Inquiry 5

In Victoria Purcell-Gates chapter, she follows a young, illiterate boy—Donny—and his illiterate mother; she documents the stereotype of their “hillbilly” accent at school. It is such a shame that a teacher gave permission to fail to a student. The teacher heard Donny’s mother speak and right away, she dismissed Donny as a child who is unable to learn how to read or write. Donny did not make any progress in school, and the teacher did not even seem to notice Donny’s lack of knowledge. Jenny, Donny’s mother, constantly went to the teacher begging to help give Donny a better life than she had growing up, and it was as if the teacher simply ignored her request. Why is it that no one listened to Donny’s mother? It is because she had the same hillbilly accent that a close-minded individual would view as ignorant. I am completely floored to read about a teacher who did not care about a student because of his dialect. A teacher’s job is to teach, and nowhere in the definition does it say only to students who have previous knowledge of reading and writing. How can a teacher really not care about the success of her student?

So what can we do as future teacher to change this? We must not let stereotypes haze our view of teaching. Every student is unique and has different learning styles. I want to be sure that I can cater to children’s different learning styles so that I can give them a full education. We must take a stand and help all students even those who seem like they cannot be taught.

Ch. 8 Inquiry

Victoria Purcell- Gates’ chapter “’… As Soon As She Opened Her Mouth!’: Issues of Language, Literacy, and Power” describes how dialect determines how most individuals view another person’s ability to learn. She provides reasons why this notion is inaccurate and damaging. She also supplies the reader with ways to educate students that suffer from this stereotype.
I think her distinction between deficit and difference is helpful in understanding how to approach the disparity that exists in the acquisition of reading and writing skills. Her research suggests that a student’s success in the first two years of formal education is highly contingent upon that student’s previous exposure and experience with language. She claims that students from “economically stressed homes” have less experience with language than those from middle-upper class homes (126). This lack of experience in the home creates substantial obstacles for students who are attempting to gain “conceptual knowledge of written language” (127). This lack of experience with language does not represent a deficit, especially not one that is irreparable. Purcell-Gates insists that neither the parent nor the student is to blame for this lack of experience. It is unfortunate to learn that because students from lower-economic backgrounds are expected to fail that schools are “unconcerned about [their] failure to learn” (130). These “diminished expectations” stem from the notion that students that come from poverty are unable to learn (133).
Purcell- Gates insists that teachers must raise their expectations under the assumption that all children are ready to learn. If a student fails to learn then the teacher must look reflectively at their pedagogical strategies instead of relying on “prejudicial stereotyping” that marginalizes students (140). A teacher must also recognize that just because a student speaks a non-standard dialect does not mean that they are incapable of communicating with standard written language. It is the teacher’s responsibility to provide the student with the experience they may lack and to give them formal instruction.
How can we simulate the pre-formal experience of language in a secondary classroom? How can we convince administrators that expectations and subsequent responsive amelioration of language issues should be equal for all students? How do we instill in children of poverty that they are learners when society tells them they are not?

Chapter 8 Inquiry

Chapter eight of, The Skin That We Speak by Victoria Purcell-Gates focused on how many people, even teachers, associate class with achievement. In other words, some people feel that lower-class students are incapable of learning in the classroom, where as upper-class students are capable. As many of you would agree, this stereotype needs to be eliminated because it’s false on so many levels.

The author of this chapter explains that experience gives students a basis for learning. Students who are exposed to reading and writing before they enter kindergarten have prior experience to build their new knowledge upon. Students who do not have the same home experience may struggle to catch up to the levels of the other students; however, the important point here is that students who have not had home literacy experiences are not incapable of learning. As teachers, we need to introduce these students to different forms of reading and writing that they have not seen before they entered school, so that they can understand what it means to read and write. Just because they were not able to gain this knowledge at home, does not mean that we should label these students as incapable of learning.

What does this mean for us as secondary teachers? If students have had less experience reading and writing when they reach our classrooms, how can we help them? Can we help them as much as their elementary teachers helped them? Can we have just as much impact on these students as their elementary teachers might have had?

Is there a specific Workplace Language?

