Asa Hilllard brought something up that stunned me. Interviewed a teacher, Septima Clark, the creator of freedom schools and she said that educated teachers couldn’t teach her students as well, “often people who [see] themselves as highly educated projected the idea to her students that they regarded themselves as better than the students. ‘Their education got in the way,’” (102). Is this really what happened? This is really awful. The fact that an educated person can’t speak on a student’s level and try to fully understand them is hard to except.
I was also shocked by some of the information that Hilliard presented in this chapter. Specifically the misconceptions about Common American English. Do people really believe that English is the only language?? How could you not know that English is constantly evolving? Some of this was almost scary. As English teachers I think it is essential that our students have a basic understanding of the development of our language and that they understand that it continues to develop. I loved the information on the influence of Bantu. I think this could be an excellent way to hook African American students on learning and using Standard English.
Danielle, I've always believed that just because someone is intellectual, doesn't mean they can teach. I've had many teachers and professors who obviously were brilliant in their content, but failed miserably at teaching it. As far as the misconceptions of Common American English, I agree with you Erin that it really is terrible what some people think about language. Language is constantly evolving and changing, so why should we expect there to be some sort of standard?
Interesting that you used the word standard, Brent. As English teachers specifically, how can we ensure that our CCGPSs are constructed to adhere to a constantly developing language? What would a standard like that look like? I think it is vital that the standards we teach are built to withstand the inevitable changes in our language and our society.
I was shocked by the same things everyone has cited--specifically the inability for some people to understand that English is not uniform in content across historical and geographic lines, nor "the only" language, that AAVE is not distinct from "standard" American English, and that teachers get in the way of their students' improvement because of their own heightened sense of intellectual achievement. (Although like Brent I was not quite as surprised on that score.) How do we ensure we do not overshadow or diminish our students' intellectual growth? What can we do as teachers and human beings to combat our own (potential) hubris? In the future I would hate to look at the faces of my students and realize that for the past ten years I had hindered their growth because of my inability to communicate with them meaningfully.
"Failing to deal with the existence of oppression and its impact will result in a further distortion of study" (91) I couldn't agree more with where this statement is going. So much of our history is still part of today and people who just ignore the past or who only want to talk about the past without regard to the present are not teaching effectively. This reminds me of "colorblindness" and how it is not really a good thing. Oppression needs to be discussed and the effect on language needs to be openly discussed with children so they know what they are up against and can learn how or if they even want to battle it. It is their choice to speak in certain ways and it is unfortunate that so many of these issues that Hilliard presented in this chapter exist. As teachers I think we need to face this head on and as early as possible. Preparing students for different social settings is important and spreading awareness about how we, as well as others, perceive our language is important. I think that encouraging students to speak certain ways is better than a too prescriptive approach because as we've been reading, it seems it promotes (in Lorien's words) "our own (potential) hubris" and makes it seem as if they are "wrong" when really it is just informal vs. formal or dialectal instead of standard. Introducing and pointing out these differences through lessons and minilessons is our best bet in my opinions
I definitely did not know anything about the Bantu influence on the English language. I also really enjoyed the statement that perhaps English is just "informal German". Thought that was really cool.
I also definitely appreciate the eloquent way Hilliard made the distinction about the flawed way we view "standard" and "difficult" vocabulary, as opposed to "something with which students are unfamiliar." Often we write off students as being being unable to grasp vocabulary simply because they are unfamiliar with word. It does seem to think that all of this is simply a matter of convenience; it is what is easiest. Of course, the same thing can be said of pretty much everything that goes on in this country---especially with regards to our political landscape.
Like everyone else, I was also shocked about some of the misconceptions people have about English. I just showed my class an example of Old English yesterday (their faces were priceless). I found the Bantu history fascinating. I have always known that Ebonics play are large role in our English- it's easy to see that many words and phrases in the South exists in both Black and White cultures. But, I never knew the Bantu part of it.
I do agree that we need to re-approach and reeducate our nation on language.
It's interesting. I wasn't all that shocked to hear his findings on how negative and ignorant people can be about language. I come from a small town where speaking proper English causes one to appear to think that they are better than others. I also come from a highly segregated town where Blacks and Whites don't really mix. (I've mentioned the newspaper article about the public school's basketball team and my basketball team that started out by saying "One's an all Black school. One's all white" - NOT kidding; I've still got the article back home). So it wasn't all that difficult for me to understand the concerns he addresses.
