DOL Unpacked

I completely agree with the points made by Darren Crovits, in regards to his position on DOL’s, and how there effectiveness is minimal because they are not tuned to the students learn.  DOL’s from what I can remember only critic one style of writing—American Standard English. This automatically sets students up for failure because the teacher is essentially assuming the student “should” know the correct grammatical form. I can see this being harmful for ESL students, because they are not learning the “why” or how to look for it in their personal live. Thus making a permanent change rather than focusing on how to get the points. Crovitz mentioned how language errors were primarily treated as learner deficiency rather than an opportunity for the instructor to demonstrate another that applies to the way that students learn. Which is nonsense, since it would be the ethical thing teachers are supposed to do, right? I understand that teachers “barrow” lesson plans, pedagogies and, other insightful material. Yet at this point Crovits (I believe) is showing how indolent it is making them. DOL’s take up about ten-fifteen minutes of class time, if the focus is only on how to make the sentence correct, that does not leave time for the why and how for those who don’t understand. Thus the saga of red marks continues.

To combat this problem, my group and I have come up with an alternative DOL lesson that focuses on the context and situation. Our task was to transform simple sentences into another way of saying them. An example(s) from the article was:

Starter sentence:

You’re fired.

Transformed sentence (basically another way of saying something):

Sorry, Bob, but with the poor economy we have to let you go.

I’m breaking up with you.

My group and I came up with three starter sentences of our own:

Lemme geta numba nine wit some mac sauce (Almost everyone I know back home orders from McDonalds like this…even Beyoncé)

Dude let’s hangout!

President Obama, it was my absolute pleasure and joy getting to chauffeur you around.

Within our lesson plan, I believe our goal is in essence to teach our classmates how to codeswitch; in their writing and while they are dealing with certain groups or people. Like—you wouldn’t talk to me—a student and friend and manager and coworker and club member the way you would your mother or boyfriend or sister or professor. This lesson will prepare them to deal with a mass of different types and kinds of people because of diverse saying one thing can be. To make sure our classmates truly understand our lesson we will give each group a series of sentence and ask them to transform them. Then, choosing the one they like they will act it out and give a short explanation of how transforming the sentence change the context (relationship) of the situation. I think this also help our classmates with reading material from other classes as well since they will be able to differentiate the material accordingly rather than seeing every piece of reading material as a chore or a textbook. (If they do not already like reading)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Push Past the Standard--That's Small Thinking

Between Christensen’s article: “Teaching Standard English: Whose Standard?” and the first couple chapters of “Alive!” reinforces the pedagogy I plan to teach with. I want my students to be proud of what makes them unique from their peers. The power of language is a big identifier of where and what they have come from nonetheless what have learned…if anything.

Christensen’s editorial gave insight on how teach American Standard English—which seems to be the only English type of English acceptable, is actually hindering students because they are unable to express themselves the way they know how without feeling like it needs perfect or done a certain way.  Its almost like really loving a sport but never trying out because peers and other influences—social media, professional athletes, self-doubt, or; the kid who is practically the best at everything is always highlighting what they think is a shortcoming.

In the beginning of Christensen’s article, she explained the teaching style of many teachers today. Basically a 45mintue lesson do’s and do nots in English grammar. They do not take in consideration of English Language Learners (ELL). This can be frustrating for students who are not native English speakers because they are being asked to discard of their culture and what is “normal” for them to assimilate to something they have not had much time or practice.

I think one of the key ideas Christensen displayed throughout her work, was involving her students into each other lives. Allowing them to hear and feel connected to their peers through the power, sincerity and voice of their writing. Which leads me to Goal A and Goal C from Grammar Alive!  Blatantly expresses how every language has a set a basic foundation of grammar rules and through English language variety we are able to empower and encourage students to uncover language structures. (Haussamen, 2003) Before taking this grammar class I believed that there was only standard American English and then everything that was not proper—written or spoken was slang, ebonics or “wrong” because it didn’t SOUND politically correct. If the person who suppose to be over me cannot decode Mary be happy or Shoot! Girrrrll if you don’ stop it, I’ma throw yo butt into nex week... I think it is only natural to believe that I, and others like me who speak anything but the norm/standard is wrong.

Towards the end of Chapter 2, it gives an example of a teacher used a short story called Flossie and Fox to introduce students (children) to code switching. Code switching is defined as the practice of alternating between two or more languages or varieties of language in conversation. Week after week students would hear the story of Flossie and the Fox—one-character speaking (what is deemed) the proper way and the other, in a different English dialect.  The teacher eventually created a space where students were care free about switching between each character, each dialect because of their love for the book. And when one student used the wrong dialect for the character another student was able to correct them without feeling offended because they, themselves could recognize the mistake they made.

From these two readings they have only encouraged me to teach my students the importance of language and its connect-ability if we allow ourselves to be humble to languages and things we do not understand.