In Judith Baker's Trilinguilasm, Baker talks about her classroom experiences in studying her students' home languages along with her students. She describes how her students feel more comfortable learning Standard English once they realize how their own home languages fit into their lives and that these forms of English are not unwelcome, only that there is a difference and there is a certain time to use them.

Baker brings up that there is not specific term for the language that we use in the work place. She calls it a technical kind of language that may be specific to each profession. (At least that's what I think she is saying.) I found that her experiments in getting her students to speak in a work-place manner resulted in the students speaking formal English. What is the difference between our work-place speak and formal English, then? Is it perhaps the level of respect one might use when speaking to a superior; or is it the manner one uses when presenting a project? Is the work-place language that the students used any different from formal English or their home languages or street talk? Some of the scenarios did include students using non-formal English, after all. I consider language used in the workplace SE, usually, unless the workplace is one that is very comfortable and relaxed where SE would not be necessary. What differentiates a work-place language from a form of English that is already used elsewhere? Considering the many types of workplaces, I personally do not think that there can possibly be one specific term for language in the workplace.

Inquiry 4: Trilingualism

Judith Baker created a system of teaching that allowed the students to feel comfortable and retain their own personalities in the way that they speak by giving them the opportunity to teach one another about their “home languages”. She broke down the English language into three different sections: home, formal, and professional.
Her method of teaching English seems to be effective because the students understand why they should learn formal English and they don’t feel pressured, demeaned, discriminated against. This new outlook on teaching brought a few questions to mind. Why do students automatically feel that formal English is a threat to them? When we, as teachers, allow our student to bring their “home language” into the classroom, where do we draw the line for their freedom, we wouldn’t want them to become disrespectful. Sometimes, in the home, children are allowed to talk about sex, drinking, violence, and drugs. When giving students freedom, we wouldn’t want to put ourselves in a situation where we could get in trouble. Baker said that you can’t “pretend” to have compassion and understanding of a student’s “home language”, we will have to truly embrace their differences. But who are the real discriminators? Is it the teacher, another student, or are the student subconsciously discriminating against themselves? Or is it a combination of the three? Another question that came to my attention was are students discouraged by formal English because they are taking English class and they think that that class should come naturally to them because they speak it, and are they getting discouraged by the difficulties they encounter?

Inquiry #4: Trilingualism

Judith Baker’s “Trilingualism” depicts her experience in trying to relate her students to the different codes of speech she feels they need to survive in life. Through various experiments that cause them to look at and consider the language they use, Baker helps her students understand the difference between the language used for home, academics, and the professional world.

The work presented in this article really excited and intrigued me. Through the activities, she is allowing the students to see the importance of standard English and their own social languages in the world, instead of just telling them, “You need to learn standard English.” I think the students took an interest in it because their thoughts and opinions were validated, encouraging them to participate. What is more, students see not just how distant authority figures and strangers might view their language, but also how their peers react. I liked that Baker’s exercises taught that there is more than just “proper English” and bad English. The English spoken at home, in whatever dialect it may be, is accepted as appropriate there, as that is where it is used. Students are also introduced to the fact that different areas of business may require a different set of appropriate dialogue.

From the article, it seems clear that Baker’s students are coming to appreciate their language and others. However, there are students who feel differently about where some languages should be used. Specifically, for one experiment, a student posed as a junior executive presenting an advertisement plan in her home language. While some of the students felt this was inappropriate, others thought that it was fine and that it sounded like a good advertising strategy. In such a situation, I find the end results difficult to understand. I wonder, do her students realize that they may not have a choice as to where which dialect is accepted? Just because the speaker may feel that a dialect closer to home would be fine for one situation does not mean that the mass majority of mainstream culture accepts it, and therefore it is inappropriate. Students admit that some dialects do not seem appropriate for certain situations. But do they understand why those dialects do not seem appropriate beyond a simple “It’s not very professional” or “It does not sound proper”? Or, perhaps, are these questions queries that they are too young to reflect upon?

Inquiry 4- Judith Baker

In Judith Baker's essay "Trilingualism" Baker addresses the three types of English that she has observed all English speakers speaking-- "home" English, "formal" English, and "professional" English. As an English teacher at an urban high school, she has developed a system of accepting and teaching acceptance to the different dialects of English spoken in her classroom, which starts with a personal language evaluation project.

