![Sample our Language & Literature journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5941/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Language-Literature.jpg"})
Abstract
In this paper, we take a critical discourse analytic approach to short notes written at the end of exam papers by Iranian students asking for a higher score. Such notes are sometimes written when the student has a feeling that they might fail the exam as a result of not providing satisfactory answers to questions. We consider this to be a manipulative strategy employed by these students to control their professors. Manipulation, however, is often considered an illegitimate source of power abuse by people having the higher hand in unequal power relations [Van Dijk, T.A. (2006). Discourse and manipulation. Discourse & Society, 17(3), 359–383]. The present paper argues for a new understanding of this important concept in the critical discourse analysis (CDA) tradition by highlighting manipulative strategies used by less powerful people. The analysis of 71 such notes written by students in two Iranian universities suggests that the students, as people in a lower position of power, resorted to certain manipulative strategies to exert influence on professors, people in a higher position of power. Four of the most frequent strategies identified in the data will be discussed: (1) tapping into religious beliefs; (2) highlighting personal and social problems as causes for inability to prepare for the exam; (3) referring to negative consequences for failing the exam, and therefore tapping into the examiner's conscience; and (4) resorting to honorific terms to address the examiner. This study would have implications for application of CDA in Higher Education.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to two anonymous reviewers for their careful and insightful comments on an earlier draft of this paper. Any errors and shortcomings will remain our own.