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?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn her inquiry, Jessica asks a very pertinent question—“How do we instill in children of poverty that they are learners when society tells them they are not?”
ReplyDeleteIn response, I believe that as teachers we must not only change the ways in which children of poverty and those with different dialects view their language, but also children of the dominant culture. In chapter 12, Wynne talks about mainstream children’s attitudes towards other dialects and the issue of these students believing their language is superior to others. Wynne states, “that one language is clearly not scientifically better than the other, but that one is politically more acceptable than the other—for one dialect belongs to the power structure.” This may be the first stepping-stone in opening all of our student’s eyes to the ways in which power is associated with language superiority.
Wynne also talks about how the media, mainstream television personalities, and even advertisers often use AE expressions. She exposes the hypocrisy of educational systems and the media for maintaining a strong resistance to the language, and their conviction that this language is substandard. Wynne suggests, “Perhaps, we might share those kinds of contradictions with our students as a way to begin our conversations about the political nature of language choice.”
In our training to become teachers of English, many of us are just now being exposed to the academic conversation concerning the effects of language superiority and dialect in education. Although we may have previously been aware of these issues, I do not think the general public has had the opportunity to learn about linguistics. Charles Fillmore recommends that teachers should, “offer serious units in dialect in middle school and high school classes throughout the country as a general part of language education.” I could not agree with his theory more.
So, how would this method of teaching language affect the way our students learn? According to Walt Wolfram, another linguistic scholar cited in chapter 12, “activities in such units make it possible for children to ‘discover generalizations and systematicities in their own speech and in the speech of others.’” Even if those in power do not choose to integrate this method into classroom instruction, we can still help our students to become more linguistically aware. If every teacher made it a point to bring up these issues and inform their students of the many myths surrounding language, then students would already be much better off than they are now.