When reading this essay, I was amazed at how effective the language project was for her students. She wrote it moved students to consider problems they may have with writing or speaking, and also gave the students in her classroom a better understanding and acceptance of each other. I think what I've taken most from this essay is that it is very possible and beneficial to support and accept students' language and culture while also encouraging them to learn "standard English". It's also possible to openly and tactfully discuss code-switching for formal, professional, and familiar situations.

The biggest question for me from this essay is how could I apply this same practice in an ESL classroom? My goal is to teach English as a Second Language, which is tricky because often the students in ESL classes don't have much grasp on English at all, so what's an effective way to teach English to non-speakers while still respecting their culture?

inquiry 4- Baker

In this section we see an English teacher with a new point of view. She looks at her students as experts in certain fields and allows them to teach what they have learned. She gives them the freedom to choose what they wish as far as subjects go. Could their possibly be some drawbacks to this technique?

I think his style is very dangerous but in it is in a way that education should be. When she allows the students to keep their own language and also learn about other subjects like computers she runs the risk of the students not learning anything due to laziness. I don't think it is realistically very dangerous though. Young humans, I believe, have a natural desire to learn everything about something they are interested in. Proof for this is evident everywhere around us, from teens mastering difficult computer programs and operations to kids learning complicated tricks on skateboards. By allowing students to learn whatever they have an interest in we may have less experts in regurgitating information for a ninth grade geography test, but we may have more experts in technological innovation. 

Is it possible that the whole creation of controlled learning is more of a hinderance to actual learning?

Chapter 4 Inquiry

Chapter four features Judith Baker, a high school English teacher working with students on the theory of language. Her methods and techniques are simple, yet effective in teaching students to comprehend and enjoy the many types of English that we speak. Baker has been working with students on developing skills in three different forms of English that she believes every American should learn. They are: “home” English or dialect, “formal” or academic English, and “professional” English. She believes, “ … that if I can make this ‘trilingualism’ explicit and if I can motivate students to want to learn these ‘languages,’ these three forms of English, then I can enable them to master the actual differences between them.” Baker emphasizes that this theory or method should not and cannot be used by teachers who do not truly respect the “home” language of their students. Students, or kids in general, are very perceptive and can tell when people are not being genuine or sincere; this method could totally backfire if applied by the wrong person.

One thing I loved about this teacher was the way she chose to implement her theories into actual lessons and projects. Having students examine their speech and the different forms of English they use is a great way for them to learn about each other and themselves. I really agree with Baker’s ideas and believe we need more teachers like this. Being judgmental or forcing children to learn what we deem as Standard English is not going to change anything. It’s already been done and it hasn’t worked, so maybe the time has come for a reform in English education.

Do you agree with Baker’s theories about language? What are your thoughts on the categories or forms of English she presents in this chapter?

How could a teacher implement these techniques into a lesson when the school may require or enforce teaching according to standardized tests?

Would a project like the one Baker gives her students even be beneficial in a school where the students are predominately white or black, etc.? As in if they all had similar backgrounds would it still be interesting?

Inquiry 4: Judith Baker

After reading Judith Baker’s chapter, I found myself wondering how educated my English teachers had been on this subject of speaking different “Englishes.” I wish that my teachers had had a more open mind about these things. I wonder then if this was the case, my classmates and I wouldn’t have such linguistic insecurity, and we would be able to spit out what we are trying to say in a clear and forthright manner.

Judith Baker’s ideas build upon Lisa Delpit’s that we read in chapter three. They both have the same notion that “When formal English no longer threatens to demean them, students are more willing to master it.” However, she brings us insider her classroom to show us her teaching techniques and strategies to make students feel less insecure about their own language and more willing to learn “standard” English. I found her projects and studies interesting as she delves and further questions the influence of standard English on dialect speakers. She shows us how important this is in the students’ making the decision for them to learn Standard English. As teachers of English, we will constantly have to remind ourselves of these facts. How can we keep these ideas in the forefront of our minds and remain open to the different dialects of our students while teaching them the rules of grammar and the “correct” way to speak and write?

