ProDisG: Professionalism in the focus of discourse-analytical examinations of group discussions - 'references to family' as an integral part of discursive gendering of professional acting under situational and supersituative conditions of statements. (fol

ProDisG是一项语篇分析研究，使用新开发的小组讨论语篇分析模型调查Kitas和SPFH团队关于他们在小组讨论中产生的工作的发言者陈述，该模型来自于“新(新)专业秩序和性别。从对比的角度对专业人员的陈述进行语篇分析审查”项目(术语09/2016-09/2018)。它考察了小组讨论中陈述的情境性和超述性条件是如何形成对家庭的指称的。这已被确定为一种中心话语实践，将“专业行动”构成了一种按性别划分的知识对象；显示了这些领域作为“按性别划分的职业”目前是如何(重新)在历史缺失/连续性以及教育和福利政策变化的背景下发生的。作为后续项目，ProDisg使用了该项目的核心里程碑之一的方法模型，该模型已在近地天体成功开发。该模式使得从话语理论的角度思考和分析小组讨论成为可能(与教育话语研究的最新发展相一致)。小组讨论中陈述的情境性和超指示性条件被概念化为作为实践的话语的构成要素，构成了陈述行为中的知识客体和主体：“在这一点上，这一陈述怎么会出现，而不是其他陈述？”ProDisg使用与上述两个行动领域的小组进行的小组讨论的文字记录，以及其他材料的语料库，其中包括观察方案、致各机构的信函等方法学文件以及各机构的概念文件。因此，对小组讨论中发言进行分析的话语分析程序现已完全实现，并从方法上进行了批判性反思。引导性的问题是：话语分析程序可以产生哪些洞察力？在实际分析中，方法论启发式的哪些可能性和局限性是显而易见的？分析步骤如何在不同层次和类型的材料的复杂关联中发挥作用？在早期教育和SPFH领域，哪些陈述的情景和超评价条件经验性地揭示了什么使“家庭”成为专业行动话语性别划分的一个组成部分？

ProDisG is a discourse-analytical study that investigates speaker statements from KiTas and SPFH teams about their work generated in group discussions using a newly developed model for discourse analysis of group discussions from the the project "NeO - (New) Orders of Professionalism and Gender. Discourse-analytical examination of the statements of professionals in a contrastive perspective"(term 09/2016-09/2018). It examines how situational and supersituative conditions of statements made in group discussions form references to family. This has been identified as a central discursive practise constituting ‘professional action’ as a gendered object of knowledge; showing how (re)ordering these fields as 'gendered professions' currently takes place in the context of historical dis/continuities and changed educational and welfare policies. As a follow-up project, ProDisG uses the methodological model, one of the central milestones of the project, which has been successfully developed in NeO. The model makes it possible to think and analyse group discussions from the perspective of discourse theory (in accordance with recent developments in educational discourse research). Situational and supersituative conditions of statements made in group discussions are conceptualized as constitutive elements of discourse as practises, constituting the objects and subjects of knowledge in the act of doing statements: ‘How is it that at this point this statement appears and not others?’ ProDisG use transcripts of group discussion with teams from the two aforementioned fields of action plus a corpus of further material, which includes observation protocols, methodological documents such as letters to the institutions, and the institutions’ concept papers. Thus, the discourse-analytical procedure for the analysis of the statements in group discussions is now fully realized and methodologically critically reflected upon. The guiding questions are: Which insights can be produced with the discourse-analytical procedure? Which possibilities and limits of the methodological heuristic are evident in the practical analysis? How do the analytical steps work in the complex interlinking of different levels and types of material? What situational and supersituative conditions of statements empirically reveal which make 'references to family' an integral part of discursive gendering of professional action in the fields of early education and SPFH?