As a literature major, I took classes that discussed, some quite intensely, the evolution of the English language: History of English, Medieval English, even British Literature and Shakespeare. It's perfectly reasonable that someone would not know the history of English - there's a crap ton of things that have happened to "bastardize" (to quote one of my undergrad profs) the language. Plus, there's so many languages that have influenced English - German, French, Latin, Spanish... and those are just the most well-known. It's crazy-awesome to think about!
I can completely relate to Rose's aversion to calling someone "African American." Every single one of my Black friends that I've asked has told me (and I quote), "I'm not from Africa. I'm not African American, I'm Black."
I have also encountered aversion to the common “African American” stigma. Students who are not from African believe that they shouldn’t be called African American. They’re absolutely right. They aren’t by all definitions of the phrase. Some students also have something to say about teachers calling them black as well. I was told by a student that he was not black, he was multiracial.
I have friends who are upset if they are labeled or addressed as "black" and some who are upset if called "African American". Its a matter of personal preference, history, and individual identity. I prefer being labeled "white" rather than Caucasian because personally I think Caucasian sounds pretentious. I also try to avoid racial modifiers in general whenever possible because (like the video on race told us and most of my sociology, psychology, and anthropology classes reiterate) race is a social construct. And it has been used too often in our history to alienate and marginalize people. Genetically everyone on the planet is more or less equivalent to a 17th cousin.
The flaws revolving around standardized testing are well argued by Asa G. Hilliard III. He provides some solid ground for his stance against its ethnocentrism (p. 98).
I wish I had read this chapter before I finished at Oak Hill. Asa refers to a study that shows teachers engaging students less when they were considered language deficient. I believe I was acting to the opposite. I had a few students that struggled with engaging in the lesson, and I persistently went back to them for a response. One day, I had them read an excerpt and discuss it with their group. I purposefully had placed one of the students that always answers questions with one of the students that doesn't usually contribute. When it came time for them to share their feedback with the class, I made sure to have both of them contribute.
p.s. I hope my education isn't going to "get in the way."
Nick, I like that you like learning about language families. That is something you should throw in the face of people that may doubt your passion to be a Language Arts teacher.
As for "difficult" vocabulary, freerice.com uses foreign words (Swahili, Spanish, Latin, etc.) at its highest difficulty. These are words we'd never see on a standardized test. I think a good way to "market" the vocabulary to the students is by outlining how much more interesting speech and conversations can be with a more diverse vocabulary.
I felt the same way that most of you did about the misconceptions of English. I couldn't believe that there were people out there that believed it was the "only pure language" and that it was a superior and fixed permanent language. It changes all the time and every day! We learned about this in sevreal of my linguistics classes. We discussed the evolution of the English language and how it changed even every year. (which led to the discussion of how now there are new words being added to the dictionary every day)
My biggest thing that I found interesting about this though, was the assumption of there being a "Basic word" list. I thought it was absurd that many people thought there was one "true" basic word list, but loved how Delpit pointed out how Kersey found that there were several supposed "correct" lists. The question I thought however, was "well, there may not be a certain list, but aren't there words that everyone should just know?" so did this make a permanent list, or just a general group of words?
I felt the same way with how she mentioned "difficulty" of words. Who is it to say that words are difficult? Is it really because we don't know them? Or because they are hard to spell? Or because they are not used correctly? I often find myself telling students that I tutor to use more "complex" vocabulary, or to continuously substitute simple words with more "complex" words that portray the same meaning. Does this mean we should discourage this?
Lorien, I like the point you make about teaching students and making sure not to overshadow them. One way I think we as teachers can do this, is just to constantly learn with them. We know what it is like to be in a classroom, we know what it is like to have to sit in these classes and learn. We also know what it was like to be a student. This is why even when I am teaching, I am constantly listening to what my students know about the subject, but also about what they like outside of school. This way I can incorporate things they like with things that they know. In the end, I not only learn new things about the subject we are teaching, but also learn alongside my students. I think that we as teachers can KNOW our subjects, but really, what is a teacher but a glorified student who is constantly needing or yearning to learn more every day? Just my opinion.
"How can the assessment process be purified so as to operate in the service of African American children rather than against them?" The is quote particularly stood out to me. I already have a somewhat negative view of standardized tests, and this chapter was just a reminder that so many students are being tested according to this "universal standard" that just doesn't exist and it is obviously the wrong way to assess students.