She pinpoints the three main “forms” of English of which we’ve been speaking in class, her “trilingualism”; which is home, formal, and professional English. We learn to code switch between these three forms and become more aware of them as we get older. Is this a natural instinctive learning? I have observed a few instances where there are those who are less aware of code switching. Is it something also taught?

Inquiry #4 - Motivational Learning

Judith Baker's "Triangualism" details her efforts in motivating her students to study and learn all languages, whether it "home" English, "formal" English, or "professional" English. By respecting the home dialect, Baker creates an environment in which her students feel confident exploring the many intricacies of language.

The students first exploration is within the home. For example, one student, Dwayne, video tapes his family for an hour, specifically, his father on the phone, in the kitchen, and in front of the television. Despite being from Boston, Dwayne and the class pick up patterns of they label as "Southern."

Most interesting to me was Baker's work with role playing workplace scenarios. The students were very much aware of what was and was not appropriate, "It's fine for her to speak that way with her friends, but not at work." This is a notion we can all understand; it is merely our mission as educators to address it with our students.

"I am pretty sure that young people don't really understand this while they are in school," says Baker about the language barrier being a part of keeping the "uneducated" in poverty. My question is, is there a way to convey this to our students? Is there any amount of job shadowing or motivational speaker that could inspire our students to continue their education? And if so, can it be done respectfully?

I know this information would have been helpful to my adolescent self and possibly have kept me motivated throughout high school.

Inquiry #4 - chapter 4

In chapter four of The Skin That We Speak, Judith Baker gives the secret on how to be an effective teacher when it comes to Standard English. She says that you must first gain respect of your students by showing them that you, as a teacher, respect their home language. She uses the idea that if teachers teach trilingualism then students will be more inclined to learn Standard English. And she was right. In her language activity she showed interest in the students home language and she gave them credit, which made them more inclined to use Standard English.

I agree with Judith Baker’s approach to teaching Standard English because she is motivating her students to want to learn. We should never be negative with our students, especially when it comes to formal writing because we want our students to enjoy learning, not hate it. She also shows them the power of using different dialects and how important that can be for their futures. I personally have always felt, if you show someone something useful they will remember it always, but if you show them something that is meaningless, then they will forget it.

My only concern with this tactic is how can we as teachers use this without pretending to give our students respect? Is there a list of the do’s and don’ts we need to know or is it just deep within us?

Code Switching

Judith Baker's chapter in the book deals with how she incorporated code-switching into her curriculum. By respecting the students' home language she motivated them to not only want to learn standard english, but also study different dialects, including their own. Her methods were astounding to me. I can actually see this method as delivering the results Baker is reporting she had. I think it also, more than anything, should be incorporated into more curriculums due to the amount of respect it instills in students. It makes students more inclined to avoid prejudices and stereotypes because it looked at reasons behind differences in speech. It forced them to look for causes instead of labeling effects. I do not question the methods behind the strategy, the one thing I have to ask is how to gain permission to use this way of teaching?



Baker's methods, while productive, were also extremely different than the standard way english is taught. I wonder whether or not a school district like east baton rouge parish would even allow me to use this in a classroom. Baker was teaching at a vocational school, so one aspect of her job is to teach students how to speak in a professional setting. This focus on job training and contextual situations provided an easy entry for a method like the one Baker designed. On the other hand, the standard public school does not focus on such things and may look down upon this action. Although I feel it would prove just as well in a standard public school, would public school administration feel the same? I also wonder how parents took/will take the introduction of such a strategy.



I think this experimental method is a great way to get students excited about learning, but I am also afraid it will not be accepted in public school in a district like east baton rouge parish. Should we just abandon hope and allow ourselves to let this wonderful opportunity slip by? Or is there a way we can incorporate this into our classroom curriculum?

