This article by Rebecca Wheeler addresses the concept of code switching. This is something we have all encountered before. We all know that you use language differently when you are speaking to your parents than when you are talking to your friends. You even use language differently when you write in different contexts. For example, typically people don’t use the same language to write an essay as they would on an instant messenger. Wheeler specifically addresses code switching as a way to teach African American students to understand and retain the difference between Standard English (SE) and African American Vernacular English (AAVE). She suggests that if we, as teachers, simply tell students the “correct” way to write and speak that we are doing the students no good. In fact, we would do them harm. The resolution that Wheeler give us is that rather than a corrective approach to teaching language, we take a contrastive approach. Not teaching that one is wrong and the other is right, but rather, discussing both variations of English and the different contexts in which to use them. This approach can be used between more than just SE and AAVE, which makes it a nice classroom tool. Wheeler gives us many examples, including statistics, of where this approach strongly avails its opponent. In addition, using such an approach allows both African American and European American Children to perform on an equal playing field when it comes to standardized tests. I feel that this article was useful for us as future teachers because, at least for me, it shows a way to accomplish language competency regardless of the dialect spoken.
Bonnie Bilyeu
23 comments:
I was surprised by the article by Rebecca Wheeler. I would think that teaching students two different types of English would confuse them. I think that as a student I would have been confused if I was taught two different versions of English; getting the two mixed up.
Lindsay
To a certain extent I agree with what Lindsay said. However, it is important to understand that correcting a student is only half of the battle. Constant correction of a student without explaining why they are wrong has the effect of belittling that student. As the article says, eventually the student will stop asking questions and feel ashamed to speak in class. That would not be a good learning environment and the student certainly would not retain any Standard English.
by Mike Schloz
The article points out a key aspect of teaching young students the English language. Belittling children will get a teacher absolutely nowhere. If anything, it is like taking steps backwards. As the article points out, students eventually stopped asking questions. This cannot possibly be the goal.
What is important to understand is that children are sensitive to criticism. A good learning environment is one in which students can feel confident asking questions, not one in which they are afraid to even speak because they might be belittled.
I agree with what Rebeeca Wheeler had to say in her article about code switching. A teacher who condems AAVE as being ignorant or wrong, makes the student resistant to learning. However, if a teacher took the time to explain how different contexts allow for different ways of speaking, neither more right then the other, the student will be encouraged to learn. I thought this article was very fair and also honored tradition.
I found this article very interesting. I have always been of the persuasion that AAE is an incorrect form of English. Now I am not so sure. The more that I read the more I can see that they are both valid in different situation. Had I been in the position of the English teacher in this article, I would have also been correcting the students when they used "incorrect grammar". Now I don’t think that I would. Seeing how she was finally able to bring about change and understanding in the students has changed my mind. Very interesting.
Bryan
I agree with what Rebecca Wheeler said about constructive criticism and positive reinforcement. Students do not learn if they are not encouraged to do so. Correcting a child can leave an imprint on them that could be negative. The only problem I had with the text was that it was not true to code switching. The article was more about teaching methods to students who are trying to learn English, then how the children code switched. Another problem that I have with that is that most children who code switch will do so outside of school. For instance children who speak Spanish at home will be use English at school and switch to Spanish when they get home. They will use a mixture of the languages when they are with their friends. So I do not think this article should be based on code switching and I found it rather boring linguistically. She could have stated what she did with less pages and it would have been a better article.
Allie
I really don't agree with the article by Ms.Wheeler. While it is true that as young Americans we DO perform code switching on a daily basis, I don't believe that teachers should waste their time trying to teach their students something that they will learn naturally, simply by interaction with their peers. Children are like sponges, they absorb many things that they see AND hear. By socializing in normal settings and watching things on television, kids will develop their own language and way of speaking, but then in turn, they will learn the correct way to write and interact on a more formal and proper level in school. Why confuse the children? Teachers should give students proper guidance when it comes to grammar and English so that in their future, when code switching becomes a part of their everyday interaction, they will know what is right and what is not.
I agree with Wheeler's observations concerning students; obviously the old system is not working. Given that students and teachers have to identify with each other to foster a learning environment, it follows that someone's entire culture cannot be discounted on any basis. Let alone the social implications of AAE's tradition or whether objecting to its instruction is an essentially elitist position; whatever must be done to help children learn is qualified in my view. Minus some deontological extremes, of course.
So if the kids are learning better, why not mix up the play book?
I think that the article by Rebecca Wheeler was an example of a fresh outlook on how we educate and teach the "melting pot" that is America. Constructive criticism and a detailed explanations generally have a better effect on students. Slamming or condemming different approaches to English is simply the easy way out as an educator, leaving many students with no confidence or grasp in English.
