What is the end goal?

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?