Gee makes the argument that primary discourse groups have a type of test, or rite of passage, that signals whether an individual is worthy of being in the community. It’s a conscious or sub-conscious test that people use to gauge an individuals’ knowledge of how the community works. It can be used to verify a member of the community or bar outsiders. It can also be used to examine whether or not an “apprentice” was put in the right place at the right time. Analyzing their knowledge and how well they communicate their knowledge is key here. We go through these tests every day. When you sit in a lecture hall it’s expected of you to act a certain way. An extreme example would be if I started bouncing in my seat and laughing I would be judged as a weird kid and the professor would probably take note of my crazy behavior. On a more subtle note, if I would just sit in the front row and turn and talk to the kid behind me I would be singled out again. I wasn’t doing anything absurd, but it’s not proper etiquette for a large lecture hall. The same thing will happen when we go for interviews. The interviewer is going to bring up key words and gauge our knowledge. For me as an engineer it will be something to do with the profession. It will go something like, “Mr. Cook, what can you tell me about CPM?” To which I would respond,” Critical path method is the primary method of analyzing schedules to maximize efficiency within the scope of the project”. If I were not part of the discourse community I would respond like this,” CPM is great, I love that band”. With that I can rest assured I’ll never get a job as an engineer.
No comments:
Post a Comment