I really enjoyed reading the misconceptions about Common American English. Just to see one of them saying it is not a pure language kind of makes me laugh a little. Since it is the standard form of language we use, it automatically makes me think that the language is ours and is deeply rooted in the "American culture." However, it is really taken from many different places. So, that to me shows that we should be more accepting of cultural differences in language since that is how we got our Standard English in the first place. Then, in the end saying that those educated teachers were less likely to be hired by her because they saw them as better than the students, I can definitely see that this is true even with the little experience being around teachers recently.
I agree Amber. How are they deciding what goes into these tests? Are they really considering the multi-cultural group of students that will be trying to pass it?
The discussion of the word "minority" was probably my favorite part of this chapter. "For example, what are the historical antecedents of a 'minority'?" (91) is a question I had never thought about before. I have never been considered a minority, so am I to be classified as a 'majority?' There has never been a question on a survey I have seen that asks one to mark either minority or majority as an answer. I suppose this particular section stood out to me because associating everything different with the term minority can be seen as demeaning, and I have never considered it to be.
These conversations on here make me laugh. First off, I too found it interesting that people find the English language to be so static. I think it would be very interesting to combine the history of English with the project on curse words we talked about earlier. I think we need to show that our language has been borrowed and continues to change.
I also agree with Rose and Andrew about the phrase African American.
I think that it's sad and frightening that someone would teach English as the only correct language. It's unfortunate that some do not see it as a language that is evolving constantly and will continue to change as long as the world exists.
I agree with Katie in that we need to show that our language has been borrowed and continues to change. It would be cool to do a study on how words have changed over time -- their use,definition, etc. A student could choose or be assigned a word and study it's progression over the years..even look to see what words might have come to replace it at times. I did a similar project in high school and had a lot of fun with it. It can re-emphasize the fact that English is ever changing
I think it is interesting how society has decided that the speaking of Standard American English is the dominant language that is supposed to be spoken. Who came up with this rule that African American English is not the correct and professional way of speaking? When someone is mocking an African American person, the language is always Ebonics. I think it is sad and embarrassing that some automatically mock that language. While doing so, it is in a demeaning manner. This makes me sad that this it what our acceptance and unacceptance of the standard language has come to.
Asa Hilllard brought something up that stunned me. Interviewed a teacher, Septima Clark, the creator of freedom schools and she said that educated teachers couldn’t teach her students as well, “often people who [see] themselves as highly educated projected the idea to her students that they regarded themselves as better than the students. ‘Their education got in the way,’” (102). Is this really what happened? This is really awful. The fact that an educated person can’t speak on a student’s level and try to fully understand them is hard to except.
ReplyDeleteI was also shocked by some of the information that Hilliard presented in this chapter. Specifically the misconceptions about Common American English. Do people really believe that English is the only language?? How could you not know that English is constantly evolving? Some of this was almost scary. As English teachers I think it is essential that our students have a basic understanding of the development of our language and that they understand that it continues to develop. I loved the information on the influence of Bantu. I think this could be an excellent way to hook African American students on learning and using Standard English.
ReplyDeleteDanielle, I've always believed that just because someone is intellectual, doesn't mean they can teach. I've had many teachers and professors who obviously were brilliant in their content, but failed miserably at teaching it. As far as the misconceptions of Common American English, I agree with you Erin that it really is terrible what some people think about language. Language is constantly evolving and changing, so why should we expect there to be some sort of standard?
ReplyDeleteInteresting that you used the word standard, Brent. As English teachers specifically, how can we ensure that our CCGPSs are constructed to adhere to a constantly developing language? What would a standard like that look like? I think it is vital that the standards we teach are built to withstand the inevitable changes in our language and our society.
ReplyDeleteI was shocked by the same things everyone has cited--specifically the inability for some people to understand that English is not uniform in content across historical and geographic lines, nor "the only" language, that AAVE is not distinct from "standard" American English, and that teachers get in the way of their students' improvement because of their own heightened sense of intellectual achievement. (Although like Brent I was not quite as surprised on that score.)
ReplyDeleteHow do we ensure we do not overshadow or diminish our students' intellectual growth? What can we do as teachers and human beings to combat our own (potential) hubris?
