problems of regulation as learners’ behaviours, learners’ groupings and their responsibility towards their learning.

In addition to the above mentioned components, Edge & Garton (2009) identify lesson planning as the first important element in class management. Lesson planning should involve lesson objectives, procedures, order and timing. Likewise, Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics ( 3rd ed) explains that classroom management includes procedures for grouping students for different types of classroom activities, use of lesson plans, handling of equipment, aids, etc., and the direction and management of student behaviour and activity. Therefore, class-management does not intend to control students’ behaviour, however, it aims at influencing students’ effective learning behaviour.

The Facilitator Teacher Jones (2007) believes that students can’t be “taught” – they can only be

helped to learn” (p. 25). For an effective teaching environment, Underhill (1999, pp. 125-126) makes a distinction between three roles the educators undertake in the classroom: the lecturer, the teacher and the facilitator. The first refers to the teacher who has knowledge of the topic taught but no special skill or interest in the techniques and methodology of teaching it. The second implies teacher’s knowledge of the topic in addition to a range of a methods and procedures for teaching it. The last refers to the teacher who understands the topic and is skilled in the use of current teaching methods/ techniques and involves learners in their learning. The facilitator teacher actively studies and pays attention to the psychological atmosphere and the inner processes of learning with the aim of enabling learners to take much responsibility for their



learning. Therefore, facilitation is intentional in the sense that the facilitators are conscious of what they are doing and why, then, explicitly state it to their students.

However, the transition from transmitting content to attending to the learners’ needs may be unfamiliar or difficult for both teachers and learners (Brockbank & McGill, 2007, p. 209). Then, how can a traditional lecturer begin the journey towards incorporating the facilitating role into her/his existing classrooms? Two points emerge here: 1) the facilitator is establishing a relationship which is conducive to learning, and 2) s/he is creating the conditions for that learning to take place. Students cannot begin to accept responsibility for their own learning and development unless the teacher relinquishes some of what has traditionally been her responsibility. The teacher will need to do less telling and more listening. In a student centred classroom, the teacher intervenes only when students need help and whenever they face difficulties or feel doubt after they have tried to solve the learning problem by themselves (Jones, 2007). Learner-centred Classroom Management:

For an effective learner-centred classroom, class-management is a crucial element. Dunbar (2004, p. 5) sees that the best practices in classroom management is based on communicating high expectations to the students and establishing clear rules and procedures, instruct students in how to follow them and the consequences of any misbehavior. He insists on the importance of discipline by enforcing classroom rules from the very first day of study. Creating opportunities for students’ cooperation and self-monitoring would guarantee a student centred classroom. Jones (2007, p. 2) sees that students working individually, together- in pairs, groups, or as a whole class- are important criteria for learner centred class-management. He explains:

Working alone, preparing ideas or making notes before a discussion, doing a listening task, doing a short written assignment, or doing grammar or vocabulary exercises

Working together in pairs or groups, comparing and discussing their answers, or reading and reacting to one another’s written work and suggesting improvements

Working together in discussions or in role-plays, sharing ideas, opinions, and experiences

Interacting with the teacher and the whole class, asking questions or brainstorming ideas

Also in a student-centered class, students may be teacher-led as follows:



Before students work together, their teacher will help them prepare to work together

While students are working together, their teacher will be available to give advice and encouragement.

After they’ve finished working together, and the class is reassembled, their teacher will give them feedback, offer suggestions and advice, make corrections, and answer questions.

Moreover, Jones (2007) sees that the ideal size for a student-centered language class is probably 12 that can be divided in pair or groups of three, four or six students. He further highlights that even with classes of thirty students; teachers can assure learner-centred class-managements (Idem).

The Study:

Didactics is a module designed to third year students ( LMD system) in the department of English, Badji Mokhtar University- Annaba. It deals with language teaching methodology. From the beginning of the academic year 2013-2014, the recurrent observation was students’ dependence on teacher centred instruction model where the teacher is the only source of knowledge and only two or three students participated. The great majority of the students were in the classroom to listen to the teacher and take notes. This situation resulted in the lack of real interaction in the classroom and learners’ ignorance of the active role they have to play for learning. The main question of this tsudy was: “How can the teacher of didactics ensure a student-centred class-management?

The next year, along 2 semesters of 2014-2015, 40 students were involved in an experiment where they were concerned with constructing their own their knowledge. This experiment had two goals’ types:

(a) Short term goals were: Involving learners in constructing their own learning. Responsibilizing them for their learning. Developing their intrinsic motivation towards the module and

raising their self-confidence. Socialize students in the classroom through pair, group and whole

class activities Equipping students – future teacher- with certain background

knowledge about language teaching accounting for the different



teaching methods, learners’ individual variations, lesson planning and classroom management.

(b) Long term goals consisted of: Achieving student centred classroom. Developing autonomous learners. Prompting learners’ reflection on the effect of teacher and teaching

on learner and learning. Sensibilizing students for their future duties as teachers. Involving students in lessons ‘planning through the experience of

teacher modeling “ teacher training”..

Teacher’s assumptions and Beliefs: Since the learners are in their final year of study, the teacher assumes that

they can use English as the only medium of instruction. They certainly can read, write, speak and listen in English. Besides, students should have developed certain research skills from their previous years of study.

The teacher believes that whatever students’ level, teacher should express high expectations, positive regards, and work jointly with the students towards a learner-centred learning environment. Besides, the teacher should be the facilitator of knowledge and no more its provider.

The teacher considered the main components of classroom management as explained in the literature review in order to guarantee a learner centred classroom. Here are the rules, procedures, and learners’ groupings along the two semesters: Rules: The first day of study is very crucial in establishing rules; I set the followings for the didactics session:

Respect is the golden rule of relation: Respect yourself, and respect each other, in addition to the mutual respect between the teacher and the learners.

Lesson preparation is a must during the didactics session, and if not done there should be a justification only for the first time, otherwise students won’t be accepted.

All learners are equal: good, intermediate, or poor learners. Whenever late, the student should ask for permission to enter the

classroom.



No laughing at any student’s participation, opinion, even repetition of what has been already said.

We listen to each other without interruption.” No student intervenes while another student is speaking”, or “while the teacher is speaking”.

Whenever you have not understood something, it is your right to ask for clarification and repetition

No talking without raising hands ( permission).

Classroom Routines/procedures:

1st semester: In the first semester, the students were involved in different students’ groupings as follows:

Individual work: lesson preparation at home, taking notes, lessons’ reflection at the end of some sessions.

Pair work: comparing methods, answering certain questions, sharing opinions.

Group work (five to six students): In front of the whole classroom, students present the lesson together by dividing the presentation among them. Every student is accountable in the group. In some sessions, the students in groups will be required to answer certain questions that the teacher wrote on the board from their lesson preparation; they work in circles.

Whole class: class discussion of students’ lesson presentation, assessment of groups’ work, and lesson discussions.

In the classroom, the teacher assured that the students are handling seriously their responsibility of lesson preparation, and are efficiently working in pair/group work. Students were not used to work in pairs/groups and some even refused that; the teacher as facilitator should motivate learners to be part of such groupings by explaining their benefits and the best way to apply them. The teacher kept walking in the classroom and stood beside groups for a few moments listening to their interactions. The teacher intervened whenever a misunderstanding among group members occurred or when students needed some clarifications. In classroom discussions, the teacher was the last to provide her opinion.

Moreover, the teacher made sure that the students have respected the time allotted either for lesson presentation or question answering. One hour and a half won’t be sufficient to hear all the groups; the teacher took note of the



remaining groups for next sessions. Every session is a new lesson and in every lesson, all students should prepare the lessons.

