In the article, "Identity, Authority and Learning to Write in New Work Places", Elizabeth Wardle talks about three techniques people use to join new communities to have a sense of belonging. She describes these new members as "newcomers" and the three ways they try to belong to a community are by engagement, imagination and alignment. Engagement is probably the most important out of the three, where a newcomer becomes familiar with their new discourse community by engaging with older members of the community. It is a sense of respect and it also makes the newcomers come out of their shells and force them to prove themselves to the community. An example of this for me might be, new members of my sorority coming to the house and getting to know the in-house women. The sophomores act as their big sisses so they get to know them very well, but they never have a chance to really bond with us, the juniors so we always welcome them if they want to stop by and talk. It shows us they're in our sorority for the right reasons and that they're also friendly girls.
The second way newcomers become accepted into a discourse community is through imagination. Wardle explains that imagination expands experiences you partake in and also the way you conduct yourself as a person. It makes for a well-rounded person and you also create new images of the world around you. Without imagination the world might be very close-minded so the members of the discourse community look for someone creative. If you aren't imaginative, I don't think you would even think about joining a new one. An example I can think of with this, was when I first went out of my executive board position of event planning. It is the most demanding for being creative and having an imagination. It was scary thinking I would be taking the shoes of another member, but with my hard work and determination, I used imagination to help me make decisions and make events much more fun. I got a lot of praise and no longer felt that I wasn't going to be a good predecesor.
And lastly, Wardle says the third way to become accepted by a discourse community is through alignment. Alignment is sort of like becoming knowledgable about how the community works and accepting that. It's like following the rules almost. When a member first joins a discourse community, the must align their old ways with the new ways of how the group works. The best example of this for me was when I was a new member. I had no idea a sorority did so many things and operated so intensely. I changed a lot about my work ethic (in a positive way) and point of view of everything. I did all this so I could have a smooth transition of being initiated and I also wanted all my new sisters to like me.
Any discourse community faces these three ways newcomers come about. Everyone is a newcomer at some point. Some never make it because they don't approach a community the correct way, and some do and flourish and become the next leaders. It all depends on whether or not they were meant to be apart of it or not.
i like the way that you explained the second one, imagination. i agree that communities are looking for someone that is open minded and creative. i think it takes all three of the modes to join a community and be accepted into that community but i think that imagination is the most important of the three to have.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the way you explained engagement and I think it is very important to be able to achieve the other two models. My response differed in terms of how much of a relationship is built with engagement. I would say that engagement is more just establishing the common goals and essentially just how the new comer tries to work hard to show his dedication to the established members. I think that building a strong relationship with members is more imagination and alignment. I used sorority members in my example too. New girls that come in need to show interest in the valuable aspects of the sorority such as philanthropy and friendship instead of just focusing on social gains and I think that is what determines success as far as engagement. To relate this to the case study of Alan, I think that he did not have engagement in his positions at all. In his initial post graduate job he did not try to fit in, he immediately wanted the bigger responsibilities and therefor he did not engage. Then in his second job it seemed he did a little better with that model but still he did not try to establish common goals with the other workers, he was more about independent success.
ReplyDelete