Shifting to the World Englishes Paradigm by Way of the Translingual Approach: Code-Meshing as a Necessary Means of Transforming Composition Pedagogy

Abstract

English" classrooms in U.S. institutions of higher education are not linguistically homogeneous. It is not logical, ethical, or realistic to designate "standard" English as the only discourse acceptable for the writing classroom. This praxis-oriented article chronicles a U.S. composition instructor's process of re-envisioning a formerly monolingualist, unidirectional composition curriculum through a lens that acknowledges and celebrates the World Englishes paradigm. The revised curriculum is driven by the translingual approach to composition pedagogy, which understands hybridity and fluidity as the norms of language acquisition, usage, and development, and focuses on one of the approach's practical pedagogical applications: the code-meshing strategy of writing. The article provides an overview of the author's institutional context and offers observations about how the traditional monolingualist conceptual framework has marginalized and alienated students whose language practices do not fit within it. The article explains how the translingual approach to composition pedagogy, and specifically the teaching of code-meshing as a viable communicative tool, has contributed to positive changes in students' self-perceptions as language users in and out of the classroom. The article concludes with informed reflections, from the vantage point of a composition and TESOL teacher-scholar, on further ways that the World Englishes ethos might manifest in the paradigm of U.S. composition theory and instruction.

Factores relevantes para la evaluación de la producción escrita de estudiantes haitianos no hispanohablantes en la escuela pública chilena

“…Además, sostiene que la aceptación de la mezcla de códigos lingüísticos podría remediar el daño que la tradición monolingüe ha generado en los estudiantes, cuyas lenguas difieren de las variedades privilegiadas estándares (Leki, 1997;Kubota y Lehner 2004Kubota 2010aKubota , 2010bCanagarajah, 2013aCanagarajah, , 2013bCanagarajah, , 2013cCanagarajah, , 2015. En esta línea, Lee (2014) advierte que la mezcla o fusión de códigos, entendidas como combinaciones de unidades estructurales o retóricas, puede ser, en efecto, una estrategia de instrucción, pero solo de carácter temporal. En relación con la propuesta translingüística, Pearson (2013) hace una reflexión muy acertada sobre la contradicción que existe en el hecho de que las mismas publicaciones que argumentan a favor de relajar los estándares de la escritura entre los aprendientes de LE estén escritas en inglés estándar 7 y no provean un modelo para la escritura de aprendientes que pueda ser apropiado en contextos académicos.…”

Exploring Global Englishes content and language variation in an academic writing course

“…In writing studies, this approach is now encompassed in translingual writing pedagogy, which sees language difference as a resource, recognizes language and language varieties as heterogenous and fluid, and confronts the exclusionary use of language standards (Horner, Lu, Royster, & Trimbur, 2011). Translingual approaches tend to emphasize codemeshing (e.g., Lee, 2014), though that focus has not been without its critics (P. K. Matsuda, 2014).…”

World Englishes, translingualism, and racialization in the US college composition classroom

“…In a similar fashion, Kubota (2001, pp. 49, 47) has suggested that schools should be able to ‘develop awareness and attitudes necessary for functioning in a culturally and linguistically diverse society’ as students likely communicate more and more with ‘various WE speakers on campuses and at workplaces.’ Attuned to these language and literacies expectations, many writing instructors have purposefully incorporated WE texts in their teaching and sought to foster opportunities for students to examine different Englishes and variability of norms (Lee, 2014; Wetzl, 2013). While not conclusive, these studies often report students’ enhanced awareness of the pluralism of English formations, WE, and positive perceptions towards texts that work within and across these different Englishes.…”