Inquiry 4

Judith Baker’s chapter is by far the one that I found the more interesting; she not only showed respect for the language diversity of her students, but she also learned about how to better educate herself on diversity from her students. I absolutely loved the assignment of giving students a chance to observe and to learn about their own language; the students become most interested in learning, which makes them want to learn more as we read in our last chapter. When the students have a chance to listen and learn about their own language they begin to realize how many different dialects there are in the world, and that none of them are wrong.
I also liked the role-play games that Baker assigned. It was interesting to read the completely different responses to the scenarios. It was strange how different their responses were, and I liked how one student says, “we don’t hardly take time out to really listen. I mean the way we speak, we think it’s correct. It’s wrong, but we understand each other.” The last sentence really hit home for me. The way we speak all the time may not be perfect English, but who cares as long as we get our point across to other people? How can we as teachers get other people to have this view point on language? How can we get other teachers to respect the language of their students by not constantly correcting them? By respecting a student’s home language, will this make a student want to be more culturally diverse and want to learn more dialects including bettering their Standard English?

Code Switching

"Oh my gawd I cant freakin remember what was goin on when me and Ligea, like, hooked up. It was so long ago you know. And I just blacked out or maybe like because really she was like so freaking hot and super smart and like super amazing that like I didn't even realize we were doing that on the couch you know"

-Neil's response as a "typical" teenage girl

My response as a more classy type teenage boy:

Oh my goodness, I have no idea was happened the night that I met Ligea. It was so long ago that it is hard to remember, or maybe it's hard to recall because I think I fell in love with her. She was the most beautiful girl I have ever seen, and she was smart too. It was like I was in a whole new world, and when I came back to the real world her beautiful lips were on mine.

Code Switching

I don't remember when I first met Ligeia. It was a long time ago and I've been through so much since. I don't know. Maybe I can't think of it because she made her impact so suddenly

- In class response by: Danielle

I have no idea of when i met Ligeia. It was way back when, and I've had a lot'a drama since then. I don't know. Maybe I can't think about it because I only saw her for a short while. But she did make a big impact on my life while she was in it... I didn't even realize it until I think back on it now. She had a lot of good qualities about her. You know how you only appreciate something 'till it's gone. She was such a chill and mellow type a girl that I guess I never took the time to noticed.

Inquiry Chapter 4

In chapter four of The Skin That We Speak, Judith Baker gives teachers an effective alternative to teaching Standard English with the use of “trilingualism”. Baker makes the point that teachers need to truly respect students’ home languages in order to teach them when and how to use SE.

I thought the home language assignment Baker gave her students was a great, effective idea. This project showed Baker’s students that she was interested in what went on in their homes. Here, Baker showed how much she respected the students and what they had to say. Because their home languages were given credit by Baker, many of her students were more willing to use SE. For example, students Sandra and Tracy used SE in their restaurant presentation. The two students even backed up their use of SE when their classmates criticized the language (Baker 60).

Baker says that her approach to teaching SE is backward in the sense that it doesn’t start with the rules of SE first. Instead, it starts with respect. What are some other ways we can show students that we respect their home languages? In other words, how else can we show our students that we care about their cultural backgrounds? How else can we incorporate students’ home languages into more classroom activities?

Ch.4 Inquiry 'Englishes"

I have found both Ch.3 and Ch.4 to be very helpful in that they provided realistic ways to implement language acceptance and formal English education in the classroom. I believe that Judith Baker’s systematic approach to teaching “Englishes” would be effective because of the “motivation first, rules last” progression as well as the intention of examining dialects prior to teaching formal language (59). It also seems that she focuses on the empowerment of students by letting them know that learning other dialects is a choice and that the students are experts on their own dialects. I agree that when students are aware that being trilingual is advantageous to them and that they have the freedom to choose which language they would like to use in any given setting eliminates the impression that formal English is demeaning to the students’ respective home dialects. I appreciate the idea of having students to present their own dialects to the class; however, I suspect that most high school curriculums would not reserve time or space for such a large unit on language. I can certainly see how this approach would be far more effective than the “error-correction model of grammar study” (56). How else could one go about validating students’ home dialects? How can you assure yourself as a teacher that you are not pretending to respect non standard language forms?

