Abstract
Using a framework from general semantics, communication as a semantic environment (Postman, 1976), this paper analyzes specific language used in discourse about measuring teacher effectiveness. Three contextualizing features of this sematic environment are discussed (people, purposes, and rules of discourse). With the use of multiple examples, the author introduces and illustrates four common language behaviors (Definition Tyranny, Model Muddles, Propaganda, and Silent Questions) and shows how they can lead to conflict and/or confusion in discourse about measuring teacher effectiveness.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: InterActions: UCLA Journal of Education and Information Studies
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
