"Students' Right to Their Own Language": A Retrospective

Smitherman, Geneva

doi:10.2307/820470

Cited by 40 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, despite this body of empirical research, AAEV in particular continues to be viewed as an obstacle to academic learning (Stotsky, 1999). When the Board of Education in Oakland, California voted to focus on AAEV as a linguistic resource, there was a national outpouring of criticism, notwithstanding the vote of confidence from the Linguistic Society of America (Perry & Delpit, 1998;Smitherman, 1995Smitherman, , 1998Smitherman, , 1999Smitherman, , 2000b.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

‘Every good‐bye ain’t gone’: analyzing the cultural underpinnings of classroom talk

Lee

2006

International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education

121

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explicates the Cultural Modeling Framework for designing robust learning environments that leverage everyday knowledge of culturally diverse students to support subject-matterspecific learning. It reports a study of Cultural Modeling in the teaching of response to literature in an urban underachieving high school serving African-American students from low-income communities who are also speakers of African-American English. The study is situated in the history of research on African-American English as a resource for academic learning, particularly in relation to literacy. Results document the ways that African-American rhetorical features served as a medium for complex literary reasoning and provided contextualization cues to enhance participation.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

‘Every good‐bye ain’t gone’: analyzing the cultural underpinnings of classroom talk

Lee

2006

International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education

121

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As a result of their experiences, many Native American parents refused to teach their children their heritage languages to protect them from similar hardships. Smitherman (1995) has discussed this issue in the US and elsewhere, phrased as "students' right to their own language," a classic formulation in terms of basic educational rights (see also Templer, 2016, p. 155-156).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mother Tongue of Turkish Immigrant Children in Berlin: to Be or not to Be?

Kyuchukov

2018

JLE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How do bilingual Turkish children develop their mother tongue knowledge in German kindergartens and what are some of the difficulties they face? These are the questions which this paper tries to answer. For this purpose, a study with Turkish kindergarten children from Berlin, Germany was conducted. A total of 40 children were divided into two groups between 3 and 6 years old and tested twice in a year with the TEDIL Test . The test consists of pictures and measures the knowledge of Turkish nouns, verbs, adjectives, prepositions, and syntax. All of the children were tested individually by a native Turkish speaker and by the researcher. The testing was done in the kindergarten setting. The results showed that the knowledge of both age groups on different grammatical categories in Turkish was equal on the first test and there were no statistical differences. However, during the second test the group of older children showed a decrease in their knowledge of the grammatical categories in their mother tongue. This paper discusses the factors that influenced the regression in the knowledge of Turkish. This study is one of only a few on bilingual Turkish children and it presents new information about mother tongue loss among kindergarten children, discusses the reasons, and suggests that kindergartens and families should cooperate and work together in order to prevent mother tongue loss from a very early age as well as its effect on the cognitive development of bilingual children.

show abstract

“…16 In "'Students' Right to Their Own Language': A Retrospective," Geneva Smitherman contrasts all the "Unhip," who continued to press for Standard English, with the "Enlightened," who fought instead "to bring mainstream recognition and legitimacy to the culture, history, and language of those on the margins." 17 The unhip seek an equitable sharing of the bounties of contemporary life, but Smitherman detects a malicious "game plan" behind all such overtures: "cultural and linguistic absorption of the Other into the dominant culture, and indoctrination of the outsiders into the existing value system (e.g., Sledd 1972), to remake those on the margins in the image of the patriarch." 18 Where Smitherman sees evil "absorption" and "indoctrination," others will applaud the long-overdue triumph of inclusion and worry more about the ethnic enclaves that the Smitherman/SRTOL "game plan" always brings to mind.…”

Section: Srtol Draws On and Feeds Into A Reactionary Politics Of Ethnmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Students’ Right to Their Own Language”: A Counter-Argument

Zorn¹

2010

Acad. Quest.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

"Students' Right to Their Own Language": A Retrospective

Cited by 40 publications

References 1 publication

‘Every good‐bye ain’t gone’: analyzing the cultural underpinnings of classroom talk

‘Every good‐bye ain’t gone’: analyzing the cultural underpinnings of classroom talk

Mother Tongue of Turkish Immigrant Children in Berlin: to Be or not to Be?

“Students’ Right to Their Own Language”: A Counter-Argument

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About