2nd Semester: As students’ got used to lesson preparation and presentation, the next step

was to make them model teacher role- role play activity- by standing with their lesson plans in front of their classmate- who became their students- for half an hour teaching them the lesson. This teacher should use the board and any material s/he found useful. Here the student playing teachers’ role became one hundred percent responsible for their lesson preparation and presentation. The teacher pinpoints: “No novice teacher is perfect”, ”we all made make mistakes, just get profit from this occasion before being a real teacher”. She provides the following instruction:

You should behave as a real teacher and this needed rehearsing at home. You should interact with your students- the classmates. You should train your voice to be heard by all your students. You will be assessed first by yourself, your classmates and finally by the

teacher. Certain criteria will be considered in the assessment: the content,

teacher-students interaction, teacher’s role, students’ role, board use, teacher confidence/hesitation, students’ motivation, teacher movements in the classroom.

The full lesson will be handed to the didactics teacher by the end of the session.

Experiment Difficulties: Implementing this experiment was not easy, since the students got used to

certain classroom managements where they had no responsibility towards their learning. The difficulties were as follows:

1. Students were not used to prepare lessons 2. They were not used to work together either in pairs or groups and if it

happened in their previous learning experiences, they were rare and not weekly.

3. They showed hesitation, anxiety and even fear in presenting their ideas. 4. They were afraid of making language mistakes. 5. They didn’t like the new burden of weekly lesson preparation. 6. They were not comfortable during the first sessions. 7. Teacher should be in tight control of the experiment and lessons’

procedures.



Experiment Results: As the semester progressed, students got used to their responsibility and

became more motivated to study didactics. The classroom atmosphere became more positive since students learned how to respect, cooperate and discuss with each other. The students became more comfortable in their relation with each other and with the teacher. The teacher was in tight control of the experiment to make students accept their new roles, once this happened; the session became more vivid with less tension from both sides- teacher and students.

By the end of the year, students became highly responsible, motivated and even autonomous. They have developed their English in the four skills since they were in constant contact with English inside and outside the classroom: reading, writing, listening and speaking.

Certain Introvert learners did overcome their fear and anxiety to speak English in front of the classroom and to express their ideas. They learned from pair/group work how to be more confident as they found that some students are sharing their same feelings but still they participate. Besides, teacher’s encouragements and beliefs made students work to achieve her expectations. Here are the results of the experiment:

(c) Students became more involved, committed and responsible for their learning.

(d) They became intrinsically motivated with less anxiety and more self-confidence.

(e) They became aware of the benefits of individual, pair/group work. (f) They developed certain background knowledge on language

teaching accounting for the different teaching methods, learners’ individual variations, lesson planning and classroom management.

(g) The didactics session is a student centred classroom where the teacher is the facilitator.

(h) Students are more aware of the impact of the teacher and teaching on learners and learning.

(i) They are more aware that “teaching is a responsibility” that needs knowledge and skills.

Consequently, from the second semester, the hallmark of the didactics session was students’ participation and interaction. The didactics session



became vivid with new voices every session. The teacher became a participant in the classroom, intervening when ideas needed support or clarification. As part of learner centred classroom management, teacher did not judge students’ performance as teachers, it’s up to them to judge themselves first then hear the classmates and finally the teacher. The students felt the necessity of preparing well their lessons and the importance of brainstorming ways to present them effectively.

By the end of the year students were asked about the effect of this experiment on them; the great majority of students were happy with this experience because it helped them to discover their strengths and weaknesses by themselves in addition to what type of teachers they want to be in the near future. From this experience, students learned to value their efforts, assess their performances and plan for better learning. Some learners, when they did not like what they have presented or how they presented it, they asked for a second chance and this was the real success of this experiment; “Students became satisfied only by the good work”. These students raised their standard to the level of teacher’s expectations. The didactics session became an active session with students constant interactions and discussions.

Conclusion: Learner centred classroom is a joyful classroom, where the time is never

enough to end a discussion or to hear all the students. It is very motivating, enjoyable and thoughtful not only for the learners but also for the teacher. By the end of the sessions, students seem happier, enthusiastic and more confident because they constructed their knowledge by themselves. Saying that does not underestimate teacher’s role, because without teacher’s planning for classroom management and constant research there would be no student centred classrooms. Therefore, implementing this approach in the classroom is a decision taken by the teachers who want to make a changes in their classrooms. In such classes the teacher learns how to listen and observe attentively the students. However, for a student centred class- management, one hour and a half is never enough, because the students and the teacher have a lot to do and to discuss.



References:

Brockbank, A., & McGill, I. (2007). Facilitating reflective learning in higher education (2nd Ed). McGraw-Hill Open University Press

Campoy, R. W. (2004). Case study analysis in the classroom: Becoming reflective teacher. Thomas Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Dunbar, C. 2004. Best Practices in Classroom Management. Michigan State University Edge, J., & Garton, S. (2009). From Experience to Knowledge in ELT. Oxford

University Press. Evertson, C. M., & Neal, K. W. 2006. Looking into Learning-Centered Classroom

Implications for Classroom Management. Washington: National Education Association

Garrett, T. 2008. Student-Centered and Teacher-Centered Classroom Management: A Case Study of Three Elementary Teachers. Journal of Classroom Interaction 43 (1), 34-47.

Harmer, J. 2007. The Practice of English Language Teaching ( 4th ed).Pearson Education Limited.

Jack C. Richards and Richard Schmidt. 2002. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics (Third Edition). Pearson Education Limited .

Jones, L. 2007. The Student-Centered Classroom. Cambridge University Press.

Kumaravadivelu, B. 2006. UNDERSTANDING LANGUAGE TEACHING From Method to Postmethod. LAWRENCE ERLBAUM ASSOCIATES, PUBLISHERS

Minter, M, K. 2011. Learner-Centered (LCI) Vs. Teacher-Centered (TCI) Instruction: A Classroom Management Perspective. The 2011 New Orleans International Academic Conference New Orleans, Louisiana USA , pp.749-756

Oliver, R. M. 2007. Effective Classroom Management: Teacher Preparation and Professional Development. National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.

Scrivener, J. 2011. Learning Teaching: The Essential Guide to English Language Teaching. MacMillan

Strone, J, H., Tucker, P. D, & Hindman, J. L.2004 . Handbook for Qualities of Effective Teachers. The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).

Underhill, A. (1999). Facilitation in language teaching. In J. Arnold (ED.), Affect in language learning (pp. 125-141).Cambridge University Press.

Westwood, P. 2006. Teaching and Learning Difficulties .ACER Press (Australian Council for Educational Research Ltd)

Westwood, P. 2008. What teachers need to know about Teaching methods. ACER Press.


Ethnography of Communication: A Socio Cultural Perspective to Understand Language Communication

through Communicative Competence

DRISS Mohamed Amine: Lecturer 'B' Faculty of Letters and Languages

Department of English Language and Literature University of Mustapha Stambouli - Mascara

MAKHLOUF Abdelkader: PhD student Faculty of Literature, Languages and arts University of Djilali Liabes-Sidi Bel Abbes

Introduction: Speaking and interacting with each other is a complex social, cultural and

linguistic act as well. In this spirit, people speak and organize their communication in ways depending on the social and cultural circumstances they face. This is not merely governed by rules of grammar; but rather patterned according to rules which are part of their social knowledge in a given speech community. The latter is, mainly, regarded as a container of different groups of people, interacting among themselves socially and culturally in different settings and social networks.

