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?
I definitely agree with Baker’s theory about language and in Gloria J. Ladson-Billings’ excerpt, she shows how teacher Carter Forshay accomplishes one of her goals. He does this by creating an assignment that allows the children to be comfortable in using their home dialect and through this realizing that it isn’t “wrong.”
ReplyDeleteRegarding your second question about teaching techniques when a school may enforce teaching according to standardize tests, I think that if the teacher so chooses, he or she could always teach according to standardized tests along with their own style. Teaching and using different thought processes in the classroom would allow the student to better their test taking abilities. The example of Mr. Carter and his resistance to giving “permission to fail” shows that there is always a way to work around a challenge.
This will be the hardest challenge for us to overcome in our future years of teaching. We are going to have to find a way to engage and catch the students attention to what needs to be learned. Mr. Forshay achieves this almost in a way in which the students did not even realize what they were accomplishing until the task was completed.
I do not believe that in either project the race or background would matter. Even if the majority of the classroom had similar backgrounds no two people speak exactly alike as they are influenced by different sources. The parents of the student were also influenced in a different manner, thus creating a new and unique experience for the individual.