way <strong>of</strong> speaking a language. While all dialects <strong>of</strong> a given language are linguistically legitimate,some achieve social prestige. <strong>In</strong> literate, economically developed societies, <strong>the</strong> dialect spoken bythose with <strong>the</strong> most formal education, <strong>the</strong> highest socioeconomic status and <strong>the</strong> gre<strong>ates</strong>t degree<strong>of</strong> political power tends to acquire <strong>the</strong> gre<strong>ates</strong>t social prestige. Typically, it becomes <strong>the</strong> standardfor <strong>the</strong> culture, for writing and for education. <strong>Sta</strong>ndard dialects also provide a medium throughwhich persons from different linguistic backgrounds can communicate with one ano<strong>the</strong>r. Socialand regional variations may exist within standard dialects as long as <strong>the</strong>y conform to specifiedlinguistic rules, largely grammatical in nature. <strong>Sta</strong>ndard English, <strong>the</strong>refore, should not beconsidered "Nor<strong>the</strong>rn English" or "White English," since it is spoken, in one form or ano<strong>the</strong>r, inall parts <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Un</strong><strong>ited</strong> <strong>Sta</strong>tes and by some members <strong>of</strong> all racial and cultural groups. At <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>rend <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> social spectrum, so called nonstandard dialects are generally spoken by <strong>the</strong> "havenots:" <strong>the</strong> powerless, <strong>the</strong> less educated, <strong>the</strong> less economically well <strong>of</strong>f and <strong>the</strong> less sociallyprominent. While legitimate linguistically, <strong>the</strong>se dialects tend to be unacceptable to <strong>the</strong> "haves"<strong>of</strong> society. <strong>In</strong> American English, nonstandard dialects exist within all racial, ethnic and regionalgroups ( see Table III ). Each dialect is a product <strong>of</strong> distinct social, historical, cultural andeducational factors. All are legitimate in that <strong>the</strong>y represent <strong>the</strong> concepts, needs and intentions <strong>of</strong><strong>the</strong>ir speakers.TABLE III Some Varieties <strong>of</strong> Nonstandard American EnglishAppalachian English"He just kept a begging and a crying and a wanting to go out." (He persisted in begging, cryingand wanting to leave.)Athabascan English (Alaska)"Most time we play games." (Most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> time we play games.)African American English Vernacular"He be scared, but I be brave." (He is usually scared, but l am usually brave.)General American Nonstandard English"don't nobody want none." (Nobody wants any.)Keaukaha English (Hawaii)"I no can place that name." (I cannot place that name.)New York City Nonstandard English"She's a good cook, your mo<strong>the</strong>r." (Your mo<strong>the</strong>r is a good cook.)Sou<strong>the</strong>rn American Nonstandard English"I mon' rest." (I am going to rest.)Spanish <strong>In</strong>fluenced English"Carol left yesterday. I think is coming back tomorrows." (Carol left yesterday. I think she iscoming back tomorrow.)For a variety <strong>of</strong> reasons, including negative public attitudes and inadequate teaching models,nonstandard English speakers <strong>of</strong>ten do not effectively learn standard English in school. Withoutcompetence in standard English, students will fail academically and face diminished career,social and life options. Many students who do learn standard English do so at a great price:devaluation or rejection <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir home or community dialect. When competence in standardEnglish is coupled with rejection <strong>of</strong> one's own home or community dialect, it may lead to seriouspsychological and identity problems (Chambers, 1983). <strong>In</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Un</strong><strong>ited</strong> <strong>Sta</strong>tes, <strong>the</strong> schools' failure© 2008 Dr. Ca<strong>the</strong>rine CollierAll Rights Reserved60
