Here's what I gathered from the reading.
The CCCC article itself:
The Students' Right
to Their Own Language is a theory piece addressing the issue of non-standard
English speaking students. Its authors were essentially announcing that the
CCCC would honor and "officially" recognize the various dialects of
English spoken by students. It seems that this was primarily a response to the
growing number of non-standard English speaking students in high school and
college. I suppose, however, anybody could argue that is article is a
pedagogical piece because it offers insight and recommendations of how to
approach education for a diverse group of students. Its statements and
arguments wouldn't really be applicable outside an academic setting.
- Somebody suggests that
"we need to discover whether our attitudes toward "educated
English" are based on some inherent superiority of the dialect itself
or on the social prestige of those who use it
- A dialect is a variety of
language used by some definable group. Everyone has a personal version of
language, an idiolect, which is unique, and closely related groups of
idiolects make up dialects.
- The user of specific dialect
employs the phonological, lexical, and syntactic patterns and variation of
the given "community." Because geographical and social isolation
are among the causes of dialect differences, we can roughly speak about
regional and social dialects.
- In specific setting, and
because of historical and other factors, certain dialects may be endowed
with more prestige than others.
- Edited American English (EAE)
refers to the written language of the weekly news magazines, of almost all
newspapers, and of most books. This variety of written English can be
loosely termed a dialect, and it has pre-empted a great deal of attention
in English classes
- Carefully chosen materials
will certainly expose students to new horizons and should increase their
awareness and heighten their perceptions of the social reality. Classroom
reading materials can be employed to further our students' reading ability
and, at the same time, can familiarize them with other varieties of
English
- There is no evidence that
enables one to describe any language or any dialect as incomplete or
deficient apart from the conditions of its use. The limits of a particular
speaker should not be interpreted as a limit of the dialect
- Concentrating on the EAE with
handbooks encourage a restrictive language bias.
- Students can and do function
in a growing multiplicity of language situations which require different
dialects, changing interconnections of dialects, and dynamic uses of
language.
- Students should also be able
to recognize the difference between handbook rules and actual performance
Support for the CCCC article:
It was rather
difficult to figure out the overall point of this article. While it was
relatively easy to determine it was an academic theory piece, it was so long
winded that it took a while for me to figure that out. It brought in excerpts
from other people's work, I frequently struggled to figure out why that
particular quote or example was important. The author has an academic tone that
supports linguistic diversity and a heightened sensitivity towards language
attitudes, but it took me a while to reach that conclusion.
Struggle for
language rights
The
CCCC was not merely being trendy, nor politically correct, in passing the
Students' Right resolution. Rather, the organization was responding to a
developing crisis in college composition classrooms, a crisis caused by the
cultural and linguistic mismatch between higher education and the
non-traditional (by virtue of color and class) students who were making their
imprint upon the academic landscape for the first time in history.
The resolution
sought three goals:
To
heighten consciousness of language attitudes
To
promote the value of linguistic diversity
To
convey facts and information about language and language variation that would
enable instructors to teach their non-traditional students - and ultimately all
students - more effectively.
The Counterargument:
The author of
this piece is arguing against the CCCC's decision that ensures the students'
"right" to their own language. The author quickly points out some of
the weaknesses in SRTOL and often remarks that the CCCC means well but does not
do enough or has overlooked critical details.
SRTOL:
- Never begins to
examine a "right" to one's own language
- Offers no consistent
view on the importance of dialect
- Wildly overrates its
"sophisticated" knowledge in sociology and linguistics
- Both draws on and
feeds into a reactionary politics of ethnic-cultural chauvinism
- Clumps people into
homogenous, internally undifferentiated groups, missing individuals
entirely
- Tries to shame English
teachers for professional work of which we should be proud
The readings focus
on the issue of having a diverse group of students who do not speak Standard
English. This has always been an issue but has gained much more attention
largely because of the increasing number of non-standard English speaking
students.
Not only does it
reveal potential weaknesses in our current educational system, I think it
highlights the fact that blanket policies for education are often ineffective.
Especially relevant today, there are simply too many students that may have
different learning curves and struggle to stay in school. Regardless of what
dialect they speak, every student brings a different set of creativity and
analytical abilities. Just because a student does not speak or write in EAE
does not mean that student should be lumped into a group of "remedial
English" students.
My recommendation
would emphasize the notion that every student is different, and that not every
teaching method will work for all students. I think the best approach for any
class to bring a diverse group of activities and perspectives to the classroom.
That way, it will ensure that most students will be engaged and actively
participate. Of course, no matter how "cool" the instructor is or how
fun the activities are, there is no way to guarantee that every student will
participate. But it should be better than having all students strictly adhere
to one method while learning nothing.