Language+and+Society+Final+Exam

//**Context:** For our final exam, we were asked to write a letter of reflection to Dr. Hartman explaining how our daybook became a learning tool for us throughout the semester by pointing back to evidence in our previously submitted portfolio. //

Dear Dr. Hartman,

My daybook has been a true source of learning and reflection for me over the course of the semester. My first entry, which is not mentioned in my portfolio discusses how after reading the intro. to EWA, "I can see how LG assertion that 'the way we use language is more complex and meaningful than any single fact about our bodies' (p. 5)." Through my experiences as a teacher and my dealings with people on a daily basis, I've been able to see first-hand how language truly is an identification marker for anyone. I'm going to walk you through my daybook chronologically using the entries from my portfolio to show you how throughout the course of the semester, my daybook has been a place for me to explore, grow, and expand my own ideas about the complexity and meaning of language, specifically within a high school English classroom environment and my personal life.

My first entry from September 6 highlights a conversation I had with my AP students one day about how the spellings of words have changed over time. The work from class that week was to learn about the history of the English language through a brief Powerpoint by Dr. Parker, and with a good refresher behind me, I was able to have a brief discussion with my students about the history of English (objective 2) and why it is so difficult for anyone to truly master. My students continue to reference this conversation when we discuss why words are spelled differently in texts from different time periods. Being able to show my students that language does change in this way has enabled me to have conversations with them about how language is always changing - it is never static.

During my notes for Chapter 1 on September 6, LG discussed the impact of assimilation on language and how this is a telling history of our own desire to make and create oppression based on language. I cannot count the amount of times I have heard my students, and even some members of my family, proclaim that "If you can't speak English, you shouldn't be here." What does this say about our (English speaker's) opinion of others who don't speak English at all? It's common knowledge that many groups of people have issues with L2 learners in this country, but doesn't this change the attitude of the L2 speaker or an immigrant's attitude toward the dominant culture? This is one thing that I have struggled to deal with over the course of the semester because, like I said before, some of my family members feel this way, and I can' t help but almost be angry with them concerning their idea of power and privilege that they believe English brings to people in our country. How do I deal with this - maintain relationships with those people in my family and hold on to the new knowledge and appreciation I have for what language subordination does to people? I'm still grappling with this - I think I always will.

 As a teacher, communicating with my students is a daily occurrence, whether it is through speech or writing. When James and Lesley Melroy were quoted in Chapter 1, I picked up that perhaps extending this "taking spoken language for granted" trend that seems to be occurring in our culture, specifically in our school systems (there is only ONE new "standard" for speaking in the Common Core while there is an entire section on writing), into my writing workshop portion of my classroom would not only be beneficial for my students, but for myself as well. I would be able to put emphasis on speaking during individual conferences with my students where emphasis is not always placed in a school. Traditionally, and sadly, many classrooms at my school still operate on the "student as depository" school of thought, and this has a major influence on how students converse with me. The impact of that type of educational force on students' language (objective 3) could be altered, even if just a little bit, by my willingness to utilize language - any type of language - in a constructive and conducive way.

I am what most people call a transplant. I came to the South to escape from my small, rural hometown, only to find a new home in a small, rural town. However, coming from a region of the country where my L1 accent is different because of a choice I may subconsciously make (EWA, p. 42), I am still considered part of a "different group." In my daybook on September 13 (portfolio 1), I noted how I have seen how students who speak the same way - my students who speak AAVE, SWVE or some sort of hodge-podge - group together during small group activities. Over the course of the semester, I've taken notes about some other commonalities that might be present between group members, but many times, L1 accent similarities is the only commonality between group members. Even when I ask students to choose different groups than normal, they still tend to "stick with what they know" and continue to group with students who have similar L1 accents. I've wondered why this is, and may be because of the perceptions that may be constructed because of the variation of L1 accents I have in my classroom during all three of my classes (objective 5).

