Ohio University Survivor Advocacy Program

Discourse Community Ethnography: The Ohio University Survivor Advocacy Program Jessica Arnold Ohio University

Ohio University Survivor Advocacy Program

Discourse Community Ethnography: The Ohio University Survivor Advocacy Program In every community, no matter its size or perceived significance, one will discover a unique literacy that has been developed so that the goals or ideas of the group may be accomplished or recognized. The unique situations in which these norms develop within a specific discourse community, or a community of individuals working towards a common goal by use of various forms of communication, are those that provide a foundation for the potential effectiveness of the community. It is important to recognize the being of a discourse community and its variation from other discourse communities. These communities exist everywhere. This being so, it is impossible for a discourse community to become accomplished without partaking in some type of interaction with other, possibly contradicting, discourse communities. The interactions of the discourse community with members within the community, the population in which the community exists to serve, and other discourse communities are important in that these interactions develop a morale within the community, connect the community to the individuals in which they serve, spread the unique ideas of the community, and enable the community to remain aware of other communities. These interactions, ultimately, allow the discourse community to thrive within a specific culture if they are willing to become members of the greater community in which many smaller, yet important, discourse communities inhabit. When an individual within a discourse community, or an entire discourse community within a larger community, fails to adapt to the agreed literary norms, communication practices, and/or appropriate lexicon used within the community, trouble will surely arise. Elizabeth Wardle, a researcher of communication practices within a

Ohio University Survivor Advocacy Program discourse community and author of Identity, Authority, and Learning to Write in New Workplaces, exemplifies what it means to become acculturated in the communication practices of a discourse community and presents a real life example of how ones intentions might lead them astray if they are not well aware of the purpose, goals, and importance of the discourse community in which one might find themself. Wardle places emphasis on the case of Alan. Alan, an individual who began

working in an unfamiliar discourse community, failed to adjust to the expectations of his job that happened to be within a community in which his practices and values differed. Alan attempted to communicate within the unfamiliar community with his own, inappropriate communication methods. These methods proved to be ineffective within the community in which he found employment and, unfortunately, concluded in Alans unemployment. In todays world, the majority of human beings have access to an overwhelming number of discourse communities. While we should consider ourselves lucky to live in such an accessible time, being a member of many discourses can be difficult. As previously discusses, each discourse community has its own, unique set of values and goals and uses communication in a specific way to meet their needs and the needs of others who might depend on the product or services of the community. The participation in more than one discourse community may result in conflict. We are, nonetheless, expected, as members of many discourses, to master our skills demanded by each community, as this is how one becomes a contributing factor of the community. The problem (inability to fully immerse oneself in a discourse) is deepened by the fact that true acquisition of many mainstream discourses involves, at least while being

Ohio University Survivor Advocacy Program in them, active complicity with values that conflict with ones home- and communitybased discourses. This excerpt, found in James Paul Gees Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics (2011), comes from an expert of literature who has clearly exposed the unavoidable conflict existing between discourse communities and the individuals whom

inhabit these communities. Combining the ideas of Wardles passage and Gees previous excerpt, Gee later concludes that individuals are given the opportunity to thrive in many discourses through mushfaking. Gee explains, Mushfake Discourse means partial acquisition coupled with metaknowledge and strategies to make do. Using these strategies, it seams that, interpersonally, it is possible to hold membership within many communities with little conflict. The easing of tension between discourse communities is important to an individuals contribution to a discourse. Wardle explains that the failure to integrate oneself into their discourse community can lead to social ostracism. Gee adds to Wardles textual conversation by suggesting that individuals can get by in a discourse community in which they do not have value of feel meaning by mushfaking discourse. John Swales, professor of linguistics, synthesizes these ideas with his own summations of participation within a discourse in the following excerpt (2011): There are enough spies, undercover agents and fifth columnists in the world to suggest that non-assimilation is at least possible. Spies are only successful if they participate successfully in the relevant speech and discourse communities of the domain which they have infiltrated; however, if they also assimilate they cease to be single spies but become double agents. On a less dramatic level, there is

Ohio University Survivor Advocacy Program

enough pretense, deception and face-work around to suggest that the acting out of roles is not that uncommon (p. 476). Through this excerpt, Swales is expressing that individuals fake success and contentment within a discourse community quite frequently. He suggests that the fake it til you make it approach has historically worked and can lead to successful acculturation if an individual is aware and pretentious in their actions within the community. Wardle, Gee, and Swales all address ways in which the differences that exist between communities have the potential to create conflict socially, and interpersonally for individuals who participate in various discourses. These authors conclude that as long as an individual is aware of their communitys expectations and expectations of the larger scale community in which their community resides, uses skills that they have already acquired from other discourses, and appear as though they are satisfied and productive within their community, they will become successful in the community and will decrease potential conflict or tension between other communities in which they participate. Discourse Community of Interest To gain further insight on how discourse communities and their effectiveness are impacted by their interactions with other communities and interactions by individuals within the discourse, I chose to observe an organization on Ohio University campus in which I volunteer, the Ohio University Survivor Advocacy Program. OUSAP is an organization that provides services for victims or survivors of stalking, domestic violence, sexual assault, or rape. As a peer advocate, my job within the program is to provide these victims with the appropriate resources within the Athens community.