From this perspective, ethnography of communication, introduced by Hymes, seeks to find a clear explanation to these different rules, including the ability to communicate more appropriately and effectively under the heading of communicative competence. Besides, the presence of speech event and its analysis under the speaking model introduced by Hymes appears necessary to exist under the umbrella of communicative competence. Objectives of the Study:

The present study aims to reveal how ethnography of communication is primordially concerned with language use and rules of speaking in which speakers as members of speech community and different social networks equate particular language codes and topics with particular socio-cultural setting. This is to focus on the ability to communicate more appropriately and effectively under the label of communicative competence as a cultural and linguistic act as well, in contrast to the simple study of language structure and rather than accepting the fact that language is merely governed by rules of grammar.

Ethnography of Communication: A Socio Cultural Perspective to Understand Language Communication through Communicative Competence


Statement of the Problem: In social interaction a certain amount and quality of communicative

competence is needed. Thus, members of speech community not only should share a set of grammatical rules but there should also have regular relationships between language use and social structure; i.e., there must be norms which may vary by sub group and social setting. At this level, Hymes insisted that speech community cannot be defined solely through the use of linguistic criteria, but it is related to society and culture. To this effect, the following question arises: What relationship can be determined between socio-cultural contexts and communicative competence?

Research Questions: 1 How can we understand the different communicative behaviours and practices into a broader social context? 2 What element is most important in determining the cultural differences between members of different social networks within the same speech community? Method of the Study:

The method used in this study is analytical because its nature seeks to uncover a set of concepts that are related to ethnography of communication, speech community, norms, communicative competence, and the relationship that can be determined between socio-cultural contexts and communicative competence. Thus, under an analytical study we will have the possibility to organize a set of important general characteristics that allow us, more specifically, to understand and consider speech as a socio-cultural practice.

Historical Overview: In 1962, through his new approach “The Ethnography of speaking”,

Hymes as a sociolinguist, launched a new discipline which focuses on the patterning of communicative behaviour as an essential constituent of the system of culture; it is concerned with the analysis of language use (usage vs. use) in its socio-cultural setting (Bussmann, 2006,p. 381). This is clear when he said: “My own purpose with the ethnography of speaking was …to show that there was patterned regularity where it had been to be absent, in the activity of speaking itself” (Hymes , cited in Saville, 2003, p. 10). In this spirit, Hymes identified an ultimate importance for the cultural pattern as a key element in the establishment of his discipline.



On the other side, Saville (2003) stated: “The ethnography of communication has become an emergent discipline, addressing a largely new order of information in the structuring of communicative behaviour and its role in the conduct of social life” (p. 01). It means here, that a good understanding of communicative behaviour requires a good study of communication under a specific socio-cultural setting (context).

In 1964, Hymes and his colleague John Gumperz published a special section of a volume of the Journal “American anthropologists”, under which the ethnography of communication as a new filed has come to be known. Hence, this latter has become an emergent discipline, addressing a largely new order of information in the structuring of communicative behaviour and its role in the conduct of social life (Saville, 2003, p. 01).

The contribution of ethnography of communication helped interactional sociolinguistics to be developed with the pioneering work of Gumperz (1996), with the idea of “contextualization” in which certain cues such as prosody are used to create a social context, a frame work for interpretation. The presence of such cues is central for speakers to interpret and to share their communicative interactions, otherwise communication may be not well understood, or even broken down (Strazny, 2005, p. 979).

Thus, in contrast to the popular linguistic theories of structuralism and transformational grammar, Hymes based his approach on the fact that the meaning of an utterance can be understood only on relation to the “speech event” or “communicative event” in which it is embedded (Hymes, cited in Bussmann,2006, p. 381).

The basic opposition which was argued by Hymes, was that of communicative competence. He came to the fact that the linguistic competence, argued by Chomsky which merely refers to speakers’ knowledge of their language including the rules which they have mastered in order to produce and understand an infinite number of sentences and to recognise grammatical mistakes and ambiguities, is not sufficient. In contrast, his notion of communicative competence extends the Chomsky’s one, and focuses on the speaker’s situational appropriateness of their language.

From all what precedes, we can deduce that ethnography of communication is the emergence of two concerns : Anthropology and linguistics, and behind this fact there was a need to make an interrelationship between them because anthropological linguists (later this became known as linguistic anthropologists) failed to deal with this interrelationship until the



1960s when Hymes realised this omission, something led him to call for an approach that would deal with aspects of communication which were escaping both anthropology and linguistics (Saville, 2003, p. 01).

Communicative Competence as a Comprehensive Way to Understand Language Communication communicative competence:

Hymes, in contrast to Chomsky, pointed out that other criteria are required in order for speakers to be able to communicate in an appropriate and effective manner in a speech community. According to Crystal (2008), this notion of communicative competence focuses on the native speakers’ ability to produce and understand sentences which are appropriate to the context in which they occur, and what speakers need to know in order to communicate effectively in a socially distinct setting (Crystal, 2008, p. 92).

In this spirit, the notion of communicative competence as it was introduced by Hymes in the 1960s: (1962, 1964, 1972), emphasised that knowledge of grammatical rules is not sufficient for speaking a language and for communicating, it was considered only half of the story; in addition to the ability of producing grammatically acceptable utterances, speakers also need to know when to speak and when to stay silent, or what is appropriate to say in a particular situation.

The emergence of communicative competence was the birth of this culture-specific speaking rules, it is the central concern of ethnography of communication, in that it tries to uncover, describe, and compare the speaking practices of specific communities (Strazny, 2005, p. 303).

Revealingly, communication is of a central importance. In social interaction a certain amount and quality of communicative competence is needed. Its importance emerges from the fact that many individual and social problems in our societies arise, however, because people are not sufficiently competent with respect to certain aspects of communication. It is clear here, that a good command of communicative proficiency is needed to facilitate a better social life.

A good range of this competence or proficiency is related to the successful communication. A good clarification of communication is related to the study of its behavioural basis composed of many communication skills because the concept of communicative competence is not easy to be defined in a general way. The reason behind this lies in the complexity of communication itself because it is primarily cognitive. However, a good definition of skills seems to be that proposed by Spitzberg who maintained that:



Skills, therefore, are generally thought to be manifestations of some underlying ability which is a capacity for action. This capacity is typically conceptualized as a function of numerous motivation (e.g., confidence, goals, reinforcement, potential, etc) and knowledge (e.g., content and procedural knowledge, familiarity, etc) components (Spitzberg cited in Rickheit & Strohner, 2008, p. 25).

Evidently, Spitzberg here defines skills as the capacity of doing action, which is an outcome of some underlying ability mainly related to the specific knowledge of people who interact, and also of their feelings. In this sense, Saville (2003) stated that: “The concept of communicative competence must be embedded in the notion of cultural competence, or the total set of knowledge and skills which speakers bring into situation” (Saville,2003, p. 18).

It is clear from what precedes that culture is closely tied to communication, and interpreting the meaning of linguistic behaviour lies to this relationship. Culture as relevant to communication contains different aspects, most important among them according to Saville (2003) are: the values and attitudes held about languages and ways of speaking, the network of conceptual categories which results from experiences, and the way is knowledge and skills (including languages) are transmitted from one generation to the next and to new members of the group. Among these aspects, shared judgement of truth value is a substantial component of contextually appropriate usage and interpretation (Saville,2003, p. 19).

Accordingly, Findlay (1998) referred to the same context by mentioning the term “social cultural rules” as basic in individual’s communicative competence that he must learn in order to use language. He admitted also, that the knowledge of what is appropriate or inappropriate in a given social or cultural context, is to a large extent, a function of learning and acting on shared cultural rules for what he called “proper behaviour” (Findlay, 1998, p. xiii).