I have many different opinions about the concept of AAVE, but one that I think needs to be addressed is that the students we will be dealing with in the future are not neccesarily using the AAVE. Most of the language we will be encountering in the future is little more than slang. I do think at one time that the AAVE could have been considered a language worthy of a lesson in classrooms, but mostly, students today are using slang words that they have learned from rappers, t.v. shows, etc. and not necessarily a language of their own culture. I do think that it is important to be on the same page with students as far as the difference between formal english and every day conversation english. However, I also think that it is important for students to learn the proper way to write and speak in order to be successful in the future. Jessica
I think that teaching students two different types of English would be confusing. However if students learn this early on, then it would be easier to learn. For example you could not start teaching this in middle school, you would have to start early elementary.
I don't agree with the article by Rebecca Wheeler. I think that everyone should learn the same English. Connecting with the students and not alienating them is important, but teaching different variations of the language to different students seems unnecessary.
I really enjoyed Wheeler's article. I never really thought of the possibility of teaching both AAE and standard English in the classroom. I always thought my job as an English teacher is to correct anything that isn't standard English. I think that teachers should explain to the students the circumstances for both types of language. Instead of telling students that their native language is "wrong" (which may discourage them), teachers should be sensitive to their students culture while also exposing them to something new. This strategy may help these students be more receptive to learning something new!
Amanda Murphy
Using statistical research helps provide the article, by Rebecca Wheeler, with substance and credibility. Students are learning two different languages, such as Spanish and English, at an earlier age than my generation of colleagues. I have learned that you must be knowledgable of how the other language differs and relates to English grammatically. For example, in Spanish the adjective follows the noun as opposed to English where the adjective preceeds the noun. Thus, in Spanish is essential to know how to conjugate copula because of the adjective's placement.
Personally, based on the arguments and statstics presented I agree with the experiment of Wheeler and colleagues and believe this techinique should be implemented. I am very famliar with AAVE and have seen the failure of all other methods to eradicate the problem of poor writing and communication skills among African Americans. Innovativation is neccesary for change.
In every part of life there are standards. Many times, adhereing to these standards is crucial. Would it be correct to teach that the standard "formal" answer to 2 plus 2 is 4, but if a student says its 6, that is ok because that is what the child learned at home? Some learning cannot be up-for-debate. It is what it is. It is standard. To teach anything else would deprive any student an education and destroy their future.
I think that if I were a student I would be completely confused by the use of two types of "English" languages in the classroom. If I were a teacher I could see myself telling a student the correct answer rather than trying to teach him or her the correct answer. However, the post by Bonnie helps me realize the error in this approach.
I believe that Rebecca Wheeler's ideas are interesting and possibly useful in some classrooms. I do think it is most important to keep the best interest of the child as the main priority, and I feel like her methods would work depending on the children being worked with and the English form they use. I feel it is important for students to learn all sides of the "story".
Overall, the summary was very nice. It sums up the article very well. Personally, I don't think I should be required to teach my students to different kinds of English. There is only one correct form of English and that is what I will teach them. However, if they happen to speak AAVE then I will learn all I can to understand them and correct them but I will not force my students to learn a language that will ruin their vocabulary. I will correct my students and teach them the right way to talk with proper standard English.
I enjoyed the article and the ways in which Rebecca taught the code switching with the contrastive learning, as opposed to the corrective teaching. This is a subject I have never come across or considered, but I can see how damaging to a child the corrective teaching can be. This will be very helpful to keep in mind when this class becomes future teachers. There are many dialects of English, not only found in AAVE but in "mountain" and "southern" dialects. By teaching both the SE and other, it allows students to keep their "home language" without it being derogatory.
The article by Rebecca Wheeler was interesting, but I am still of the opinion that AAE is incorrect english. I believe you can "correct" a student without belittling them. Maybe I am old fasioned, but I believe our use of the english language as a whole has been declining. Have you ever read letters written by civial war soldiers? They write beautifully. People just do not write like that any more, and I believe it is a shame. I personaly would never teach AAE as an acceptable language for the classroom or everyday life. I mean talking with your friends is one thing, but shouldn't we strive to sound even remotely intelligent? Dialects like AAE were originated from poor uneducated people. It is the same for a redneck dictionary or from a hillibie dialect. I don't think we should teach students that using incorrect grammar is appropriate. If, and I mean if, you were teaching a creative writing class or creative writing assignment then dialects like AAE can indeed be used. If you are writing a story that takes place in a certain geographical region or a certain time in history then you should strive for an accurate portrayal of the characters, but in normal english and grammar classes absolutely not.
I enjoyed the article by Rebecca Wheeler. Last semester, I was exposed to AAE in my English class, but I do not remember learning about in high school, so this type of language is new to me. I do think it is important to correct student’s grammar, but I think it is also important to respect their language as well by not saying AAE is incorrect. But all in all, I believe Wheeler’s experiment had some very good tactics that will be useful to me as a future teacher.
I totally agree with the contrastive approach of teaching writing and reading English properly. Instead of literary assimilation, literary accommodation seems to be a more effective method when teaching Standard American English to students of other cultures. We all code-switch, it will be unfair to try and change a dynamic sense of their cultural personality.
Post a Comment