to teach standard English is reflected in <strong>the</strong> poor performance <strong>of</strong> nonstandard English speakerson achievement, aptitude and diagnostic tests. Perhaps <strong>the</strong> most alarming evidence <strong>of</strong> this failureis <strong>the</strong> low performance <strong>of</strong> nonstandard English speakers on tests used to place students inremedial or gifted programs. Virtually all <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se tests presume competence in standard English(Oakland, 1977). Many African American children, usually from working class homes orcommunities, speak a nonstandard variety <strong>of</strong> English. This variety, <strong>of</strong>ten referred to as BlackEnglish Vernacular, is thought by many sociolinguists to reflect African influences on AmericanEnglish, and is reinforced by social isolation, segregation and group identity.Cultural Differences in Discourse<strong>In</strong> addition to differences in pronunciation, vocabulary and grammatical structures amongcultural groups, variations also exist in <strong>the</strong> rules for general discourse in oral communication,covering such specific acts as narratives and conversation. <strong>In</strong> communicating with one ano<strong>the</strong>r,teachers and students naturally will follow <strong>the</strong> assumptions and rules governing discourse within<strong>the</strong>ir respective cultures. Discourse rules govern such aspects <strong>of</strong> communication as:• Opening or closing conversations;• Taking turns during conversations;• <strong>In</strong>terrupting;• Using silence as a communicative device;• Knowing appropriate topics <strong>of</strong> conversation;• <strong>In</strong>terjecting humor at appropriate times;• Using nonverbal behavior;• Expressing laughter as a communicative device;• Knowing <strong>the</strong> appropriate amount <strong>of</strong> speech to be used by participants; and• Sequencing <strong>of</strong> elements during discourse.With respect to narratives, Gee (1985) claims that story telling during sharing time in <strong>the</strong> earlyschool years helps to provide students <strong>the</strong> foundation for reading and writing instruction in latergrades. Both he and Michaels (1981) report that schools and teachers prefer linear, single topicstory telling, <strong>the</strong> style that is compatible with strategies encountered in reading and writingactivities. These topic centered stories are characterized by tightly structured sentences thatreflect on a single or small set <strong>of</strong> highly related topics. The speaker presumes little sharedknowledge with listeners. Topic centered stories, <strong>the</strong>refore, tend to be very explicit and containgreat detail, emphasizing more telling than showing. Topic centered stories are thought by someto be associated with <strong>the</strong> field independent cognitive style. I Gee and Michaels note fur<strong>the</strong>r thatmany working class children, particularly those from oral cultures, tend to prefer a topicassociating narrative style. These story tellers presume a shared knowledge with <strong>the</strong> audience, domore showing than telling and imply linkages among a wide range <strong>of</strong> topics which need not bepresented in temporal sequence. Topic associating narrative style is thought by some to beassociated with <strong>the</strong> field dependent cognitive style. While both narrative styles providemeaningful ways for children to talk about <strong>the</strong>ir experiences and realities, research shows thatstudents who tell topic associating stories tend to be called on less and interrupted more <strong>of</strong>tenthan do children who tell topic centered stories (Michaels, 1981). They also tend to be wrongly© 2008 Dr. Ca<strong>the</strong>rine CollierAll Rights Reserved61
- Page 2 and 3:
"Those who arrive by age 12 or 13 m
- Page 5:
Article I.2 Are Signed Languages "R
- Page 8 and 9:
Biological analyses of the status o
- Page 10 and 11: and beyond, speaking and signing ch
- Page 12 and 13: Conclusion: Are Signed Languages Re
- Page 14 and 15: Article I.3 The Interpreter: Has a
- Page 16 and 17: A few weeks earlier, I had called F
