“Critique is understood as an interrogation of the terms by which life is constrained in order to open up the possibility of different modes of living; in other words, not to celebrate differences as such but to establish more inclusive conditions for sheltering and maintaining life that resist models of assimilation.” -Judith Butler
If I am to teach children that who they are and what they bring to school is a valid and authentic life, I must challenge my own ideas and manner of thinking. I must not define the worth of my students, others or myself by any societal criteria. The research texts of this class expanded my thinking about the importance of investigating a child’s background in relation to language, class, economic status, and race and how it affects literacy learning in the classroom.
Race, language, and cultures in the United States seem to meld into a society of sameness. After all, are we not known as “the melting pot” of the world? However, the United part of our nation should not be the assimilation of races, languages, and cultures or a division of genders but the celebration and legitimacy of uniqueness among our people. Research conducted in the area of language reveals a complex chain of thought about how others either accept or reject people who speak differently. Our home language, or mother tongue, helps define who we are. In the article, “No Kinda Sense” by Lisa Delpit she explains “…our language has always been part of our very souls. When we are with our own, we revel in the rhythms and cadences of connection…” (p. 37) She was referring to African-Americans, however, all cultures, languages, and even dialects have this same connection with their home language. The general populace has a biased view of those who have not conformed to a standard form of English. Many think that a manner of speaking ties us to knowledge or intelligence. Therefore, it has been necessary for us to alter home language in order to conform to school or professional ways of speaking called “code switching.” The term code switching was new to me although I completely understand the concept. My language with my mother and older family members tends to be very country, while I speak differently with my husband, children, and friends and quite differently than when I speak in a classroom or professional setting. Delpit further states, “I have come to realize that acquiring an additional code comes from identifying with the people who speak it, from connecting the language form with all that is self-affirming and esteem building, inviting and fun.” (p. 39) Delpit goes on to explain, “If students are to acquire a second language form in school, teachers must not only see their students as nondeficient, they must understand their brilliance, and the brilliance of their home language.” (p. 42) This is part of literacy instruction that breaks down barriers to students’ success in school. Educators need to be aware of the needs of students to express themselves in a language form stemming from their race and cultural histories to lead them into being willing participants in school. Validation in spoken language leads them to a relaxed and accommodating ear for when I require them to transfer into the writing mode.
The reluctant writer is more challenging to motivate. After all, writing is work! My first-grade students have to work extremely hard to learn and apply forming the thought, holding the thought, spelling, spacing, letter formation, punctuation, grammar and reread. Their culture, class, and gender also play parts in this struggle to get their words on paper for an audience. Writing material in the form of experiences may be limited by those factors as well. In “I ain’t writin’ nuttin: Permission to Fail and Demands to Succeed in Urban Classrooms” by Gloria Ladson-Billings, she stresses that teachers should not lower expectations because of race, class, or gender. Her belief is that teachers who are creative and resourceful can and will motivate students to succeed. I must confess that when a five or six year-old students does not want to write and cannot write because of lack of knowledge in any of the aforementioned areas, it is difficult to get them jump-started. A certain measure of willingness on their part is what is required to get them moving. However, as Ladson-Billings says, we have to make a connection between what “language and literacy skills the students already possess and connect them up with conventional forms of literacy.” (p. 117) I believe I can best motivate these young, reluctant writers through Language Experience stories. This strategy will connect their home language, culture, gender, and class together and validate it to the others in the classroom at the same time.
Literacy education in the United States is a conundrum. The success of our students depends upon a complex system of individual societal histories, engagements with others concerning culture and gender expectations, oral language acquirement, class status, and prior experiences with literacy. I must make connections with my students and between my students concerning these systems that are already in place when they arrive at my door. Their success may depend on my ability to help them validate who they perceive themselves to be through their race, language, social class and culture. I must strive with an educational system that seeks to assimilate students’ individual histories instead of valuing their uniqueness.
Janet Gross