Ohio University Survivor Advocacy Program A large part of being an advocate is developing flyers, merchandise, and programing that will distribute information containing OUSAPs services and hotline phone number. Our goal is to educate the university and Athens community on these devastating topics while providing them with resources that many may not realize are available. Our slogan, Creating a Safe Campus for ALL, really demonstrates the values and goals of OUSAP. We were developed to help men and women in the community

feel safe after suffering or witnessing a traumatizing event and to prevent these attacks by educating the population. Research Methods I primarily gathered information on the Ohio University Survivor Advocacy Program discourse community through observation in my volunteer experience and an interview that I conducted with OUSAPs coordinator, B. Strickland. I began volunteering at OUSAP in the fall of 2012, my sophomore year of college, after ten weeks of training. During this training the potential peer advocates learn how to effectively communicate with survivors of domestic violence, stalking, sexual assault, or rape. To do this we had to learn the specific lexis used at the specific crisis center, become familiar with the many resources in the Athens area, and develop effective ways in which we could reach out to the Ohio University and Athens communities to discuss the realities of stalking, domestic violence, and sexual assault and to inform the residents of our services. In being apart of the program for an entire school year, I was able to observe clients in the office, experience conversation techniques used in a crisis situation, watch how community members and university students responded to the facts that we

Ohio University Survivor Advocacy Program presented, and learn what means of communication were the most helpful in getting survivors into our office, and eventually to the other resources that they were in need of. In gathering information, I also interviewed B. Strickland, licensed social worker and coordinator of the Survivor Advocacy Program. Mrs. Strickland conducts peer

advocacy training and oversees the activity that occurs in the office. Mrs. Strickland has previously worked with other programs that promoted health, safety, protection and advocacy for crisis victims or survivors. As an experienced, authoritative figure in the OUSAP office and in the crisis intervention profession, B. Strickland was the perfect person to gain insight from. My findings of the OUSAP discourse community expressed throughout this paper are from my own, personal experience or my interview with Mrs. Strickland. Results Through participant observation and my interview with B. Strickland, I have discovered that OUSAP is a discourse community within many other discourse communities. The program is within the Ohio University community, which is in the Athens county community, which is in the rural Appalachian community. OUSAP, being within many discourses that have alternative values and goals, struggles to accomplish many of its goals because of its place within a larger community. I asked Mrs. Strickland how she viewed the interaction between the OUSAP discourse and the Ohio University and Athens discourses. She replied, Being a program that discusses, somewhat, explicit content, it is important for us (members of the OUSAP discourse) to remain sensitive to others who are not aware of or would rather not recognize the tragedies that we are faced with here (the OUSAP office). While one of

Ohio University Survivor Advocacy Program our primary goals is to provide community outreach, it becomes discouraging when we are responded to in negative ways. Many individuals in Athens (a rural and, in some areas, conservative community) do not find it beneficial to understand our line of work. Its so difficult to passively observe this denial. Some individuals do not realize how often these violent acts occur in their own backyard.

As a participant in the OUSAP community, I have observed communities that we reach out to cringe at the use of our lexis. Although the definition of a term such as rape and the thoughts that it may provoke are not pleasant, it is important to think of its prevalence from time to time. As an organization we may face conflict, but this will not prevent us from dismissing our values and goals. We feel that we must continue to provide education that may lead to prevention and decreased prevalence. I later asked Mrs. Strickland what types of communication she thought was most effective when reaching out to the community. After consideration she decided, I think that the posters that we endorse get the most attention. These posters are developed by another sexual assault prevention program on campus. The content on the posters has often been controversial, with photos and other messages that might be interpreted different than they were intended. While these posters create controversy, they are getting attention. It is difficult, in an organization such as OUSAP, to provide literature that is accepted by other discourse communities. The content, being explicit, can be interpreted in many different ways and in many different contexts. Some who read our literature may find its content victim blaming or against males. While this is not our intention as an organization at all, we must remain aware of the many strategies in which other

