Should Colleges Only Teach Standard Written English? by Devi Nina Bingham

 

I believe that requiring college students to write only in Standard Written English (SWE) is a complex issue, and I can see both sides of the debate. My opinion tends to fall somewhere in the middle. Let me explain. The traditional argument in favor of requiring SWE, also known as Standard American English (SAE), makes some sense. To succeed in the “real world,” which means to be a success in business, academics, and socially, students must be familiar if not fluent in SAE, and the classroom is the most appropriate place to learn to communicate effectively. It is said that the purpose of academics is to prepare the student to succeed, both professionally and personally; it is not to make them feel comfortable. That is not academia's purpose. In fact, learning new things can make us distinctly uncomfortable because we must stretch ourselves. Thus, when this question is analyzed through an academic lens alone, then yes-requiring students to write and communicate in SWE is correct.

Having said that, if you look at this question through a different lens, the lens of a mental health professional (which I am), and especially through the lens of Psychology (which was my undergrad), it looks different. Allowing multilingual students to use their dialects in the classroom respects their cultural heritage. Using vernacular English such as Black Vernacular English (BVE) that has its own grammar rules, validates the English as a Second Language (ESL) student. Allowing these differences to coexist with traditional pedagogy will inspire a higher quality of engagement in the class, and a higher caliber of writing from multilingual students. It will also encourage other instructors and American students not to take part in cultural bias which comes easily to us all, whether we like to admit it or not.

This debate reminds me of something important I learned in a Psychology class as an undergrad. The class was asked whether we believed we had unconscious bias, what is known as implicit bias, against people of other cultures. My daughter's father was African American and very dark skinned, and my daughter was biracial and looked like her dad, so I responded no, confidently-I had no implicit bias. How could I if my daughter and her father were Black? Then our class participated in a university research study to test for implicit racial bias.

During the online test we were shown a series of pictures that flashed quickly on the screen, and for each face we had to make a split-second decision. We had to choose whose face we felt more comfortable with and press the arrow either way. Sometimes the face was Caucasian, sometimes, Asian, Hispanic, African American, or Native American. It went so fast that you did not have time to think, you just had to react. At the end of the 30 minutes, I felt that I had not shown any bias. The results came back several weeks later. There was not one person in the class who did not have some bias. I was 55% biased in favor of Caucasians. In other words, I would unconsciously give a 5% advantage to a white person over any other. When I got my score, I was shocked and dismayed because I have always prided myself on being culturally sensitive.

That study showed our class the truth. No matter how hard we try not to be biased towards our own group (meaning race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, etc.) we are unconsciously and evolutionarily predisposed to preferring our own groups. This is because, according to Evolutionary Psychology, in our ancient past if you did not choose your own group, you would not have lived long. Genetically it is bred into us to have in-group bias.

I share this eye-opening experience because you may think you are not biased; everybody thinks that. But it is important to acknowledge that even educators are biased. It does not mean being aware of it will stop the bias; it will happen unconsciously. But to be aware of our inclinations is half the battle. “Findings suggest that reading these studies impacted teachers' understandings of race and racism in terms of their teaching, as well as in terms of their personal relationships to race and racism, increasing their inclination and ability to address race and anti-racism” (Kempf, 2022).

In an effort to mitigate these inequities, Catherine Savini (2021) proposes allowing students to use their dialects; allowing them to write in their vernacular English or their first language, and to implement grading contracts with them “that value labor, effort, and process over standardization.” Then she suggests asking these students to write as if they were going to present their papers to a public audience. She suggests allowing them to use their familiar, culturally inherited language, but to make it understandable enough for a general audience. It seems to me if a student used their own vernacular, but a general audience could clearly still understand them, then mission accomplished. However, whether an audience will appreciate listening to or reading a paper in another vernacular is unknown. It depends upon the audience. If it is a majority white audience, they may not appreciate alternative vernacular because as we have seen, it is not their way of speaking.

I have witnessed linguistic prejudice, usually from white people towards people of color with comments such as, “If you don’t know how to speak our language then go back to your country.” My father and his side of the family were hardcore racists, so I grew up enduring and detesting comments like this. I believe that it is not until you yourself are different in some way, or someone you are with is different, that you can see it. 

 Works Cited

 

Savini, C. 10 Ways to Tackle Linguistic Bias in our Classrooms. Inside Higher Education, 2021.

 Kempf, A. Toward Deeper Unconscious Racial Bias Work in Education. Teachers College Record, 2022. Toward Deeper Unconscious Racial Bias Work in Education: DragonQuest (opal-libraries.org)