During chapter 3 when LG discusses the "standard language myth," she posts that "something as important as language cannot be left to itself - there must be 'experts'" (p. 58). After looking back over this entry (September 21) in my daybook and contemplating the meaning of this as a native English speaker and English teacher, I cannot help but wonder if **I** am sometimes viewed as an "expert" because of my knowledge of English as a native speaker and as a teacher. Personally, I do not want that type of responsibility - how can I say who is "right" and who is "wrong"? It has been clearly established that in the United States, we feed the "mainstream English" beast and how linguists (objective 1) have attempted to prove that MUSE does not exist - it cannot exist. Why do my students ask me if how they pronounce "aunt" is correct and I reply to them that both are correct, they are not satisfied. I guess it's because there is a deeply entrenched cultural history of accents (objective 5) and because of their inclination to feel perceived as "wrong" in an educational culture where messing up just a little bit means absolute failure, they feel there must be one "correct" way to pronounce anything.

After LG lays the foundation of her argument in the first three chapters of EWA, my notes in my daybook start asking more questions rather than responding to her ideas/thoughts/conclusions. Looking back, I believe that this is where the lines begin to blur between what I thought I knew about language and what LG was trying to convey to me and teach me. On October 1 for chapter 4, LG talks about how "dominant institutions promote the notion of an overarching, homogeneous standard language...[which is a] devaluation of all that is not politically, culturally or socially mainstream [and a] validation of social (and linguistic) values of dominant institution" (p. 65). And this is where my greatest question, I believe of the semester comes from. How does all of what LG says inherently change the way I teach and communicate because I am a part of that "dominant culture" - I am white, upper middle class - even though I may not want to be part of this practice? Do I do this subconsciously because of my own social and cultural background? Is there any way to truly avoid preaching a "standard" language inside of a classroom? I've learned over the course of the semester that this is possible. Little by little, and maybe just within the confines of my room, it is possible to validate the variety and nature of dialects of my students (objective 5) so that my students can feel comfortable with their own language, their own identity, in my classroom.

As a I sat down to craft my Ning post for chapter 4 on October 2, I found myself asking more questions and figuring out "answers." But now that I look back at this, I think that this was the best thing for me in order to learn and grow in this type of thinking. I have been a part of language discrimination before, and I've been lucky enough to be surrounded by different accents and dialects my whole life, but through this chapter, I realized that many people haven' t had that social and educational opportunity. When we, as speakers of English, exclude accents and/or dialects, we are composing and reinforcing the idea of "other" in a society where "other" was never meant to exist. Going back to the history of our country, we wanted a place where "all men are created equal" - to me, equal also means in terms of language - but we seem to have strayed from this in order to simply make a "standard" seem ideal in the world of scholarship and opportunity.

Being able to discuss current events with my students is one thing I pride myself on, and while I was taking notes on chapter 5, I recalled the influx of negative and derogatory language surrounding Muslims. The "repeating machine" that Roland Barthes mentions about the "official institutions of language" came up during a discussion recently in my classroom. We were watching a video clip about the anniversary of 9/11 and one of my students proclaimed proudly that if he could, he would blow up all of those "towel heads" in their "desert huts" and solve the problem for good. Without missing a beat, another student chimed and talked about how not all Muslims are like the terrorists who planned the tragedy of 9/11 and that by stereotyping those people, we weren't giving them the opportunity to let their own stories be heard. I believe this is what LG is trying to convey throughout this whole book. The language we choose to use - and the way we react to language being used - is a part of our educational and cultural history.

In chapter 6, LG talks about how "uniformity in language will do this [create a homogeneous mass] - nothing else will...the language of the greatest, most powerful and enterprising nationalities beneath the sun" (p. 116) become the "only" language that one can speak in order to prosper. In my daybook, I noted that this was like "language genocide." Simply because another language (or variation of our own language is different), people decide that it's not worth having or worth speaking, so an attempt is made to eradicate it which creates a sense of power (objective 4). How is this not totalitarianism in language on our part? At one point in our history, the US prided ourselves on our cultural diversity, but when did language become separated from one's culture or identity? Like LG says at the beginning of the book, language is more of a marker than any physical aspect of our body. When we cannot divide based on race or ethnicity, we turn to language. I believe, that with the knowledge and growth I've done through this class, it's my job to impart inclusion, validation and acceptance of all types of language to my students by being accepting of everyone's language.

