Herb,
It's good that a lot of future teachers are being required to take
linguistics and language-and-society classes, but there is a big
disconnect once they get out of college and into schools. Their
grammar-teaching materials take no account of dialect differences
whatever (leastways not those published for use in CA), and simply
state that one does something this or that way, period. So, "verbs must
agree with their subjects", and only one way of doing this is
presented. There is no qualification "This is how verbs agree with
their subjects in _standard_ English". The only mention of dialect I
have found in the majority of K-12 teaching materials relates it to
literature, usually refers merely to "groups" or just regions, and
treats it as a way of making literature more "colorful" or a character
more "authentic". (One high-school book, I think it is the senior-level
text, and I think the publisher is Prentice-Hall, has a section in each
unit on language, including the history of the language and dialect
variation, etc. I think it was written by John Algeo. It's the only
linguistically-informed patch I've seen in any of the materials CA has
approved (and I have looked at them all). However, the grammar
materials that go with the book are the usual prescriptive stuff.)
And, as I have said before, numerous grammar points are covered with
the sole purpose in mind of correcting the language habits of children
who speak nonstandard English. This is the only reason to have lessons
about double negatives, "hisself", irregular verbs, and so on in these
materials. They are treated as mistakes (often using that very word),
not as alternative ways of doing things in various communities of
speakers.
When these new teachers get into the schools, they will have as their
judges and superiors people who have not had the education about
dialect and language that they have had. Those who care about grammar
at all will be those who believe in what the textbooks teach. To what
extent will the new teachers be able to buck the system? The Ebonics
controversy showed just how ignorant of these issues most Americans
are. Now we have the added pressure of No Child Left Behind,
standardized testing, and rabid anti-bilingual movements.
Many of my students remark on how eye-opening my lectures on dialect
prejudice are, and many also tell me how, since the lectures and
readings, they have arguments with those of their friends and family
who correct other people's grammar all the time. A number also often
tell me that they used to correct other people all the time, but now
realize how snobbish and offensive that is. But for them to play a role
in reforming grammar instruction, they will need both materials and
support. A new teacher is overwhelmed enough with the teaching load,
the number of students, the lesson planning, grading student work,
etc., without having to both create supplemental grammar materials
_and_ have arguments with the head of the English department about how
to teach grammar.
This is why I keep saying that we have to get the attention of the
powers that be by implementing reformed practices wherever we can and
demonstrating their effectiveness through _higher test scores_. The
Ebonics flap taught us that the authorities are not going to listen to
linguists just on the merits of the facts linguistic science has piled
up. We have to find other windows, other ways in. Most teachers love
their kids and want them to succeed, and most now realize that
prejudice is a form of disadvantage. They need to be made aware of the
fact that language-based prejudice is built into the current grammar
curriculum, then be given ideas and materials for doing it better. We
need a sort of ten-point PR plan. It is very important for us to work
with practicing teachers as well as trainees.
Something I plan to do this coming school year is to write to our
state's Superintendent of Education (who used to be a state
representative from my district) about the possibility of closing the
achievement gap for African American kids partly through introducing a
different way of handling language arts for them. I'm going to bug him
until he agrees to talk with me about it, and I'm going to tell him
about the various places this is being done.
Dr. Johanna Rubba, Associate Professor, Linguistics
Linguistics Minor Advisor
English Department
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
Tel.: 805.756.2184
Dept. Ofc. Tel.: 805.756.2596
Dept. Fax: 805.756.6374
URL: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
|