Scholarship on dialect diversity in classrooms has yielded two seemingly incompatible lines of research. Although numerous pedagogical approaches have been shown to provide productive alternatives to traditional responses to stigmatized dialects, research on public perceptions and teachers’ attitudes suggests that negative beliefs about stigmatized dialects and the students who speak them are deeply entrenched in U.S. society. The authors argue that teacher preparation grounded in socio-linguistic understandings of dialect diversity can help teachers develop productive pedagogical responses to students’ language choices. Drawing on previous research and their own work with teachers, the authors present a framework for preparing teachers for dialectally diverse classrooms. Recommendations include anticipating resistance, addressing issues of identity and power, and emphasizing pedagogical applications of sociolinguistic research.
S The purpose of this study was to examine the language ideologies—the assumptions about the nature of language, language variation, and language learning—reflected in a widespread daily editing activity often known as Daily Oral Language or Daily Language Practice. Through a yearlong ethnographic study of grammar instruction in three urban, predominantly African American 10th‐grade English classes, two university researchers and the classroom teacher collaboratively analyzed the language ideologies reflected through the teacher's implementation of Daily Language Practice. Using methods of the ethnography of communication and classroom discourse analysis, they coded for the content and sources of recurring language ideologies and their links to state standards and assessments. Findings show that Daily Language Practice represented the English language as monolithic, language form as disconnected from meaning, and written Standard English as the only correct dialect of English. However, some students in the study concurrently expressed alternate language ideologies through their participation in Daily Language Practice, ideologies that forefronted language variation and its dependence on context and audience. Findings suggest that daily editing activities provide limited opportunities for students to learn about language in ways that build off their existing linguistic resources and that could enhance their literacy learning. El propósito de este estudio fue examinar las ideologías lingüísticas, es decir los supuestos sobre la naturaleza del lenguaje, la variación lingüí;stica y el aprendizaje del lenguaje, tal como se reflejan en una actividad de edición muy difundida conocida como Lenguaje Oral Cotidiano o Práctica Cotidiana del Lenguaje. En un estudio etnográfico de un año centrado en la enseñanza de la gramática en tres clases de inglés de 10° grado con una población urbana mayoritariamente afroamericana, dos docentes universitarios y el docente del aula analizaron las ideologías lingüísticas reflejadas a partir de la implementación de la Práctica Cotidiana del Lenguaje. Usando los métodos de la etnografía de la comunicación y el análisis del discurso en el aula, se codificó el contenido y las fuentes de las ideologías lingüísticas recurrentes y sus vínculos con estándares y evaluaciones. Los resultados muestran que la Práctica Cotidiana del Lenguaje representa la lengua inglesa como monolítica, la forma lingüística desconectada del significado y el inglés escrito estándar como elúnico dialecto correcto del inglés. Sin embargo, algunos estudiantes expresaron ideologías lingüísticas alternativas a través de su participación en la Práctica Cotidiana del Lenguaje, ideologías que reconocían la variación lingüística y su dependencia del contexto y la audiencia. Los hallazgos sugieren que las actividades cotidianas de edición proporcionan oportunidades limitadas a los estudiantes para aprender acerca del lenguaje de maneras que apuntalen sus propios recursos lingüísticos y que mejoren su aprendizaje de la le...
The purpose of this study was to examine how classroom conversations about diverse dialects of English can provide a useful foundation for critical language and literacy instruction for students who speak African American Vernacular English (AAVE) and other stigmatized dialects. This article describes a weeklong unit on language variety that implemented what we call critical language pedagogy in three predominantly African American, 10th-grade English classes. Analyses of class discussions, interviews, and pre- and post-questionnaires demonstrate that the unit helped students critique dominant language ideologies, become more conscious of their own code-switching, and view dialect variation as natural and desirable.
One approach to writing instruction that has been shown to improve secondary students' academic writing without increasing demands on teachers' time is peer review. However, many teachers and students worry that students' feedback and assessment of their peers' writing is less accurate than teachers'. This study investigated whether Advanced Placement (AP) English students from diverse high school contexts can accurately assess their peers' writing if given a clear rubric. The authors first explain the construction of the rubric, a student‐friendly version of the College Board's scoring guide. They then examine the reliability and validity of the students' assessments by comparing them with their teachers' and trained AP scorers' assessments. The study found that students' assessments were more valid than the ones provided by a single teacher and just as valid as the ones provided by expert AP scorers. Students' and teachers' perceptions of the peer review process are also discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.