I am glad that Jim responded to my post.  The language I used may have
been extreme but it brings/bringed to the fore the issues here.
 
 
 
On Thu, 23 Jan 1997, Jim Dubinsky wrote:
 
> I agree that teaching language and grammar is not value neutral.
> What teaching is?  But I find such overtly Marxist language just as
> disconcerting as he (and others on the list) find the language of those of
> us who believe in teaching our students a clearly presented, coherent sense
> of the language used in the majority of workplaces in which they will have
> to find work to feed themselves and their families.
>
 
I do not find (any) language disconcerting, as is suggested in the third
sentence in the quoted passage above.  But I would ask,  what does the
characterization of my language as "overtly Marxist language" mean?
 
It seems to me to be nothing more than labelling, which is used to
dismiss the issues at hand.
 
 
 
> My students, at a two-year commuter regional campus of a major state
> university, want and overtly ask for such a coherent presentation.   We
> often discuss, and they indeed recognize and understand, that their personal
> language use is acceptable (and "correct") for them at home, among their
> friends and family.  But they also know that such language use, particularly
> if they come from a home or environment that values and carries on rich
> ethnic and racial traditions, won't help them pay the rent as effectively as
> other language uses.  They want to learn the language of the group Terry
> refers to as the "ruling class."  I work to help them learn it and use it
> effectively.
 
Learning some other variety of English will not help my students pay the
rent either, so your claim has no warrant.
 
My students come from Appalachia, parts of Eastern Kentucky.  This region
has the highest concentration of poverty in the United States.  Many of
them realize that their home language is not the language of the dominant
economy and many of them have low self worth because the way they speak
is socially stigmatized.  As much as they want to learn the standard
variety of English used by middle class white suburban prestige speakers
of English and insofar as they may succeed in this endeavour, the reality
of stigmatization and social economic isolation of the region from which
they come will persist.
 
> I suppose we could work with them to subtly overthrow the "ruling class,"
> but what would take its place?  Certainly another ruling class.  One need
> only look at the many political experiments with Marxism and Communism in
> this century alone to see that the classes that do the replacing are often,
> nay usually, more oppressive than the ones they replaced.
 
Obviously, you missed the allusion of my "pedagogy of the oppressed"
comment.  It has been the case in many South American and African
countries in the last two decades that an oppressive ruling class has in
fact been replaced with a government that benefits the public at large.
The claim of your last sentence in this quoted passage in not supported
by any facts.  It is simply reactionary cold war rhetoric.
 
My allusion was to the work of Paolo Friere, which is a pedagogy of
liberation.  In fact, the ideas of Friere and others have been
incorporated into a view of what the composition class should do, and the
radical view is, indeed, one of revolution and liberation.
 
 
>
> What is our job?  Is it, as Johanna says, to make good citizens?  If so,
> those citizens should learn to understand the workings of our country and
> its many different peoples, all of whom strive to be one people.  Sooner or
> later, in that striving, there needs to be some sort of agreed upon standard
> that is used for common practices of "doing business."
>
 
Yes, there needs to be an agreed upon standard.  But this is different
from an IMPOSED STANDARD.  Read Locke on the Social Contract.
 
But the notion of "our country" and the idea that we are all striving "to
be one people" rather turns my stomach.  It sounds like Hitler and Nazi
Germany to me.  I want to know who this "we" is.  Ask some hispanic kid
in east la who "we" is.  Then talk to me about teaching grammar.
 
 
 
Virtually, Terry
(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)
Terry Lynn Irons        [log in to unmask]
Voice Mail:             (606) 783-5164
Snail Mail:             UPO 604 Morehead, KY 40351
(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)