- Page 18 and 19: “We struggled even getting to the
- Page 20 and 21: herself by strapping a cassette rec
- Page 22 and 23: In 1998, after nine years as the ch
- Page 24 and 25: momentary burst of excitement that
- Page 26 and 27: can shape core grammar. Because the
- Page 28 and 29: The authors compared animal and hum
- Page 30 and 31: monkey moved. He followed it with h
- Page 32 and 33: delight, fear, laughter, and surpri
- Page 34 and 35: Piipaío in a hut: Pirahã huts typ
- Page 36 and 37: LEP students, and equitable organiz
- Page 38 and 39: 4. Second language development crea
- Page 41 and 42: curriculum or "teaching to the test
- Page 43 and 44: portfolio work was scanned and stor
- Page 45 and 46: experiences of many groups of stude
- Page 47 and 48: While not disagreeing that interpre
- Page 49 and 50: sound educational practice, however
- Page 51 and 52: arises from the efforts to abstract
- Page 53 and 54: Article II.2 Cross-Cultural Communi
- Page 55 and 56: males who can serve as positive rol
- Page 57 and 58: Understanding another culture is a
- Page 59: Pets and AnimalsWhich animals are v
- Page 63 and 64: Asking personal questions of a pers
- Page 65 and 66: Using Cross Cultural Communication
- Page 67 and 68: Why Do Nonstandard English-Speaking
- Page 69 and 70: Before beginning to teach standard
- Page 71 and 72: • Negative attitudes toward low p
- Page 73 and 74: New standardized tests and assessme
- Page 75 and 76: Each of the behaviors listed above
- Page 77 and 78: Article II.3 Hard Work Hypothesis:
- Page 79 and 80: each point higher in SES, students
- Page 81 and 82: This case does not provide strong s
- Page 83 and 84: Article II.4 Language Acquisition a
- Page 85 and 86: 1992, p. XI). These researchers, wh
- Page 87 and 88: comprehend a word within a specific
- Page 89 and 90: more to the truthfulness of the chi
- Page 91 and 92: This idea of “semilingualism” c
- Page 93 and 94: Article III.1 A Brief Description o
- Page 95 and 96: take different lengths of time to c
- Page 97 and 98: example, should involve the same co
- Page 99 and 100: As with all stages of BICS acquisit
- Page 101 and 102: Assessment techniques at stage 3 ca
- Page 103 and 104: different. Therefore, the social di
- Page 105: integrative motivation. Basically,
- Page 109 and 110: (Ellis, 1985; Hakuta, 1986). Howeve
- Page 111 and 112:
that sociocultural processes have o
- Page 113 and 114:
Article III.3 How Children Acquire
- Page 115 and 116:
phonetic units (unique to signed la
- Page 117 and 118:
Article III.4 Toward a Sociocultura
- Page 119 and 120:
emember is that the fundamental goa
- Page 121 and 122:
The best practices models can be th
- Page 123 and 124:
By focusing on the dialectic betwee
- Page 125 and 126:
intergenerational wisdom shared by
- Page 127 and 128:
Daily Realities RecappedThe above v
- Page 129 and 130:
traditions. At a time in our histor
- Page 131 and 132:
We will now look at two examples of
- Page 133 and 134:
Speakers communicate fluently, main
- Page 135 and 136:
question the effects of such attitu
- Page 137 and 138:
Article IV.3 Culture Change: Effect
- Page 139 and 140:
and psychological characteristics o
- Page 141 and 142:
Contraryto what wewere expecting, t
- Page 143 and 144:
Article V.1 Assessment in ESL & Bil
- Page 145 and 146:
vocabulary does the student lack?Is
- Page 147 and 148:
whether they are LEP and to provide
- Page 149 and 150:
Fourth, ESL and bilingual program s
- Page 151 and 152:
competent reader/writer. All versio
- Page 153 and 154:
Table 1Comparison of Recent Accultu
- Page 155 and 156:
unilinear model, which measures the
- Page 157 and 158:
an English-only instructional progr
- Page 159 and 160:
Article V.3 Assessment of English L
- Page 161 and 162:
8. Change answers only for a very g
- Page 163 and 164:
Riles, 1979; Jose P. v Ambac, 1983)
- Page 165 and 166:
proficiency is often underestimated
- Page 167 and 168:
Finally, when second language reade
- Page 169 and 170:
for their decisions, noting issues
- Page 171 and 172:
As mentioned above, when the transi
- Page 173 and 174:
ather than generic adjectives and t
- Page 175 and 176:
their imagined points of view. Ther
- Page 177 and 178:
English texts and demonstrate progr
- Page 179:
using inter-district teams). In the