Code Switching In-Class Activity

I’m not sure when Ligeia and I first met. It’s been a while since we met, I guess. So long, in fact, that were you to ask me about any of the characteristics of our meeting, I could only tell you about her intelligence, her voice and whatnot, those are the things that mattered to me.
By Michael Quartano


To children:
Once upon a time, I met a lady named Ligeia. It was a long, long time ago. I don’t know a lot about the lady. The lady was really smart. The lady talked really low. It was so long ago that I don’t remember anything else about the lady.
By Gabrielle Pollock

One of my friends from the East emailed me and asked me to check up on his friend Leonidas W. Smiley. I got in touch with Simon Wheeler and asked him about Leonidas. My friend was probably lying to me and doesn't know anybody named Leondias Smiley because old Mr. Wheeler rambled on and on about someone else named Smiley. Old Mr. Wheeler reminiscenced forever about him and I have a feeling my friend about him and I have a feeling my friend knew that would happen all along.

- Rebekah Dwight's in class response

My boy from the east side asked about Smiley. Simon lied to me and Mr. wheeler is wack. They don’t know Smiley. You heard. So I don’t know what to tell you.

- Chelsea Demel's out of class response to Rebekah's

Ch. 3 No Filters Allowed

Lisa Delpit’s “No Kinda Sense” has to be my favorite of the chapters so far. Even though most of the concepts have overlapped, she seems to bring a fresh perspective to our views of AAVE and language in general. I love how she questions herself and explains her thought processes to us. She wants to know why she felt and reacted in the manner that she did concerning her daughter picking up the second language.

Delpit is quick to recognize the problems and address them. I found interesting the concept of Krashen’s affective filter. We first have to recognize that we have these mental blockages before we can remove them. One of which involves the filter and it’s removal from teachers, students, and the public’s eyes. She is clear and to the point with what she wants us to understand. We can tell that recognition and acceptance is important to her. If the filters are not removed then this acceptance will never occur because if “The students don’t identify with the teachers who question their intelligence or with a curriculum that ignores their existence.” (41) One of her main goals is to break down the language barriers especially in the teachers’ eyes. If this goal can be accomplished then, we can move on to Delpit’s second main point of making school inviting to the students. She says that in order to do this, we, the teachers, must listen to the students and be concerned with their concerns; be interested in their interests. What about unwilling teachers that are set in their ways? I believe that the newer generations of teachers will be more willing and open to these concepts. Is there any way to support teachers to listen to their students, almost to the point of encouraging a relationship among them? If the teacher never learns about their students, will they ever be able to teach effectively?

Also as a side note in response to the AAVE readings: If works on AAVE phonology and grammar seem incomplete, could we assume that this may be part of the reason the public views the language as incomplete or broken as well? I assume I’ve heard it before, but I would love to listen to Gullah/Caribbean Creole English to put a name to the dialect.

Don't Tread on Me (By Saying Strange Things)

Yet again, we see the issue of code-switching come to the forefront in Lisa Delpit's "No Kinda Sense." It is accompanied by undertones of the phenomenon previously referred to as playing the game, or speaking a certain way not out of any sense of loyalty, but out of the need to achieve a desired result in a social setting. We (as a class and as considerers of linguistics) have determined that we all code-switch on a regular basis. Given this fact, why on Earth is it so difficult to cross these dialectical barriers in the United States? There is no problem of understanding, as there is with a full-on language barrier. Standard English speakers have no problem (perhaps with the exception of certain obscure idioms) understanding AAVE speakers, who have no problem understanding Appalachian English speakers, who have no problem understanding English speakers from the Bronx. The issue cannot possibly be one of language comprehension.

Perhaps, then, it is something more latent. Language is an integral part of each of us; we identify with the words that we speak in a similar way to the choices that we make and the clothes that we wear. Our language is a picture of ourselves that we choose to show to the world. As such, it feels immediately alienating to encounter someone else who is fundamentally different in such a manner. If someone sees a person wearing totally different clothes from him/herself, he/she is less likely to approach the stranger and will likely not be as friendly (at least in thought) as he/she would be to someone who looked similar. An analogous case can be made for the way each of us speaks. It takes a truly thoughtful, open-minded person to move past this initial schema-based thinking.

So then, if the problem can be identified as one of self-identification and alienation, then question becomes: How can we change it? How can we, as a society, be made comfortable with people that we perceive to be so fundamentally different from ourselves? Or should we simply foster the belief that, despite the language differences, we are not that fundamentally different after all?