Effectiveness vs Appropriateness: Considering that a good communicative competence is based on two

facts: both grammatical and situational (socio-cultural context). According to Rickheit and Strohner (2008) this is primarily possible through two important criteria: appropriateness and effectiveness. Whereas effectiveness describes the outcome of communicative competence, appropriateness connects it with the situational conditions of the actual social interaction (p. 16).



Appropriateness: According to Harmer, appropriateness does not offend against the social

customs of society in which a native speaker knows how to choose the suitable thing to say in a given situation (Harmer, 1990: 13). Similarly, Spitzberg and Cupalh (07) stated that “appropriateness reflects tact or politeness and is defined as the avoidance of violating social or interpersonal norms, rules, or expectations” (qtd.in Rickheit and Strohner, 2008, p. 26).

In general, as Hymes proposed, a competent communication should be judged as appropriate according to social factors in a given situation, and these social factors should not be equated with norms or rules. The reason behind this is that in some situations it may be very appropriate to alter existing norms and rules or to establish new rules, which means that the criterion of appropriateness is flexible enough to cover a vast variety of relations between communicative actions and their environments (Hymes cited in Rickheit & Strohner, 2008, p. 25, 26). Accordingly, we can deduce that Hymes’ definition of appropriateness does not go side by side in its totality with that of Spetzberg and Cupach because it stands on the possibility that appropriateness may offend the existing social norms or rules in some cases. Effectiveness:

As a second criterion of communicative competence, effectiveness is centred beyond the meaning that communication is predicted to reach a certain goal. Thus, it is a central criterion for communicative competence. As Spetzberg and Cupch pointed out that: “effectiveness derives from control and is defined as successful goal achievement or task accomplishment” (Spitzberg &Cupach qtd in Richeit & Strohner,2008, p. 25). This is related to the ability to achieve or to infer a speaker’s (utterance) meaning, or to the achievement of the goal behind this intent (e.g. that this irony is meant as a critic or as a joke). A problem can arise with this criterion; in cases where functions and goals of communicative actions are not clear.

Generally speaking, competence according to these two criteria (appropriateness and effectiveness) allows individuals to interpret social and cultural contexts (circumstances), and gives them the ability to use language to communicate culturally. Types of Communication Competence:

The notion of communicative competence, as we have discovered so far, is too huge: it does not imply, simply, to know if something is formally possible in a language, but also the knowledge of whether it is feasible, appropriate



within socio-cultural context in any speech community. Accordingly, communicative competence includes three types:

Grammatical Competence (Formal Competence): This type in a great deal is based on what was argued by Chomsky: it is

the knowledge of grammar, vocabulary, phonology, and semantics of a language. A distinction was drawn by Chomsky at the level of competence and performance. Competence is identified primarily with grammatical competence; it is understood as the underlying or innate principle from which the structure of all nature languages derives (Meyerhoff, 2006, p. 288). Performance, on the contrary, is what speakers do with competence.

Pragmatic Competence: This second type refers to the ability to use expressions to achieve a

desired communicative effect (Malkmjaer,p. 530). In other terms, it is the ability of a well socialised speaker to know when certain speech acts are required, whether they are appropriate or inappropriate. It is considered as a competence required over and above grammatical competence in order to participate successfully in the speech community (Meyerhoff, 2006, p. 96-97). For example, politeness according to the social normative view is to speak formally and to behave in accordance with situation. According to this view, politeness is regarded as one component of pragmatic competence (Leech cited in Starzny, 2005, p. 866). Sociolinguistic Competence (also Socio-Cultural Competence):

It is defined as the knowledge of the relationship between language and its linguistic context, knowing how to use and respond appropriately to different types of speech acts such as: requests, apologies, thanks and invitations. It is determined also by knowing which address forms should be used with different persons one speaks to and in different situations (contexts) and so forth.

Sociolinguistic competence differs markedly in communities where language shift (change) is in progress, or for immigrants who may lose their ethnic language because of the wide use of styles in the language of the new community. Our sociolinguistic competence is detected through our speech; this latter is manipulated by interrelated factors. Holmes (2001) stated that “we all belong to overlapping social groups. We are concurrently members of social, and ethnic, and a regional group as well as members of a particular gender and age group” (p. 369).



Holmes (2001) endeavoured to explain most of these differences of speech choice by answering the following question:

How do changes proceed through a community? The process by which a particular change spreads reflects patterns of social contact. You learn the current slang from a friend who learns it from another friend outside your group. You adopt a new pronunciation, often unconsciously; in order to sound more like those you have heard using them. The reasons for the successful spread of one change compared to others are predominantly social and attitudinal (p. 369).

Coming back again to the point of who we are talking to, is primordial in constructing our sociolinguistic competence, and coining this point to that of age factor is also needed in order to use language appropriately. For instance, knowing how to speak with a young man is opposed to the way of speaking with an old man because they are often considered to be different in terms of social groups and cultures, and when they meet their sociolinguistic norms may conflict. Speech Community and Related concepts: Speech Community:

From all what has been seen previously so far in the present study, the notion of ethnography of communication explores how and why language is used, and how its use within a special communicative behaviour varies in different cultures. Hence, as an answer to the first research question, and in order to understand the different communicative behaviours and practices into a broader social context, the study of speech community as a key element is required at this level, and many concepts are required too to be defined, principally: group, language (variety), and norms.

First, we will shed the light on the notion of “group”, Whardhaugh (2006) tried to define the group in spite of its complexity, he argued that it consists at least of two members, and with no upper limit to group membership, and there are variant reasons that make people group together, most important are: social, religious, political, cultural, familial, vocational, etc, that what justifies its extent, for the reason that many groups may belong to each other at the same time, though, they may or may not meet face to face. Beyond this, an individual’s feelings of identity are closely related to that person’s feelings about groups in which he or she is a member (p. 119).

In this respect, members of speech community not only should share a set of grammatical rules but there should also have regular relationships between



language use and social structure; i.e., there must be norms which may vary by sub-group and social setting. At this level Hymes insisted that speech communities cannot be defined solely through the use of linguistic criteria, but it is related to society. For Hymes the concept of speech community is a difficult one to grasp in its entirety because it depends on how one defines group in society, he also pointed out that: “Speech community is a necessary, primary concept... it postulates the unit of description as social, rather than linguistic, entity. One starts with a social group and considers the entire organisation of linguistic means within it” (Hymes, 1974,p. 47).

From what precedes, any group of people in order to constitute a speech community, must share what they do and know when they interact with one another and their behaviour is operated within a shared set of norms, local knowledge, beliefs, and values.

Now, we will see other points related to speech community such as: idiolect, dialect, sociolect, and the relationship between them as giving birth to norms, without excluding code switching (shifting) as an important factor in relation to speech’s situation change. Then, we will devote our concern to social network as a major element in creating differences in people’s speech. Dialect, Idiolect and Sociolect:

The actual individual language behaviour is very variable, this can be explained through accepting the fact that the speech of each individual is different in some variable degree from every other speaker, and his language is unique and peculiar to himself. This language according to Corder (1985) is called idiolect; it is considered as a dialect spoken by one individual (p. 54).

Generally, dialect is any variety of a language characterised by systematic differences in pronunciation, grammar and vocabulary from other varieties of the same language, e.g.: differences occurring within the same English language, from British to American [petrol (British)/Gasoline (American)].