Ohio University Survivor Advocacy Program

communities interpret and digest our literature. Those who know the values and goals of OUSAP know that we, in fact, exist to find help for victims of sexual assault whether these clients are male or female. While interviewing B. Strickland we reflected on a particular instance in which a population misinterpreted a poster that we created. The flyer was titled Halloween Safety Tips. Many found this title to be victim blaming. While this flyer was created with good intentions, we had to apologize as an organization and recollected the remaining copies. After explaining to Mrs. Strickland what a discourse community was, we discussed OUSAPs role as a discourse community within many other communities. We both agreed that we are limited, as the type of organization that OUSAP is, as to how effective we can be. With the predispositions that have existed in this rural community for many years, it has been difficult for our organization to interact with other communities in a positive way. When OUSAPs intensions are misunderstood, conflict arises with organizations that have values or goals that differ from that of the program that exists to improve the conditions in which breed such violent acts. Mrs. Strickland and I have observed that OUSAP is gradually gaining acceptance into the Athens community. The interview concluded with Mrs. Stricklands positive statement, If we continue our hard work and refuse to allow rape culture to exist, we will eventually obtain the acceptance from other discourse communities needed to allow OUSAP to make the campus (Ohio University campus) and community (Athens, Ohio) a safer place to be. Conclusion

Ohio University Survivor Advocacy Program Through my observation and an insider view from an authority within the Ohio University Survivor Advocacy Program, I conclude that a discourse community that is

10

within a larger discourse community can become limited in its function. This destructive nature of competing communities impairs the potential effectiveness of these communities. As a result of this, an individuals values and goals must vary by community in which they participate. The overlapping of communities that have developed different, and sometimes opposing, goals complicates and may prevent their ability to function. This overlap can create tension between communities in which we are involved and may result in the reluctance of prospective individuals or communities to recognize or support a cause. Through experience that I have gained through OUSAP and reflection of Wardles passage, I have realized that one must consider other discourse communities when publishing or dispersing communication. The reception of the communication, written or spoken, often depends on the individuals or communities in which the communication reaches and their own goals or values. Ultimately, it is the goal of OUSAP to serve those who have been victims or survivors of stalking, domestic violence, sexual assault, or rape. In this line of work, the client comes first. This being so, we must often step on the toes of other communities to better care for our clients or to disperse information that may prevent such violence from occurring. We are willing to do this for the client and for the greater good of the community.

Ohio University Survivor Advocacy Program Works Cited

11

Gee, James Paul. Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics. Writing About Writing. Eds. Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martins, 1989. 481-494. Print. Interview with B. Strickland. June 18, 2013. Swales, John. The Concept of Discourse Community. Writing About Writing. Eds. Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martins, 2011. 466-480. Print. Wardle, Elizabeth. Identity, Authority, and Learning to Write in New Workplaces. Writing About Writing. Eds. Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martins, 2011. 520-537. Print.

Ohio University Survivor Advocacy Program Interview Notes What are the primary B. Strickland: OUSAP exists to serve victims/survivors of stalking, domestic violence, sexual assault, and rape. We are here to believe the victim, to find them appropriate resources, and to help them, ultimately, heal. What

12

B. Strickland: We create flyers here in the office. We are given material from the campus Sexual Assault Prevention Program. Our peer advocates develop literature to disperse throughout the campus and community, after it has been approved. The peers also meet with other communities on campus to educate them about stalking, domestic violence, sexual assault, and rape, and provide these groups with information on how to receive help if they are ever in a dangerous situation or know someone who is being affected by these issues. How does OUSAP interact with Ohio University/the Athens Community? B. Strickland: OUSAP provides community outreach. Although our program is received in various ways, it is important that we are out there educating the public, and potentially saving individuals from traumatic experiences.

B. Strickland: We are received differently from different groups. This may be because our mission is misunderstood or they assume that we do not serve men. In the Athens community, and most of Southern Ohio for that matter, I have found that individuals do not like to recognize the prevalence of these horrific crimes/events. Through my experience, I have realized that with time, organizations such as OUSAP are better understood, and therefor accepted in rural communities. What do you believe is the most B. Strickland: I think that our posters receive the most attention. They typically contain something eye catching, and while at the time they may not be taken seriously, students will remember the content. Can you describe the literacy/lexicon that an individual must develop to B. Strickland: Our peer advocates must take a 10-15 week course that introduces useful vocabulary and terminology. Through this training, they will learn about

Ohio University Survivor Advocacy Program

13

HIPPA and what our office policy is when discussing clients and their situation. It is important for the individuals within the OUSAP community to use these practices to protect the rights of the victims or survivors that we serve.