Daiute,

Narrative inquiry Workshop, 4-9-12

Narrative Inquiry Dynamic Storytelling and Reflecting

Workshop at the University of Belgrade
September 4, 2012

Colette Daiute, The Graduate Center, City University of New York
cdaiute@gc.cuny.edu
Aleksander Baucal, University of Belgrade
Jelena Radisic, Institute of Educational Research

Schedule Based on 10:00 3:00 (with break for lunch)

10:00: Welcome, introductions, and overview of the workshop

10:10 10:30: Dynamic narrating warm up

10:30 11:00: Presentation 1: Why narrative & narrative inquiry design?

11:00 11:30: Group brainstorming about narrative inquiry design & values analysis

Coffee during group work

11:30 Presentation 2: Plot analysis individuals interact with society

12:00 12:30: Group work and discussion with plot analysis

12:30 1:15: Lunch (order in pizza)

1:15 1:30: Reflection Between the narratives

1:30-1:50: Presentation 3: Significance analysis language skills for diversity

1:50 2:20: Group work with significance analysis

2:20 2:45: Reflection & Discussion What we gain from narrative inquiry

2:45 3:00: Fact sheet, implications, Hvala!

1
Daiute, Narrative inquiry Workshop, 4-9-12

Narrative Inquiry Workshop
Colette Daiute, cdaiute@gc.cuny.edu
University of Belgrade, September 4, 2012
Group work #1
Set-up for Activity-meaning System Design for Your Study

1.Research area and major question:

2. Identify stakeholders who control and negotiate related meanings & possible
stakeholder expressions for analysis:
Identifying stakeholders and stakeholder expressions for an activity-meaning system design
Sphere of activity Example of a Example of a YOUR STUDY
stakeholder stakeholder
expression
Broad societal sphere relevant Educational institutions Statement of
seeking violence prevention;
curricular goals
Curriculum developers
Participant role responsible for socially Teachers Teachers
reproducing socio-cultural values implementing
the curriculum
Mrs. Morales
Individual cultural-personal role Teacher as person in a Teachers group-
broader context personal values
interacting with
the curriculum
Subject meant to take up the value(s) Students identified as Students in the class
students & in terms of Mrs. Morales
other relevant student, Jeff
demographics

3. identify stakeholder values for each power level Societal #1:

Value #1:

Value # 2:

Value # 3:

Value # 4:

Stakeholder/expression(s) # 2:
Value #1:

Value # 2:

Value # 3:

2
Daiute, Narrative inquiry Workshop, 4-9-12

Value # 4:

5. Identify processes of negotiating those values: Performing, contesting,
centering
Value Stakeholder Stakeholder Stakeholder Stakeholder Stakeholder
# 1 # 2 # 3 # 4 # 5
Value 1:


Value 2:


Value 3:


Value 4:

3
Daiute, Narrative inquiry Workshop, 4-9-12

Narrative Inquiry Workshop

Colette Daiute, cdaiute@gc.cuny.edu
University of Belgrade, September 4, 2012
Groupwork #2
Plot Analysis Beginning

A plot analysis identifies the basic structure of a narrative and as such can apply to a
single narrative, many narratives, interviews, letters or other time-marked discourses.
The plot analysis identifies the structure of a plot most simply beginning, middle, and
end more complexly: initiating action, complicating actions, plot conflict or turning
point, resolution strategies, and ending. For plot analysis single narratives can do, but for
more theory-based studies, applying plot analyses to expression across an activity-
meaning system is powerful.

1. Read each narrative, then read it again. When you think you are familiar with the
narrative, take a first step at identifying what seem to be is major movements by
identifying what you perceive as the beginning, middle, and end sections, and more
specifically the plot elements. What can help with this (but is not necessary) is to
separate the sentences or independent clauses (if theres no punctuation or inconsistent
punctuation).
2. Identify the plot elements, including
2.a Setting
2.b Characters: major actors in the narrative protagonist, antagonist, other relevant
characters (who may emerge later on in the process, such as in resolution
strategies)
2.c Initiating action = This action initiating would motivate the plot, which the
narration then follows through (albeit with inexperienced narrators sometimes in a
minimal way). This plot motivator is also referred to as breach, trouble,
the engine of the plot.
2.d Complicating action(s) = actions building from the initiating action you
noted in #2.
2.e High point turning point where complication becomes the climax, point, or
point before the action begins to recede to
2.f Resolution strategy(ies) = Attempts to resolve the main plot issue, need not
can be more than one, need not be an ultimate resolution
2.g Coda or Moral
2.h Narrator perspective Based on the high point and resolution strategies, coda
if included, what does the narrator seem to be saying with this narrative?
3. Make an outline of the major plot elements = initiating action, complicating actions,
high point, resolution strategies. Notice, in particular, the major plot central/plot turning
- issue or conflict enacted in the high point.
4. Compile the conflict issues across the relevant set of narratives in this plot analysis.
5. Compile the resolution strategies.
6. What similarities and differences do you observe across the conflict issues?
7. What similarities and differences do you observe across the resolution strategies.
8. What observations from this plot analysis address your research question(s)?