In the future I would hate to look at the faces of my students and realize that for the past ten years I had hindered their growth because of my inability to communicate with them meaningfully.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"Failing to deal with the existence of oppression and its impact will result in a further distortion of study" (91)
ReplyDeleteI couldn't agree more with where this statement is going. So much of our history is still part of today and people who just ignore the past or who only want to talk about the past without regard to the present are not teaching effectively. This reminds me of "colorblindness" and how it is not really a good thing. Oppression needs to be discussed and the effect on language needs to be openly discussed with children so they know what they are up against and can learn how or if they even want to battle it. It is their choice to speak in certain ways and it is unfortunate that so many of these issues that Hilliard presented in this chapter exist. As teachers I think we need to face this head on and as early as possible. Preparing students for different social settings is important and spreading awareness about how we, as well as others, perceive our language is important. I think that encouraging students to speak certain ways is better than a too prescriptive approach because as we've been reading, it seems it promotes (in Lorien's words) "our own (potential) hubris" and makes it seem as if they are "wrong" when really it is just informal vs. formal or dialectal instead of standard. Introducing and pointing out these differences through lessons and minilessons is our best bet in my opinions
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI definitely did not know anything about the Bantu influence on the English language. I also really enjoyed the statement that perhaps English is just "informal German". Thought that was really cool.
ReplyDeleteI also definitely appreciate the eloquent way Hilliard made the distinction about the flawed way we view "standard" and "difficult" vocabulary, as opposed to "something with which students are unfamiliar." Often we write off students as being being unable to grasp vocabulary simply because they are unfamiliar with word. It does seem to think that all of this is simply a matter of convenience; it is what is easiest. Of course, the same thing can be said of pretty much everything that goes on in this country---especially with regards to our political landscape.
Like everyone else, I was also shocked about some of the misconceptions people have about English. I just showed my class an example of Old English yesterday (their faces were priceless). I found the Bantu history fascinating. I have always known that Ebonics play are large role in our English- it's easy to see that many words and phrases in the South exists in both Black and White cultures. But, I never knew the Bantu part of it.
ReplyDeleteI do agree that we need to re-approach and reeducate our nation on language.
It's interesting. I wasn't all that shocked to hear his findings on how negative and ignorant people can be about language. I come from a small town where speaking proper English causes one to appear to think that they are better than others. I also come from a highly segregated town where Blacks and Whites don't really mix. (I've mentioned the newspaper article about the public school's basketball team and my basketball team that started out by saying "One's an all Black school. One's all white" - NOT kidding; I've still got the article back home). So it wasn't all that difficult for me to understand the concerns he addresses.
ReplyDeleteAs a literature major, I took classes that discussed, some quite intensely, the evolution of the English language: History of English, Medieval English, even British Literature and Shakespeare. It's perfectly reasonable that someone would not know the history of English - there's a crap ton of things that have happened to "bastardize" (to quote one of my undergrad profs) the language. Plus, there's so many languages that have influenced English - German, French, Latin, Spanish... and those are just the most well-known. It's crazy-awesome to think about!
I can completely relate to Rose's aversion to calling someone "African American." Every single one of my Black friends that I've asked has told me (and I quote), "I'm not from Africa. I'm not African American, I'm Black."
I have also encountered aversion to the common “African American” stigma. Students who are not from African believe that they shouldn’t be called African American. They’re absolutely right. They aren’t by all definitions of the phrase. Some students also have something to say about teachers calling them black as well. I was told by a student that he was not black, he was multiracial.
ReplyDeleteI have friends who are upset if they are labeled or addressed as "black" and some who are upset if called "African American". Its a matter of personal preference, history, and individual identity.
ReplyDeleteI prefer being labeled "white" rather than Caucasian because personally I think Caucasian sounds pretentious.
I also try to avoid racial modifiers in general whenever possible because (like the video on race told us and most of my sociology, psychology, and anthropology classes reiterate) race is a social construct. And it has been used too often in our history to alienate and marginalize people.
Genetically everyone on the planet is more or less equivalent to a 17th cousin.
The flaws revolving around standardized testing are well argued by Asa G. Hilliard III. He provides some solid ground for his stance against its ethnocentrism (p. 98).
ReplyDeleteI wish I had read this chapter before I finished at Oak Hill. Asa refers to a study that shows teachers engaging students less when they were considered language deficient. I believe I was acting to the opposite. I had a few students that struggled with engaging in the lesson, and I persistently went back to them for a response. One day, I had them read an excerpt and discuss it with their group. I purposefully had placed one of the students that always answers questions with one of the students that doesn't usually contribute. When it came time for them to share their feedback with the class, I made sure to have both of them contribute.
p.s. I hope my education isn't going to "get in the way."
Nick, I like that you like learning about language families. That is something you should throw in the face of people that may doubt your passion to be a Language Arts teacher.
