View/Open - Scholarly Commons Home

Chapter Four
The diachronic analysis – who, what and when?
Introduction
Saussure (1983) distinguished two analytic perspectives, the diachronic (across or
through time) and the synchronic (with or in time) (Stables, 2002). Although Saussure’s
distinction has been criticised, Stables illustrates its value in relation to the
consideration of educational achievement, and I believe it contributes to a wider
perspective in this study than would be the case were just a diachronic or synchronic
approach to be taken. This chapter is a diachronic analysis of the semester. It is created
by first setting the scene (including actors, their aims, and the setting) and then relating
a narrative of what took place over the life of the semester. The group of chapters that
follow (Five to Nine) represent a series of synchronic analyses, particular moments or
episodes in this narrative that, I propose, warrant a closer and deeper look.
Setting the scene
This chapter begins with a table (table 4.1, below), showing two responses from each
individual, one made at the beginning and one at the end of the semester. I then look in
turn at questions and learning edges for the students (i.e. where they began the
semester); the setting trope; the fieldwork; the story so far for the group; and issues that
members bring, both between them as individuals and collectively as a group.
The above is intended as a succinct view of the context of the fieldwork project, in
particular, something of the worlds of the participants and of the group that Judi and I