These differences occur due to variability in geographic dimensions, and sometimes to social dimensions (differences of speech within a community are due to differences in density of communication, as argued by Bloomfield (1933, p. 46). We will recognise this fact when dealing later with social network). In this respect, dialect is used to indicate a subordinate variety of a language. If this variety is associated with a place it will be called: regional or geographical dialect, and if it is associated with boundaries of social nature it will be called: social dialect. A recent terminology calls this latter “sociolectal” for the sake of making a clear distinction between geographical and social dialects (Fishman



cited in Corder, 1985, p. 55). Both sociolectal and dialectal varieties merge into one another. This relationship can be illustrated diagrammatically as follows:

Fig. 1. Social and Geographical Dimensions of Variability (Corder, 1985, p. 55)

norm

Social dimension ‘sociolect’

The point of interaction can be regarded as some sort of norm agreed by a group of people interpreted by some set of sociological characteristics shared in common, e.g. education, social class, geographical residence Corder (1985.p. 55). We would add here age as another element which serves to manipulate and regulate the norm between groups of people within the same speech community and social networks (as we will see later), in that age is a regulator factor in differentiating the norms accepted distinctively among both: the young and old people.

Additionally, the social situation (or context) impose itself to manipulate person’s idiolect, and leads him to change his performance when he speaks in both the sociological and geographical dimension in accordance to “who he is” in relation to “who his hearer is”. In here, the speaker pays attention to how he speaks, and attempts to maintain the norm according to the situation or context in which he finds himself. This behaviour according to Corder (1985) is called “dialect switching” or “code switching” or rather dialect or code shifting i.e. The speaker switches from one code to another in different situations, and this is remarkably related to sociolinguistic competence discussed earlier (p. 56).

Social Network: Another concept is strikingly related to speech community, that we firmly

believe is useful in achieving its meaning, it is that of social network. According to Gumperz “Speech community, broadly conceived, can be regarded as collectivities of social networks” (1996, p. 362).

Network can be dense or loose, the former is possible if members that a person interacts with have close and strong interaction with each other and

Geographical dimension ‘dialect’



knows each other, otherwise it is loose (Wardhaugh, 2006, p. 129). Consequently, ties between people can be stronger or weaker; within dense networks strong ties exist, which can explain how speech forms remain stable over long periods. On the contrary, weak ties may provide a crucial means by which change -either linguistic or cultural- infiltrates social networks due to the lack of norm reinforcement (Malmkjaer, 2005, p. 484). Other factors according to Milroy and Gordon (2003) caused disruption of close-knit, localized networks, these are: migration, war, industrialization and urbanization (Milroy & Gordon cited in Llamas et al, 2007, p. 87).

The importance of the distinction made between the two types of networks: dense and loose, leads to what has been articulated by Bloomfield (1933) : “differences of speech within a community are due to differences in density of communication” (p. 46). Indeed, Bloomfield was right, and this is clear also from what has been argued by Meyerhoff (2006) that social networks have to effect on the variation that exists in the community at large: a person when he associates with another trough, for example, work or friendship networks can have a significant impact on how he talks (this is the case of dense social network) (p. 05).

We have so far discovered the importance of socio-cultural contexts under the concept of communicative competence in which communication takes place. Besides as an answer to the second research question, we have recognised the important role of norms as a key element in determining cultural differences between members of different social networks, from which a speech community is consisted. It remains to determine another crucial component of ethnography of communication; it is that of speech event and its analysis under Hymes’ speaking model.

Speech Event and the Speaking Model: Speech Act, Speech Event, and Speech Situation:

Ethnography of communication involves observing human communication. According to Findlay (1998) this is possible through three levels introduced by Hymes, under a hierarchical frame work, which are: speech situation, speech event, and speech acts (p. 61).

The speech situation: represents the larger contexts and the general setting and scenes for communication, in which more specific speech behaviours (speech events) occur. For example, holiday celebrations, school semesters, important rituals, dinner party and so on. In this first level the broad context of communication is created.



A communication situation may consist of one or several communicative (speech) events, which refer to specific activities, occur (such as jokes, job interviews and conversations, a lecture). In such activities as Duranti (1997) pointed out, speech plays a crucial role in the definition of what is going on, that is if we eliminate speech the activity cannot takes place (p. 289).

Finally, speech acts are utterances made by one person; they are the minimal unit of analysis, and represent a highly specific action that occurs within broader communicative circumstances (speech events and situations). For example, (greeting, request, apology) (Findlay, 1998, p. 61).

The importance of speech (communication) event within context and situation can be illustrated through the following example:

1- (A) Can you tell me what time is it? (speech act1) (B) Yes, I can (Speech act2).

The problem with (B) is that he responded with the literal meaning, not with the speaker’s meaning. Instead, a normal sequence of this Conversation for example would be as follows: 2- (A) Can you tell me what time is it? (Speech act1). (B) The time is X (speech act2). (A) Thank you (speech act 3).

In the first case (1) unlike the second case (2), (A) might concluded that (B) is ignorant of the speech event (asking for the time). Accordingly, we conclude that (B) is being uncooperative though there is a possibility that (B) is perhaps joking, but it is far from being accepted since we don’t usually joke with strangers on the street.

In here, the principle of context is conditioned by understanding the context of speech events in which they occur (in the previous example the speech event is that of asking about time). In the same way, speech events that consist of different speech acts take place within a larger context of speech situations.

Speech Event: Speech event is defined by Crystal (2008) as the description of a

communicative exchange made meaningful by culturally specific structures of participants, genres, codes and other elements (p. 446). This description as



Wardhaugh (2006) clarified, is related to all the factors that are relevant in understanding how that particular communicative event achieves its objectives ( p. 247).

These factors are analysed through the speaking model used by Hymes under the mnemonic device: S P E A K I N G as an acronym. In fact, this acronym is an application and extension of Jakobson’s arguments concerning the multifunctionality of language that allows us to examine how the different factors play a role in the shaping of the message and its interpretation. Indeed, Hymes’ 1962 paper as Van Dijk (2009) pointed out was dedicated to Jakobson, in which he proposes an ‘emic’ approach to speech event. Hymes defined the ethnography of speaking as the study of “The situation and uses, the patterns and functions, of speaking as an activity in its own right” (Hymes qtd in Van Dijk,2009, p. 158).

Accordingly, context, thus, is needed to disambiguate the meaning of utterances. In the following years, Hymes developed the basic ideas of ethnography of speaking (later called “ethnography of communication”). Hymes explicitly built on Jakobson’s speech event model by refining and expanding Jakobsnon’s six factors into a list that grew from seven to sixteen.

The sixteen components were : (message form; message content; setting; scene; speaker/sender; addresser; hearer/receiver/audience; addressee; purposes (outcomes); purposes (goals); key; channels; forms of speech; norms of interaction; norms of interpretation; and genres). He regrouped these sixteen components within eight divisions under the acronym S.P.E.A.K.I.N.G (Setting and scene - Participants - Ends - Act Sequence - Key - Instrumentalities - Norms - Genre) (Hymes cited in Duranti, 1997, p. 288).

The Speaking Model (Analysis of Speech Event) : According to Wardhaugh (2006), the factors of this model are relevant in

understanding how a particular communicative event achieves its objectives (p. 247). These factors are as follows:

1- The Setting and Scene (S): they are related to speech. Setting refers to the time and place which are the concrete physical circumstances, or location in which speech takes place. For example, the setting for a business meeting is likely to be a conference room, and it can take place at any time. Whereas, scene refers to the abstract psychological setting or the cultural definition of the occasion.



2- The Participants (P): includes variant combinations of speaker-listener and their relationship with one another, i.e., the social role of each participant in the interaction, their age, sex (gender), and social background. The relationship: speaker–listener may be expressed in general way as speaker-audience. For example, a teacher may ask a student, but in this case the message is not shared only between these two persons in a classroom as speaker and listener; it extends to the totality: teacher and students as speaker and audience.

Tow aspects of participants are needed to be taken into consideration regarding the context in which speech event happens: who they are and what roles they are taking within the speech event. For example, speaking with the boss in the administration involves a relationship by the role of each of them (the simple worker and the boss).

