What is the purpose of Literacy education in America? My guess is most do not spend much time trying to figure this one out. We take it as 'given.' The purpose of Literacy Education is, of course, to teach the population how to read and write in Standard English (the home language of American middle and upper classes). But why Standard English? Might not the goal be to teach students how to read and write in a common language and, if so, perhaps the end goal might involve some deviation from what we now consider Standard English? If, however, nationwide fluency in Standard English is the end goal, how are educators to engage students when, as is most often the case, students not immersed in Standard English at home are made to feel as though there home language is wrong? Linguists do, after all, agree that no language is inherently superior to another even though their voice on the subject, as was the case in the recent debate of Ebonics, often goes unheard "Lost in this debate is the fact that numerous scholars have entered their support for Ebonics as a rule governed linguistic system (Baugh 1983, 1999, 2000; Dillard, 1972; Ewars, 1996; Poplack 2000; Rickford 1977, 1997, 1999; Stewart 1967; DeFranz 1979; Ewars n.d.; Honda 2001; Placas 2001)" (Gayles, and Denerville 16-23)
I'd like to tip a bit into the overly idealistic and suggest that certain aspects of nonstandard English dialects be introduced and actually taught in English classrooms. After all, if the end goal of Literacy Education in America is fluency for all, might not a bit of compromise help to bring the nations diverse speakers closer to a common language? This might be done as practically as possible, involving small bits for recognition at first. Whatever gains nationwide acceptance, might become a part of a new Standard English. I can think of two reasons why this idea is not in sync with current realities. One is that Standard English is the language in the corridors of wealth and power and fluency in it gains one access. This might not be wholly fair, but it is our current reality. In addition, I believe it important to consider the idea of working toward the goal of not only a national common language but also a global one. This suggests that in the US, educators should work toward a global standard of English and avoid the kinds of changes in parlance that would deviate from a global norm. And so even the idealistic must accept that formal Literacy education in America be focused on fluency in Standard English despite the fact that this goal is likely to alienate and put at disadvantage those students whose home language is a nonstandard dialect of English. What message might be sent to these students by their teachers that would bring them on board in working toward acheiving this goal?
Lisa Deplit suggests that students need to be ensured that the language they speak at home is as valid as any other, but that learning a common language is necessary for broadening their worlds and gaining access to mainstream American society; "students must be taught the codes needed to participate fully in the mainstream of American life, not by being forced to attend to hollow, inane, decontextualized subskills, but rather within the context of meaningful communicative endeavors that the must be allowed the resource of the teacher's expert knowledge, while being helped to acknowledge their own expertness as well; and that even while students are assisted in learning the culture of power, they must also be helped to learn about the arbitrariness of those codes and the power relationships they represent." And yet, how are educators to create "context of meaningful communicative endeavors" that encourage students whose home language is not Standard English to join in?
Monday, October 19, 2009
Sunday, October 11, 2009
In Diverity We Stand...or Fall?
Where do you stand between the following points of view about either welcoming or rejecting local culture and dialect into the English classroom in order to promote literacy?
1. Local culture and dialect, particularly the aspects of which are particular to teenage popular culture are like candy – too much is not healthy for children and likely to adversely affect their nutritional needs. Whether you find these cultures and dialects valid or not, they take away from a teacher’s effort to promote literacy in Standard English, a language children must adopt because it is the language of money and power. Fluency in the teenagers own social language is ensured by their interaction, but fluency in Standard English is not. Without it, these students , particularly those of minority cultures in the US, will be increasingly marginalized. Time is limited and bringing local culture and dialect in, while engaging, will only serve to dilute curriculum and underserve the very students in the greatest need of being empowered by fluency in Standard English. Therefore, teachers must focus lessons exclusively on Standard English at the exclusion of local dialect/culture if he/she is to enable students to gain access to the mainstream culture of money and power
2. All students come to school literate and only through the fair and validating exchange of diverse literacies will students avoid feeling threatened by Standard English and be willing to embrace it. Teachers must bring diverse dialects into the classroom and then proceed to bridge, to make connections between them and Standard English. All versions of English used in the US utilize the same basic concepts of grammar and usage. Can a teacher not discuss how time is expressed in a local dialect in contrast with Standard English as well as which would be more appropriate when? Don’t all languages require a writer or speaker to consider audience? Since both are valid, both used effectively for communication, can they not both be taught in a way that strengthens a student’s overall literacy? In fact, this is the only way to bring all students ‘on board’ and if they are not ‘on board,’ many will reject Standard English as foreign subjugation.
As with many issues in America, this one has taken on the polarization of our divided political system, as system that pushes unrealistic and oversimplified answers onto complex questions. What is needed is what Soja terms 'thirdspace.' a solution that attempts to address the concerns of both of the views listed above as well as some others; or perhaps neither of those views but something entirely different. In this series of blog posts, I would like to explore and perhaps identify a 'thirdspace' (Soja 1996).
Soja, E. 1996, Thirdspace: Journeys to Los Angeles and Other Real-and-Imagined Places,
Blackwell, Cambridge, MA.
1. Local culture and dialect, particularly the aspects of which are particular to teenage popular culture are like candy – too much is not healthy for children and likely to adversely affect their nutritional needs. Whether you find these cultures and dialects valid or not, they take away from a teacher’s effort to promote literacy in Standard English, a language children must adopt because it is the language of money and power. Fluency in the teenagers own social language is ensured by their interaction, but fluency in Standard English is not. Without it, these students , particularly those of minority cultures in the US, will be increasingly marginalized. Time is limited and bringing local culture and dialect in, while engaging, will only serve to dilute curriculum and underserve the very students in the greatest need of being empowered by fluency in Standard English. Therefore, teachers must focus lessons exclusively on Standard English at the exclusion of local dialect/culture if he/she is to enable students to gain access to the mainstream culture of money and power
2. All students come to school literate and only through the fair and validating exchange of diverse literacies will students avoid feeling threatened by Standard English and be willing to embrace it. Teachers must bring diverse dialects into the classroom and then proceed to bridge, to make connections between them and Standard English. All versions of English used in the US utilize the same basic concepts of grammar and usage. Can a teacher not discuss how time is expressed in a local dialect in contrast with Standard English as well as which would be more appropriate when? Don’t all languages require a writer or speaker to consider audience? Since both are valid, both used effectively for communication, can they not both be taught in a way that strengthens a student’s overall literacy? In fact, this is the only way to bring all students ‘on board’ and if they are not ‘on board,’ many will reject Standard English as foreign subjugation.
As with many issues in America, this one has taken on the polarization of our divided political system, as system that pushes unrealistic and oversimplified answers onto complex questions. What is needed is what Soja terms 'thirdspace.' a solution that attempts to address the concerns of both of the views listed above as well as some others; or perhaps neither of those views but something entirely different. In this series of blog posts, I would like to explore and perhaps identify a 'thirdspace' (Soja 1996).
Soja, E. 1996, Thirdspace: Journeys to Los Angeles and Other Real-and-Imagined Places,
Blackwell, Cambridge, MA.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)