Baker/Dowdy/Kaplan Discussion Questions [Brad Jensen]

"Ovuh Dyuh" -Joanne Kilgour Dowdy

Joanne Kilgour Dowdy is a Professor at Kent State University, Ohio. A graduate of Juilliard School in the theatre division, Dr. Dowdy continues to use her drama training to prepare teachers for the literacy classroom, and as a performer who facilitates writing development through interactive workshops. She did her Ph.D. at Chapel Hill, North Carolina, and teaches in the Literacy Studies program of Teaching, Learning and Curriculum Studies department at Kent State University. Her major research interests include documenting the experiences of Black women involved in education from adult basic literacy to higher education. She has published five books to date, including The Skin That We Speak: Thoughts on Language and Culture in the Classroom (The New Press, Publisher) and GED Stories: Black Women & Their Struggle for Social Equity (Peter Lang, Publisher). http://www.cmnh.org/site/AtTheMuseum/OnExhibit/Race/TownHall/Dowdy.aspx

1.) "In order for a Trinidadian to make progress on the ladder of success, she has to embrace the English language. If it means forgetting that the language of everyone else around you bars witness to two hundred years of cross-pollination, then so be it."

. After being wooed by Delpit's theory of "culture of power," this first person account forces me to question the intent of giving children access to "skills." How far should one emphasize the acquiring of "skills" that will enable access to the "culture of power?" When does this type of teaching become morally and ethically misguided? Does it ever? Can a teacher emphasize both cultural authenticity and a mastering of "skills?"

2.) "Soul and reality occupy different linguistic spaces. This conflict duplicates itself in every aspect of life, when the colonized tries to negotiate the two worlds of language by building bridges from one side to the other...The war will be won when she who is marginalized comes to speak more in her own language, and people accept her communication as valid and representative."

. Is this dream of the war being "won" a realistic one? What are the ways in which we as educators can fight this war in our classrooms and attempt to unite the souls of our students with the realities of their world?

"Trilingualism" -Judy Baker

1.) "Learning a formal grammar is a choice a student makes- not a choice a teacher makes for the student. This was a real revelation to my students. Many understood that they had already made some choices in this regard, but not with the sanction and support of teachers, and not with a full and careful discussion of their options."

. How can teachers better introduce this language acquisition as a "choice" for students to make? What are the pros to this choice and what are the cons? Are students in high school/middle school responsible enough to make this decision for themselves?

2.) Baker emphasizes the fact that grammatical and linguistic education is indeed a political endeavor. Do you think student achievement would increase if this fact were to be explicitly taught in the classroom? Are the high stakes of education in urban settings communicated to students enough? How could the iteration of these explicit political agendas affect motivation in the classroom?

3.) If Baker and Dowdy were to discuss their articles over coffee do you think they would agree with one another? Why or why not?

"Cultural Thought Patterns in Inter-Cultutral Education" -Robert B. Kaplan

Robert B. Kaplan is Professor Emeritus, Applied Linguistics and past Director of the American Language Institute, University of Southern California, where he was a member of faculty since from 1960 to 1995. He also currently serves as Professor of Applied Linguistics in the Graduate School of Applied Language Study, Meikai University, Japan. He currently resides in Port Angeles, Washington. Dr. Kaplan is the past Editor-in-Chief and currently a member of the Editorial Board of the Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, which he founded in 1980; he is also a member of the Editorial Board of the Oxford University Press International Encyclopedia of Linguistics, and he serves on the editorial boards of several scholarly journals.

http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/usia/EUSIA/education/engteaching/kap0299.htm

1.) "The foreign-student paper is out of focus because the foreign student is employing a rhetoric and a sequence of thought which violate the expectations of the native reader."

Here, we assume the "foreign" reader to be a non-native student who has an L1 other than English. Kaplan suggests that one's rhetoric and linguistic expression on the page is determined by one's culture and native language. However, what if "foreign" students were all English speaking students emerging from various socio-economic backgrounds and cultures within the U.S.? Do you think discrepancies in rhetoric would exist then? If so, what implications does this have for a diverse classroom?

2.) So far we have discussed giving students "skills" in areas such as grammar, spelling, and speech to help them access Delpit's 'culture of power.' However, Kaplan is now suggesting that we also need to instruct them on 'correct' English rhetoric and thought process. When does "skills" education come in direct violation of a student's identity? Does teaching someone how to 'think' English cross the line between education and the creation of white, middle class robots?