You are on page 1of 5

Sharlet Brianna Sharlet Dr.

Steffen Guenzel ENC 1101-0107 November 11, 2013 Paper 4 Rough Draft

Mock Trial: Transforming Students to Lawyers

The discourse community I was a part of, and will describe, allowed me to gain a better understanding of discipline, authority in my speech and writing, and excel in legal studies by providing me with a motivated learning environment whose members strived to reach a common goal. In turn, I define a discourse community to be a body of individuals whose specialized forms of language and interaction through language allow them to meet set, common goals for the betterment of their cause and group as a whole. But what constitutes a discourse community? What defining features must this group of individuals adhere to in order for the community to be one of discourse? John Swales claims in his article, The Concept of Discourse Community, that there are six definitive characteristics. These include an agreed set of general goals, a unique communication among its members, the use of communication for the goal of feedback, the use of genres to meet expectations, a distinct use of language that is spoken among its members, and a balance between new members and older, more experienced ones. (473) The discourse community that I was a part of my senior year of high school was my Mock Trial Team, where I was one of the teams three attorneys. The team I was a

Sharlet

part of is what I believe to be a shining example of a discourse community. The goals of the community were publically announced in my speech and debate class in the beginning of the semester. My teacher, Mr. Privett, who would soon become one of my Mock Trial coaches explained that he and his team wanted to win a state wide mock trial competition. He explained the discipline needed to be a part of the team, the work and effort that would be put forth, and the time that would be spent learning everything that we would need to know to become experts in the area. Before joining the team, there were try outs and it was made very clear by our coaches that in order to be a part of the team there would be strict practices in order to meet our goal, which was learning the material in order to win the competition. The goals were to make six students into the best attorneys and witnesses to the case we were assigned. Just as swales mentions about the commonality of the goal, we were all working together because the goal in this case was victory. This community of students is extremely disciplined and aside from learning to become a lawyer, students will learn a great sense of responsibility and a better understanding of public speaking. The next aspect of our discourse community that I would like to focus on is the way our members communicated with one another. It was mandatory for the three attorneys on the mock trial team to not only be communicating and practicing with one another face-to-face, but also with each witness that they would be giving a direct examination to on the day of competition. Our team met outside of school every Friday night for three hours at our coachs home. We met every single day after school for two hours, and we also communicated using web chatting on our computers to practice while we were apart. In order to achieve the feedback we wanted, which in this case was excelling in our

Sharlet statewide competition, we had to be disciplined and communicate efficiently and effectively. Mock Trial would fit a sort of legal genre and this could describe the goals

and purpose of the community. Texts played a major role in the function of the team. We were given one criminal case that we would be analyzing and discussing over the period of seven months. This text was extremely important and reflected the essence of our goal. Our team would have to flawlessly argue in favor of both the defendant and the state in order to be properly prepared for our trial. Other texts included lists of objections that not only had to be memorized, but understood as well. In order to truly understand objections, responses and rebuttals, while the texts themselves were extremely important, learning from past members who were already well established in the community proved to be just as important. As James Paul Gee discuses in his, Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics: Introduction, older members of a discourse community have been mentored rather than taught. Gee argues, that while you can teach someone a body of knowledge, you cannot teach them to be an expert in that field and this is where discourse comes into play. The most you can do is practice to become an expert. (485) The idea of utilizing these texts in order to accomplish things within the genres and within the community is followed by the next characteristic Swales describes of the particular lexis acquired within the community. (473) For those who are not familiar with legal studies or involved in any kind of legal community, although they may have heard of the words and phrases used, they certainly will not know how to use them properly in the context or fully understand why these words or phrases are being said. For those inside of the community, past members and new ones alike, they have had to learn this legal language. When I joined my mock trial team my senior year, I

Sharlet was brand new to the community with very limited outside knowledge or experience within the genre. However, with the help of past members who were experts on the subject, our team was able to thrive and my knowledge began to flourish. I left voluntarily as I moved on from high school to college. My experience in mock trial

proved that it is never too late to join and gain new understanding and experience. What I learned in mock trial went beyond that of legal studies and straight into life long values and skills of discipline, public speaking, and training. On the day of competition it would be hard to tell our team apart from a group of real lawyers. We were all in sync, and we all played an important role. Our team dressed professionally and all of us went in with the same winning mentality. We faced many of the most competitors whose efforts to prepare for the competition seemed to match our own. We made it the second day of competition, which were the semi-finals. We did not move on to the next round of competition. However, seeing as the competition is annual, and the community would not end because of this, we were provided feedback from our coaches and each other in order to prepare for the next year. New members have joined, some members have left, and those experts who have stayed are teaching those new members all that they need to know. In agreement with what Gee argued, you cannot simply feed the members knowledge of objections and the case, they must learn by doing. They must learn from past members and they must learn by acting as a lawyer or witness and expect to make many mistakes. James Paul Gee argued that a Discourse is similar to an identity kit, meaning that the Discourses a person is a part of influences them in all aspects of their life. (484) Gee believed that we form ourselves to these communities in our speech, in our actions,

Sharlet and often in our writing as well. As a member of my Mock Trial discourse community I almost always found myself going about my day with Mock Trial in the back of my mind, or often the forefront. I would find myself thinking in the language I would use within the community and would notice how those on the outside would not understand my usage of terms that I utilized within my community. My writing improved, I learned

to think quickly on my feet and answer accordingly, as well as think objectively. I would not trade my experience in mock trial for anything, and encourage anyone hoping to improve their written and spoken speech to join.

1. Swales, John. The Concept of Discourse Community. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Boston: Cambridge UP, 1990. 21-32. Print. 2. Gee, James P. Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics: Introduction. Journal of Education 171.1 (1989): 5-17. Print.

You might also like