4
Daiute, Narrative inquiry Workshop, 4-9-12

Plot Analysis Guidelines

Plot Element Example 1 Example 2 Example- 3 Example-4
Aida-#1 Aida #2 Juro#1 Juro#2
Setting
Character
primary,
plot crucial
secondary
Initiating action
Complicating
action(s)
Plot high point
(turning point,
climax)
Resolution
strategy(ies)
Resolution/Ending
Coda
Narrator stance

Plot Analysis Guidelines

Plot Element Example 5 Example 6 Example- 7 Example-8
Naran.#1 Naran.#2 Thor #1 Thor #2
Setting
Character
primary,
plot crucial
secondary
Initiating action
Complicating
action(s)
Plot high point
(turning point,
climax)
Resolution
strategy(ies)
Resolution/Ending
Coda
Narrator stance

5
Daiute, Narrative inquiry Workshop, 4-9-12

Narrative Inquiry Workshop

Colette Daiute, cdaiute@gc.cuny.edu
University of Belgrade, September 4, 2012

Groupwork # 3
Significance Analysis

The process of significance analysis involves identifying the range of evaluative

devices in a narrative, group of narratives, or sections of narratives by an individual,
narratives by a group of people, or the same in other genres. After identifying the range
of evaluative devices at first, you can narrow empirically to those that are preferred by
your focal participant(s) that indicate important differences and similarities across texts
and/or participants in relation to your research design and questions.

1. Read each narrative, then read it again.

2. When you think you are familiar with the narrative or corpus where you would like to
begin, take a first step to identify in a general way the evaluative devices.
For today, focus on Psychological states Cognitive & Affective

*Psychological states (typically verbs forms, but also related nouns, adjectives)
*Cognitive (think, know, expect, realize), social-cognitions (disagree, argue),
intentions (try to, had to), perceptions (see, hear, listen).
*Affective (feel sorry, sad, cry, happy, want [desire])
Reported speech (she said, we had to talk)

Other evaluative devices:

Intensifiers
Amplifiers (very, too (as in too much),
Repetitions (very, very sad.)
Emphasis (go!)
Exaggerations (biggest river Ive ever seen, quieter than a mouse)
Hedges (kind of, sort or, only)
Comparatives (more, less)
Qualifiers
Evaluative adjectives (good, bad, big, etc.) and adverbs (quickly, always, etc.)
Causal connectors (because, since, when, then, therefore )
Negations (no, not, -nt contractions, negative prefixes unimpressed)
Optional depending on study and language
Metaphors (optional, depending on whether and how they emerge in your data).
Valence (optional, mostly to indicate whether qualifying evaluative adjectives and adverbs are positive or
negative. This is, for example, to research asking for best and worst experiences to learn about limiting and
enabling aspects of lives in certain places).

3. Identify patterns of evaluative device expressions (by individual, group, genre, or some
other factor relevant to your study). Based on frequencies and/or placement, observe
similarity, difference, change over context, time, or other qualities relevant to your
research design and questions.

6
Daiute, Narrative inquiry Workshop, 4-9-12

4. Identify the clustering of evaluative devices

At what point(s) in the discursive event(s) is there evaluative intensity? What do you
learn from this reading for evaluative marking and intensity in this/these discursive
events? What does this evaluation analysis help locate the high point or significance?
This clustering can help you identify or conflict high points/turning points you found via
plot analysis. How does this reading help expand your ideas about the meaning of the
discursive event, the significance of the story for the storyteller? What do you learn
from this reading about the speaker/writers performative goals and, thus, about the
context (expectations, interactions, etc.) which as a researcher or interlocutor you may
have helped create?