3- Ends (E): refers to the purpose, goals, and expected outcome of an interaction. For example, an old man may tell a story about his life experience to teach the youth and give them lessons from life. Another example of telling a joke may bring the goal of entertaining, pass-time, or sarcasm, depending on the situation and even the age of the teller.

4- Act Sequence (A): refers to the order of actions, message form, and message content. It contains the precise words used, how they are used, and the relationship of what is said to the actual topic at hand.

5- Key (K): refers to the manner and the general tone of interaction or spirit in which a particular message is conveyed: light - hearted, serious, precise, mocking, and sarcastic. For example, in funerals most are serious, or in the mosque the discourse given by the “imam” is serious and precise.

6- Instrumentalities (I): refers simply to the medium of communication or the choice of channel, e.g. oral, written, or telegraphic and the actual forms of speech employed, such as the language, dialect, code or register that is chosen.

7- Norms of Interaction and Interpretation (N) : refers to the social rules governing the event and the participants ‘actions and reaction, i.e.: what communicative behaviours are regarded as appropriate by a speech community, and also how these may be viewed by someone who does not share them. For example, in many parts of our society, especially in Bedouin regions, it is unacceptable if a new married man meet his father during the first days of marriage, or even to meet his father in presence of his wife along his life.

8- Genre (G): refers to the categories of communication, (e.g. poetry, prayer, lecture, proverbs, riddles, sermons) as kinds of speech acts or event (Wardhaugh, 2006, p. 247-249; Strazny, 2005, p. 304).



Among the eight factors, norms of interaction and interpretation are the most determinant of culture, in that people of particular cultural group may share different values from that of other groups. Therefore, norms constitute the focus of studies in ethnography of communication. However, these norms are determined by some elements, such as setting, participants and key. Act sequence may also indicate what norms of interaction and interpretation participants have adopted in conversations.

Conclusion:

Ethnography of communication is basically concerned with the study of language in relation to the social and cultural setting. In contrast to the simple study of language structure, ethnography of communication is primordially concerned with language use and rules of speaking in which speakers as members of speech community and different social networks equate particular language codes and topics with particular socio-cultural setting. Henceforth, the concept of communicative competence must be embedded in the notion of cultural competence, or the total set of knowledge and skills which speakers bring into situation.

In addition, speech events take a central part in speakers’ interaction based on their communicative competence. The latter transcends over the speaker’s linguistic competence and, therefore, gives him the ability to communicate in a more successful way and offers him as well a good command of communicative proficiency to facilitate a better social life.

To conclude, the present study in the attempt to answer the research questions revealed the following findings: first, in order to understand the different communicative behaviours and practices into a broader social context, the study of speech community as a key element is required at this level. Second, norms are the most important factor in determining the cultural differences between members of different social networks within the same speech community and constitute, thereby, the focus of studies in ethnography of communication. Finally, a lucid resolution of the research problem requires the admission that social cultural rules, as basic in individual’s communicative competence, are closely tied to communication, and interpreting the meaning of linguistic behaviour lies to this relationship.



References :

Bloomfield, L. (1933). Language. New York: Henry Holt and Company. Bussmann, H. et al.( 2006). Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. Routledge. Corder, P. S. (1985). Introducing Applied Linguistics. Penguin Books. Crystal, D.(2008). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. 6th ed. Blackwell

Publishing Ltd. Duranti, A. (1997). Linguistic Anthropology. Cambridge University Press. Findlay, M. S. (1998). Language and Communication. A Cross-Cultural Encyclopedia;

ABC-CLIO. Gumperz, J.J. (1996). Introduction to Part IV of J.J. Gumperz & S.C. Levinson (eds.),

Rethinking linguistic relativity. Cambridge Cambridge University. Holmes, J. (2001). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Second Edition; Pearson

Education Limited. Hymes, D.H. (1974). Foundations of sociolinguistics. Philadelphia: University of

Pennsylvania Press. Llamas, C. et al. (2007). The Routledge Companinon to Sociolinguistics. Routledge. Malmkjær, K. (2005). The Linguistics Encyclopedia. Third Edition; Taylor & Francis

Library. Meyerhoff, M. (2006). Introducing Sociolinguistics. Routledge. Rickheit , G. & Strohner, H.(2008). Handbook of Communication Competence.

Mouton de Gruyter. Saville-Troike, M. (2003). The Ethnography of Communication An Introduction.

Blackwell Publishing Ltd . Strazny, P. (2005). “Encyclopedia of Linguistics” Volume 1 A-L; Taylor & Francis

Library . Van Dijk, T. A. (2009). Society and Discourse How Social Contexts Influence Text and

Talk. Cambridge University Press. Wardhaugh, R.( 2006). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.


La nature de la culture organisationnelle

SAHNOUN Abd Razak : Doctorant Université Badji Mokhtar -Annaba

Introduction : L'intérêt de la ressource de l'humain au sein de l'organisation est pas un

hasard, mais en raison de son importance et le rôle efficace dans la réalisation des objectifs organisationnels, qui est ce qui a conduit les gestionnaires à mettre les programmes de développement à former des individus depuis leur recrutement dans l'organisation et tout au long de leur carrière et jusqu'à finir. Toutefois, cette préoccupation ne peut pas conduire à la mesure souhaitée objectifs souhaitée afin que l'organisation est un système d'unités interconnectées Et les composants qui ne peuvent pas être séparés les uns des autres, comme : les valeurs organisationnelles, les coutumes, les rituels, les lois, la structure organisationnelle, le leadership et les styles de communication, l'éthique etc ... et qui entrent dans le cadre de la culture organisationnelle. Cette dernière est une identité personnelle et distinguer chaque entité de l'autre. elle servent comme un moteur de développement au sein de l'organisation, de sorte qu'il est éthique, juridique et réglementaire du système régissant les personnes intéressées ou interdisant et ces aussi la référence intellectuelle philosophique Invoqués dans la constriction les politiques et la stratégies adoptées par l'organisation, l'Organisation que néglige la culture organisationnelle est vouée à une mort inévitable et l'extinction. Compte tenu de la culture organisationnelle de la place dans la vie des organisations est venu à cet article illustre la nature de la culture organisationnelle en notant que les modèles les plus important. 1- La culture organisationnelle : des définitions multiples :

Depuis les années 1950, la culture organisationnelle a fait l’objet de plusieurs écrits, le résultat de ces recherches a marqué une divergence dans la définition de La culture organisationnelle Ce qui suit est une présentation de certaines de ces définitions :



*Pour Maurice Thevenet : « la culture d’entreprise est « un ensemble de références partagées dans l’organisation, construites tout au long de son histoire en réponse aux problèmes rencontrés dans l’entreprise »1.

* Pour E. Jaques «la culture de l’entreprise, c’est son mode de pensée et d’action habituel et traditionnel, plus ou moins partagé par tous ses membres, qui doit être appris et accepté, au moins en partie, par les nouveaux membres»2. *selon -Cameron, K.S, Quinn, R.E la définit comme « l’ensemble des postulats de base inventés, découverts ou développés par le groupe en résolvant ses problèmes d’adaptation externe et d’intégration interne »3.

Ce sont ces définitions nous concluons que la culture organisationnelle c’est une système se compose d'un ensemble d'éléments concrets et abstraits(les valeurs et les croyances; les traditions ; postulats ; Les symboles ; Les mythes ; Les rites…) communs parmi membres de l'organisation et transmis de génération en génération.