ReplyDeleteAs for "difficult" vocabulary, freerice.com uses foreign words (Swahili, Spanish, Latin, etc.) at its highest difficulty. These are words we'd never see on a standardized test. I think a good way to "market" the vocabulary to the students is by outlining how much more interesting speech and conversations can be with a more diverse vocabulary.
I felt the same way that most of you did about the misconceptions of English. I couldn't believe that there were people out there that believed it was the "only pure language" and that it was a superior and fixed permanent language. It changes all the time and every day! We learned about this in sevreal of my linguistics classes. We discussed the evolution of the English language and how it changed even every year. (which led to the discussion of how now there are new words being added to the dictionary every day)
ReplyDeleteMy biggest thing that I found interesting about this though, was the assumption of there being a "Basic word" list. I thought it was absurd that many people thought there was one "true" basic word list, but loved how Delpit pointed out how Kersey found that there were several supposed "correct" lists. The question I thought however, was "well, there may not be a certain list, but aren't there words that everyone should just know?" so did this make a permanent list, or just a general group of words?
I felt the same way with how she mentioned "difficulty" of words. Who is it to say that words are difficult? Is it really because we don't know them? Or because they are hard to spell? Or because they are not used correctly? I often find myself telling students that I tutor to use more "complex" vocabulary, or to continuously substitute simple words with more "complex" words that portray the same meaning. Does this mean we should discourage this?
Lorien, I like the point you make about teaching students and making sure not to overshadow them. One way I think we as teachers can do this, is just to constantly learn with them. We know what it is like to be in a classroom, we know what it is like to have to sit in these classes and learn. We also know what it was like to be a student. This is why even when I am teaching, I am constantly listening to what my students know about the subject, but also about what they like outside of school. This way I can incorporate things they like with things that they know. In the end, I not only learn new things about the subject we are teaching, but also learn alongside my students. I think that we as teachers can KNOW our subjects, but really, what is a teacher but a glorified student who is constantly needing or yearning to learn more every day? Just my opinion.
ReplyDelete"How can the assessment process be purified so as to operate in the service of African American children rather than against them?" The is quote particularly stood out to me. I already have a somewhat negative view of standardized tests, and this chapter was just a reminder that so many students are being tested according to this "universal standard" that just doesn't exist and it is obviously the wrong way to assess students.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading the misconceptions about Common American English. Just to see one of them saying it is not a pure language kind of makes me laugh a little. Since it is the standard form of language we use, it automatically makes me think that the language is ours and is deeply rooted in the "American culture." However, it is really taken from many different places. So, that to me shows that we should be more accepting of cultural differences in language since that is how we got our Standard English in the first place. Then, in the end saying that those educated teachers were less likely to be hired by her because they saw them as better than the students, I can definitely see that this is true even with the little experience being around teachers recently.
ReplyDeleteI agree Amber. How are they deciding what goes into these tests? Are they really considering the multi-cultural group of students that will be trying to pass it?
ReplyDeleteThe discussion of the word "minority" was probably my favorite part of this chapter. "For example, what are the historical antecedents of a 'minority'?" (91) is a question I had never thought about before. I have never been considered a minority, so am I to be classified as a 'majority?' There has never been a question on a survey I have seen that asks one to mark either minority or majority as an answer. I suppose this particular section stood out to me because associating everything different with the term minority can be seen as demeaning, and I have never considered it to be.
ReplyDeleteThese conversations on here make me laugh. First off, I too found it interesting that people find the English language to be so static. I think it would be very interesting to combine the history of English with the project on curse words we talked about earlier. I think we need to show that our language has been borrowed and continues to change.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Rose and Andrew about the phrase African American.
I think that it's sad and frightening that someone would teach English as the only correct language. It's unfortunate that some do not see it as a language that is evolving constantly and will continue to change as long as the world exists.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Katie in that we need to show that our language has been borrowed and continues to change. It would be cool to do a study on how words have changed over time -- their use,definition, etc. A student could choose or be assigned a word and study it's progression over the years..even look to see what words might have come to replace it at times. I did a similar project in high school and had a lot of fun with it. It can re-emphasize the fact that English is ever changing
ReplyDeleteI think it is interesting how society has decided that the speaking of Standard American English is the dominant language that is supposed to be spoken. Who came up with this rule that African American English is not the correct and professional way of speaking? When someone is mocking an African American person, the language is always Ebonics. I think it is sad and embarrassing that some automatically mock that language. While doing so, it is in a demeaning manner. This makes me sad that this it what our acceptance and unacceptance of the standard language has come to.
ReplyDelete