5. Summarize your findings

Evaluative devices in narratives in YOUR STUDY

Evaluative Discursive Discursive Your best Your
devices event (s) # 1 event(s) 2 experience difficult
narrative experience
narrative
Psych states
Affective
Cognitive
Speech
# Words
PsychState/Word

7
Daiute, Narrative inquiry Workshop, 4-9-12

Narrative Inquiry Dynamic Storytelling and Reflecting
KEY CONCEPTS
Workshop at the University of Belgrade, September 4, 2012

Colette Daiute, The Graduate Center, City University of New York
cdaiute@gc.cuny.edu

Presentation 1: Why narrative & narrative inquiry design?
Theory-concept-method:
Dynamic narrating
Principles of dynamic narrating
Activity-meaning system design to include diverse stakeholders from
diverse positions in society
Values analysis
Negotiation of values across stakeholders
Group brainstorming about narrative inquiry design & values analysis

Presentation 2: Plot analysis individuals interact with society
Theory-concept-method:
Plot
Plot structure
Materiality of narrator interactions with environment via use of narrative
as a cultural tool
Between narratives conversations with diverse audiences (present,
powerful, meaningful in other ways)
Group work and discussion with plot analysis

Presentation 3: Significance analysis language skills for diversity
Theory-concept-method:
Narrator significance - interactions via evaluative devices
Significance analysis
Psychological state analysis cognitive & affective states to connect &
individualize
Group work with significance analysis

Reflection & Discussion What we gain from narrative inquiry, Follow-up

8
Daiute, Narrative inquiry Workshop, 4-9-12

References
Bakhtin, M.M. (1986). The problem of speech genres. In C. Emerson and M. Holquist
(translators). Speech genres and other late essays. (p. 259-422). Austin, TX:
University of Texas Press.
Bamberg, M. (2004). Positioning with Davey Hogan. In C. Daiute, & C. Lightfoot
(Eds.). Narrative analysis: Studying the development of individuals in society.
(pp. 135 158). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Bruner, J. (1986). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Daiute, C. (2004). Creative use of cultural genres. In C. Daiute, & C. Lightfoot (Eds.) Narrative
analysis: Studying the development of individuals in society. (pp. 111 134). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
Daiute, C. 2006. Stories of Conflict in U.S. public schools. In C. Daiute, Z. Beykont, C. Higson-Smith,
L. Nucci (Eds.) International perspectives on youth conflict and development. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Daiute, C. (2008). The rights of children, the rights of nations: Developmental theory and the
politics of childrens rights. Journal of Social Issues, 64:4, 701 723.
Daiute, C. (2010). Human development and political violence. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Daiute, C. (2011). Trouble in, around, and between narratives. Narrative Inquiry,
21: 2, 329-336.
Daiute, C. (in press). Narrative inquiry: Dynamic narrating in life and research.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Daiute, C. & Nelson, K.A. (1997). Making sense of the sense-making function of narrative
evaluation. Journal of Narrative and Life History, 7:(1 - 4), 207 - 215.
Daiute, C., Stern, R., & Lelutiu-Weinberger, C. (2003). Negotiating violence prevention. Journal of
Social Issues, 59, 83 101.
Daiute, C., & Lucic, L. (2010). Situated cultural development among youth separated
by war. International Journal of Intercultural Relations,34, 615 628.
Daiute, C., Eisenberg, Z., & Vasconcellos, V. (2012). It seems like its normal,
even.Narrative analyses of risk in early childcare in favelas. Revista
Educao em Foco UFJF.
Fairclough, N. (2010). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language
(second edition). New York: Pearson.
Kreniske, P. (submitted). How a career simulation influenced middle school
students writing.
Leontev, A. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and personality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
Jovic, S. (submitted). Enactments of relational complexity in adolescents narratives
Lucic, L. (2012). How do youth make sense of interpersonal interactions and resolve
conflicts with diverse groups? Dissertation, New York: The Graduate Center, City
University of New York.
Messina, V. (forthcoming). Soldiers to students: Experiences of transitions of Iraq
and Afghanistan war veterans. Dissertation. New York: The Graduate Center,
City University of New York.

9
Daiute, Narrative inquiry Workshop, 4-9-12

Ninkovic, M. (in press). Changing the subject: Human resource management in post-
socialist workplaces. Dissertation. New York: The Graduate Center, City
University of New York.
Peterson, C. & McCabe, A. (1983). Developmental psycholinguistics: Three ways of
looking at a childs narrative. New York: Plenum.
Polkinghorne, D. (1991). Narrative and self-concept. Journal of Narrative and
Life History, 1, 135153. Popadic, D. (Ed.) (2000).
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher order thinking.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

10