Objective: To inform efforts to boost college completion and professional preparation for the linguistically diverse New Mainstream, we explored language and literacy demands, and how faculty conceive of those demands, in one allied health program at one community college in California. We also explore the implications for the preparation of community college students in academic and professional preparation programs more generally. Method: We examined program documents and outlines of courses in the allied health program and interviewed eight faculty members teaching these courses. We analyzed data using deductive and inductive codes and drafted a program overview of assignments, associated language and literacy demands, and identifiable genres and metagenres. We also conducted member checks with key faculty members to clarify and deepen our understanding. Results: Despite our efforts to focus on disciplinary dimensions of language and literacy in the allied health program, we found that course outlines and instructors tended instead to emphasize general reading and writing competencies, critical thinking, and problem-solving. Discussing students’ language and literacy challenges, instructors underscored challenges common to English-dominant and language-minority students, including problems with students’ study skills, critical thinking, problem-solving, or time committed to their studies. Contributions: We argue that, although focusing on general academic and life skills is important for the diversity of students served by community colleges, a deeper focus on disciplinary and professional language and literacy practices is warranted by both instructors and institutions to prepare and support the New Mainstream in completing college and succeeding in the workforce.
Despite decades of efforts, deficit narratives regarding language development and use by children and students from historically marginalized backgrounds remain persistent in the United States. Examining selective literature, we discuss the ideologies that undergird two deficit narratives: the notion that some children have a “word gap” when compared to their White middle-class peers, and students must develop “academic language” to engage in rigorous content learning. The “word gap” concept came from a study wherein a group of young children in low-income families heard fewer words than those in middle-class families. It assumes that language can only be acquired in one way—vocabulary exchange from one parent to one child—and ignores decades of research on diverse pathways for language development. We highlight an alternative perspective that language development builds on children’s experience with cultural practices and the harm on minoritized children by privileging a specific form of vocabulary acquisition. The second deficit narrative concerns “academic language,” a concept championed by scholars aiming to address educational inequity. The construct runs the risk of undervaluing the potential of students from historically marginalized backgrounds to engage in learning using language that is “informal,” nonconventional, or “non-native like.” It also is sometimes used as a rationale to relegate students to special programs isolated from more rigorous academic discourse, thus ironically removing them from opportunities to develop the academic registers they are deemed to be missing. We explore alternative frameworks that shift the focus from linguistic features of academic talk and texts as prerequisites for academic work to the broad range of linguistic resources that students employ for academic purposes in the classroom. Finally, we turn to a positive approach to youths’ language development and use: translanguaging by multilingual learners and their teachers. Translanguaging demonstrates the power of a resource-oriented perspective that values students’ rich communicative repertoires and actively seeks to disrupt language hierarchies. We argue that this approach, however, must be considered in relation to the broader social context to meet its transformative aims. Together, our analysis suggests counter-possibilities to dismantle deficit-oriented narratives and points to promising directions for research and practices to reduce inequity in education.
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.