2-Le système de la culture organisationnelle : Le système comprend:

• Les entrées dans le système de la société : professions, lois, histoires, héros, valeurs en compétition et services; • Le processus de création et de transformation de la culture basé sur des hypothèses, des restrictions, des valeurs et des normes; • Les sorties du système: comportements, technologies, stratégies, image, produits et services, croyances, tels que: la valeur pour l’argent, les gens en tant qu’actif, le temps en tant que restriction etc. • Feed-back: la dispersion des sorties dans la société, qui influencera certainement le processus de recréation ou de transformation de la culture organisationnelle 4.

3-Les éléments de la culture d’entreprise : La culture d’entreprise intégrera également des variables propres,

constituées par5 :



Les valeurs

Il s’agit des préférences collectives qui s’imposent au

groupe, aux croyances essentielles, aux normes qui

définissent les façons d’agir et de penser. Ces valeurs

forment la philosophie de l’entreprise.

Les valeurs déclarées de Mac Donald’s : – être irréprochable sur la qualité, – faire progresser l’alimentation

des enfants, – se comporter avec éthique,

– préserver leur environnement. Source :

http://www.mcdonalds.fr/#/engagement/

Les symboles

Ce sont des mots, des objets, des gestes, Des tenues

vestimentaires, des styles architecturaux… qui ont une signification liées aux valeurs

essentielles.

La tenue vestimentaire des salariés d’Auchan, dont les couleurs

correspondent à celle du logo

Les mythes

Ils correspondent aux légendes, aux histoires associées au passé de l’entreprise. Le mythe peut être associé à la personne du

fondateur ou de dirigeants qui ont marqué l’histoire de l’entreprise (le héros).

Ingvar Kamprad a fait fortune en créant la chaîne de magasins Ikea. Avant cette

réussite, il a, dans sa jeunesse, vendu des allumettes, puis des décorations

de Noël, et par la suite des semences… Cet homme a une réputation d’« Oncle

Picsou », roulant avec une vieille voiture, faisant ses courses lors des

soldes et des baisses de prix de la fin de semaine

Les rites

Ce sont des pratiques qui découlent des valeurs partagées au niveau du recrutement, des

réunions de travail, des réceptions…

– le tutoiement ou le vouvoiement. – l’Ordre des Compagnons du

Minorange chez Bouygues qui a pour but et missions de fidéliser et

récompenser les meilleurs ouvriers. Source : http://www.bouygues-

construction.com/ 268i/carrieres/nos-compagnons-du-

minorange.html

Les tabous

Ils correspondent aux interdits dans une organisation, comme les sujets dont on ne doit pas

parler, les actes que l’on ne doit pas faire.

Ce qui relève des échecs, des erreurs de stratégie.



4-L’Importance de la culture d’entreprise : La connaissance de la culture d’entreprise est un préalable indispensable à

toute réflexion stratégique. Elle permet de prendre des décisions adaptées, tenant compte des spécificités de l’entreprise, en évitant de fonder sur ces décisions par rapport des normes standard.

Il est généralement admis que la culture d’entreprise est un outil de management au service de la performance de l’entreprise. En effet, elle permet au manager :

-D’assurer la cohérence du groupe dans la mesure où elle permet de fédérer sur des valeurs communes qui transcendent les divergences d’intérêt et d’opinion entre les différentes parties prenantes internes (dirigeants, managers, cadres, ensemble des salariés); dans ce cadre, la culture d’entreprises apparaît donc comme un outil, dont dispose le dirigeant, pour limiter les risques de conflits et d’affrontement6.

-d’améliorer l’adaptation car un groupe mieux soudé réagit plus efficacement aux évolutions inévitables de l’environnement; de favoriser la motivation puisque les salariés intègrent les objectifs de l’entreprise. Sur le plan économique, la culture d’entreprise peut donc permettre l’amélioration de la performance. L’adhésion aux valeurs de l’entreprise et développe la motivation, permet une meilleure coordination, facilite les synergies, assure une meilleure intégration des nouveaux salariés…

Toutefois la culture d’entreprise comporte des limites :

Les effets attendus ne sont pas toujours atteints car certains individus peuvent ne pas adhérer aux valeurs véhiculées par cette culture, limitant ainsi les effets au niveau de la motivation ; de même, les conflits de personnes peuvent limiter les effets positifs attendus ;

une culture d’entreprise trop forte peut être perçue par les salariés comme une manipulation, provoquant les effets inverses à ceux attendus ; elle peut constituer aussi un facteur de rigidité face aux changements, comme par exemple à l’occasion d’opération de fusion. Ces valeurs fondant cette culture peuvent être concrètement exprimées dans une charte, le projet d’entreprise7.



5-Les théories de la culture organisationnelle : Il faut distinguer deux courants qui situeront les constantes et les logiques

dans la définition de ce concept : et qui sont 1) les théories de la culture dans le champ de l’anthropologie d’où est issu le concept.2) et les théories du champ du management. Cet auteur ajoute « l’anthropologie est le berceau théorique de tous ceux qui se sont intéressés à la culture et à la vie des sociétés humaines »8. Avant d’approfondir la définition et de présenter les composantes du concept « culture d’entreprise »9. Tableau 1 les théories de la culture dans le champ de l’anthropologie d’où est issu le concept :

Les théories de l’évolution culturelle : - Cherchent les origines et l’évolution des cultures

-La culture est un tout recouvrant aussi bien des comportements que les autres créations humaines

les théories du particularisme historique : - Privilégient l’histoire à la recherche de lois universelle de

l’évolution culturelle - la culture est quelque chose qui soumet l’individu

- c’est donc la caractéristique de déterminant des comportements qui est privilégiée ici

Les théories fonctionnalistes

- La culture recouvre l’ensemble des règles permettant au groupe de fonctionner comme un système

-La culture est moins intéressante en soi que le système social, -La culture remplie une fonction dans la société et c’est donc au

niveau des besoins des personnes qu’il faut la trouver

Les théories de matérialisme culturel : - Elles mettent l’accent sur ce qui n’est pas relié aux personnes -La culture est un ensemble de comportements observables

dont les personnes sont les transmetteurs -Cette théorie apporte deux aspects majeurs : d’une part

l’explication du concept, et d’autre part, elle s’interroge sur l’origine de la culture et les facteurs qui l’influencent

Les théories de l’idéalisme culturel :

-Mettent l’accent sur ce qui est partagé par les membres d’une organisation : ce sont les connaissances, schémas mentaux ou

structures de pensées qui sont partagées



-La culture intervient inconsciemment dans la manière d’agir des individus

-La culture suppose l’existence d’un tout cohérent, mais elle intervient dans l’action individuelle à travers des références

partagées, sans la conscience de l’individu Particularisme culturel :

- Chercher les spécificités de l’entreprise en exploitant au mieux le matériau culturel disponible

Le fonctionnalisme : -La culture traduit un liant entre tous les intérêts individuels qui leur permet de coexister, mais elle n’est rien de précis

Le Matérialisme culturel : -La culture est vue à travers ses composantes de symboles, rites

ou valeurs L’Idéalisme culturel :

- Il met l’accent sur les représentations, références et hypothèses de base qui sous –tendent l’action des individus

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Pour permettre de s’y retrouver, certains auteurs les ont regroupés en famille de cultures. Il apparaît donc plusieurs modèles comme l’Oganizational Culture Inventory, le Competing Value Framework ou l'Organizational Performance. La majorité de ces modèles sont développés dans un contexte de performance et sont plus difficilement applicables dans la relation entre la culture organisationnelle et la santé mentale au travail. Nous verrons donc en détail les trois modèles mentionnés, pour bien représenter les différences10. 6- Les fonctions de la culture organisationnelle :

Les effets de la culture organisationnelle en lui attribuant des fonctions sur les plans social, identitaire, symbolique et stratégique.