During my work in chapter 7 was when I was in the midst of doing my research for my action research proposal and I was reading James Paul Gee (who, by the way, is one of my heroes now - I SO want to be like him) and I had an immediate "ah ha!" moment when LG discusses how "the news media representatives vigorously advance the notion of homogeneity, directly and indirectly" (p. 135). Here, I believe LG is also talking about what Gee would call "non-language stuff," which paired with "language in action" creates Discourse. Regardless of what the media says, how they say it - through their relationships, significance, identities or politics - makes more of an impact on us as consumers. I've extended this into my field research project for this class (I know - not in my daybook, but it connects) about how I can see Gee's ideas about Discourse working through my students and what those implications mean for me as a teacher and a teacher-researcher (objective 7).

Before our reading of chapter 9, we were asked to view a slideshow presentation about grammar and what it truly means. When I went back through my daybook to do my last portfolio, this was one of the entries that still boggles me. When we talk and write about "grammar" as a part of language in school and "normal" conversation, most people associate it with was is "proper" or "correct" in language usage. However, that is NOT what grammar truly is. One of my questions on November 13th was how and when do we learn these distinctions and why are we NOT taught what grammar really isn't. One particular issue comes up for me concerning this word in our language because of the insistence that some of the "professionals" and "experts" in education put on the idea that grammar IS about correctness. Where does this shift occur? Has it occurred through education? If so, how can we start to move and shape this way of thinking to a different route to identify and ask students to truly understand what grammar is? Along the same lines, how can we get other less "radical" people to realize that AAVE has phonetic/syntactical features that any other language also exhibits? I even learned why my students who speak AAVE use "be" in some cases and not in others - it deals with habitual behavior! The dominance of MUSE is almost telling my students, who can clearly communicate with me in AAVE, that their language doesn't matter; ergo, their identity surrounding that language doesn't matter. Here, I believe is where education comes in.

Like I said before, this text has truly asked and required me to dig and ask some tough questions of myself, and over the course of the semester, I can tell that my language with and about my students has undergone a transformation. I now pick up on the perpetuation of an accent, much like Jeff Foxworthy in his "...You Might be a Redneck" skit, to associate certain stereotypes with language or to simply subordinate another English dialect or accent. To say that certain variations and accents of English are not subordinated in our culture is to be ignorant of plain facts. However, it is possible for us, especially as teachers, to challenge those ideas and help create an environment, if only in our classrooms, of validation.

I guess all in all, I can say that I've grown more than I expected. When I first started this class, I didn't think of language as an identification marker - one that partially makes me who I am. But like I was trying to explain to my mom about what the point of this class is that language is like fingerprints or snowflakes. Everyone's language is different in some way, shape or form, but not one is any less important or telling of who we are as a person. When I give my students, and the people around me, the opportunity to use their own language and validate the differences I may have with them in language, I offer them a piece of me, too. My language choices and nuances identify me even more than my fiery hair color or my bubbly personality. To end, I'm going to leave you with what I call a "funny". One of my students from my 3rd period class was in NYC visiting his mom, who is there on visit, for the weekend. When he arrived at JFK on Friday, he sent me a message on facebook that said exactly this. "Every here talks like you. I love it." Even though he may not see the significance in this statement, after this class, I can see that I'm slowly but surely validating language in my classroom, even my own.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">While I have missed face-to-face interaction (and possibly the conversations that could have come from just listening to each other) - I think that this class has truly been the most changing for me, simply because it has led me to my action research project, and perhaps a new career path for me if all goes well. As I close this, I do just want to say thank you for all of the encouragement and support you've given me this semester. The last month has been difficult for me being so far away from my family, but knowing that I am a part of this program and that I'm doing something that I love and having the support of a professor who truly believes in me and pushes me to do my absolute best has helped me find a sense of peace. Thank you.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Sincerely,

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Lorelei N. Futrelle