*Fonction de légitimation sur le plan social : La culture organisationnelle permet aux membres d'une organisation

d'adopter les comportements ainsi que les modes d'interprétation et de décodage qui ont une légitimité dans leur organisation. Les membres sont alors en mesure de composer avec la réalité propre à leur organisation et peuvent ainsi faire face aux problèmes qui résultent de sa culture.



*Fonction identitaire : Dans chaque organisation, les membres occupent des fonctions qui les

mènent à poser des actions devant refléter des valeurs. La culture organisationnelle fait le lien entre l'identité des membres au sein de l'organisation ainsi que leurs rôles et les valeurs qu'ils adoptent.

La culture transmet littéralement une identité aux membres de l'organisation et crée ainsi un sentiment d'appartenance. Elle comble ainsi certains besoins d'ordre idéologique et intellectuel chez les individus. Les chercheurs fonctionnalistes s'entendent pour dire que la culture organisationnelle « facilite l'arrimage à quelque chose de plus grand que le soi du travailleur».

*Fonction symbolique : La culture fournit également aux membres d'une organisation un cadre de

référence symbolique qui régit leurs interactions sociales et la réalisation des objectifs à travers la production de significations culturelles.

Ainsi, à divers moments de socialisation, les membres prennent connaissance des croyances et des représentations qui forment le cadre de référence symbolique de l'organisation. En fait, la culture organisationnelle vient donner un sens et une direction aux comportements des individus. *Fonction stratégique

Selon Thévenet (l993) la culture a des répercussions sur le niveau d'efficacité de l'organisation sur plusieurs plans. Elle permet au gestionnaire d'accroître son bassin de connaissances au sujet de la réalité de l'organisation et elle alimente sa réflexion stratégique11. 7- les types de la culture organisationnelle

Nous présentons les quatre types de culture qui forment ce modèle, a savoir :1) culture hiérarchique, 2) culture de groupe, 3) culture de marche et 4) culture idéocratique.

*La culture hiérarchique : La culture hiérarchique est caractérisée par la structuration et la

formalisation du travail. Cette culture se focalise sur la stabilité interne, les règles et les valeurs qui sont associées a la posture stratégique conservatrice (conservatively oriented strategic posture) Elle donne beaucoup d'importance a



la formalisation des procédures de production, au contrôle et a la maitrise des situations. La culture hiérarchique s'appuie sur une structure mécaniste qui, généralement, n'est pas favorable aux activités entrepreneuriales. Hypothèse 1a. Une forte culture hiérarchique acte négativement l'OE *La culture de marche :

La culture de marche (ou de développement) est orientée vers la réalisation des résultats (results oriented) a travers la maximisation de la production. Ses valeurs essentielles sont la productivité, la compétitivité, la rentabilité, la prise de décision rationnelle et la réussite. Cameron et Quinn (2006),clarient le terme de culture de marche : "The termmarket is not synonymous with the marketing functions or with consumers in the marketplace. Rather,it refers to a type of organization that functions as amarket itself [...], it is focused on transactions withexternal constituencies such as suppliers, customers,contractors, licensees, unions, and regulators [...],the values that dominate market-type organizationsare competitiveness and productivity". Hypothese 1b. Une forte culture de marche acte positivement l'OE.

*La culture de groupe : La culture de groupe est caractérisée par l'ambiance conviviale dans le

lieu du travail, et le partage entre les individus. Ses valeurs essentielles sont l’exibilite, la con ance dans le potentiel humain, l’engagement et le développement des ressources humaines. L'objectif de l'entreprise est de développer l'esprit d'équipe. *La culture adhocratique :

La culture adhocratique (ou entrepreneuriale) est caractérisée par le dynamisme, l'entrepreneuriat, la créativité, la prise de risque et la focalisation sur l'environnement externe.

Dans cette culture, le décideur est un visionnaire, un innovateur et un preneur de risque.

L'entreprise soutient la création des nouveaux produits/services, son objectif a long terme est de favoriser la croissance et l'acquisition des nouvelles ressources. "In the presence of an entrepreneurial mindset, an entrepreneurial culture, entrepreneurial leadership, and thestrategic management of resources, creativity andinnovation can ourish and resucompetitiveadvantage and wealth creation"12.



Conclusion: Si la culture organisationnelle est un système harmonieux, y compris les

composants matériel comme la structure, les symboles, les couleurs, les logos…, et autres facteurs abstraites comme les valeurs, normes, et la philosophie. Cette diversité en termes de composants, il est caractérisé les caractéristiques, de ce dernier combine ce qui est culturel et ce qui est organisationnel que la continuité, la souplesse, et la caractéristique de l'acquisition et de l'apprentissage Cela fait d'eux sont importants dans la vie de l'individu et l'organisation ensemble, ils servent comme un cadre d'esprit qui dirige les membres de la même organisation et organise leur travail et leurs relations. Les employeurs dans les organisations ne remplissent pas leurs rôles individuellement, mais plutôt dans un cadre organisationnel, et la culture qui détermine la nature de comportement organisationnel , et de définir les modèles de relations entre eux et leurs clients et d'autres qui sont aux prises avec elle, même vêtu, les niveaux de performance, et leur méthodologie en résolvant les problèmes et leur apparence, et parler la langue que vous spécifiez la culture de l'organisation.

Ils sont multidimensionnelle centrée entre ce qui est légal, social, de motivation, compétitif et stratégique. en retour aux racines de l'organisation nous trouvons de multiples sources . Dont certains sont dus à la nature de l'individu et le contenu des caractéristiques psychologiques, mentaux, sociaux et personnels, comme des tendances, des désirs, le degré d'intelligence, et d'autres attribué à l’organisation tels que l'éthique de l'organisation et l’organigramme.

En fin la culture organisationnelle reste toujours le fondement de développement organisationnel.



Référence :

1-M. Thévenet, La culture d’entreprise, PUF, Paris, 1993, p16.

2- E. Jaques, L’information et la communication, Théorie générale, Hachette Supérieur, Paris, 1991, p03.

3-Cameron, K.S, Quinn, R.E.. Diagnosing and changing organizational culture: Based on the competing Values framework. Wiley. (2011), 272p.

4-Miller, J., & Wolf, JCréer un climat de travail qui motive le personnel et améliore la performance. Management sciences for health, 11(3), . (2002).p1-22.

5-Higgins A. et al. « The Relationship of Moral Atmosphere to Judgments of Responsability », in W.M. Kurtines et J.L. Gertwitz (Eds),(1984), p. 74-106. :

6-Desphande R. et Webster F.E. « Culture d’organisation et marketing : une liste des priorités pour la recherche », Recherches et Applications en Marketing, vol. 4, n° 4, (1989), p. 25-49.

7-Nielsen, K., & Munir, F. How do transformational leaders influence follower's affective well-being? Exploring the mediating role of self-efficacy. Work & Stress, 23(4), (2009). p313-329.

8-Pettigrew, A. M.. On studying organizational culture. Administrative Science Quaterly, 24(4), (1979),p 570-581.

9- DEAL, T.; KENNEDY, A. Corporate Culture: The rites and rituals of corporate life; Perseus Books Publishing, LLC. 1982, 2000,pp41-45 .

10-Ouchi W.G. « Markets, Bureaucracies, and Clans », Administrative Science Quarterly (1980) , p. 129-141.

11- HOFSTEDE, G. Attitudes, Values and Organizational Culture: Disentangling the Concepts. Organization Studies, v. 19, n. 3, 1998p. 477-492..

12-Denison, D.R., Spreitzer, G.M.. Organizational culture and organization development : A competing value approach. Research in organizational change and development, (1991) 5, p1-21.

Recherches - univ-alger.dz

Documents

Transcript of Recherches - univ-alger.dz