Students' Rights to Their Own Language - Essay Example

Rights to Their Own Language Since time immemorial, the number of immigrants entering the United s of America has grown tremendously.Some are native English speakers while others speak Spanish, French, Germans, among other languages. The need for education is one of the factors that lead people to America. There has been a great concern on the language of teaching, writing, and expression. American middle schools, colleges, and universities are under pressure to take a common position on basic education. Considering America is an English-speaking nation, the language of teaching, writing and giving any education instruction is preferably English. Immigrant Parents advocate for their children to learn the English language because it is the language of opportunities in America, where they reside (Goode Web). They argue that teaching the students in their native languages will jeopardize the student’s chances in the job market where the English language is dominant. This notion is however, facing criticism with some parties arguing that students should reserve the right to their own patterns and varieties of language while writing their academic work. Therefore, there have been arguments and counter arguments for and against the policy statement adopted by the National Council of Teachers of English in 1974, Students Right to Their Own Language. This paper briefly discusses pros and cons of National Council of Teachers of English policy on language and then supports the statement. The use of one’s language in communication is a complicated phenomenon. The way we speak and the way we write our academic works is largely different. In recent times, uniformity manifests between the two although much success is in the offing in accommodating communication in diverse dialects as proposed in the statement. The use of the written English faces criticism from the inclusive American minorities who have proposed a shift from this norm. A dialect is a language used by a defined group of people. The diversity in dialects is because of different age or educational groups that people belong (CCCC 5). As such, most speakers profess more than one dialect, which pose a great challenge to America’s education sector. Since a dialect closely relates to a culture, accepting a new dialect is like accepting a new culture and the reverse is true. Thus, switching a dialect is a complicated issue. A rejection of any dialect in favor of the American dialect is an act of discrimination and exertion of dominance over less prevalent dialects. Indeed, the success of any speaker cannot be defined by dialect. Undeniably, the right to student’s native dialects deserves respect. Additionally, as individuals tend to maturity, they incline to their language patterns, which are difficult to change (CCCC 7). In fact, the idea of forcing an adolescent to learn the Standard English dialect is a hard assignment that might work against them while competing with students who are naturally fluent in the English language. For the purposes of fairness, the students should use their own dialect in academic work. Similarly, no dialect is good to dismiss others in general use. Therefore, the plural student society will require multiple languages to address the education curriculum needs. Another challenge that resides in the Edited American English (EAE) is the ability to write. The EAE requires a lot of precision in writing, spelling, punctuations, and interpretation. It warrants competence to learn how to speak and write a different dialect fluently. Hence, students should use the dialect they are fluent in speaking, writting, and interpreting in their academic work. Additionally, the dialect that students use in reading does not affect the interpreted meaning of any piece of an academic work since reading involves decoding the meaning and not decoding the utterances (CCCC 9). Hence, the adoption by National Council of Teachers of English in 1974, on the Students Right to Their Own Language, was relevant (NCTE Web). To achieve this, the teachers must have the experiences and training in respect of the diverse dialects. It is thus the responsibility of all English teachers to empower all students in better speaking and writing styles regardless of their dialects as quoted in the resolution. However, there is a need for a written dialect (Goode Web). This will serve the student’s and the entire community with a common means of communication and representation. The Edited American English is dominant in print media, social media, government protocols, court processes and in the job markets (CCCC 8). As such, it will be necessary to restrict the students in the standard American dialect. This will ensure that the students get equal competitive opportunities. Otherwise, non-standard dialects will face elimination from the job competition on basis of incompetence in the acceptable dialect (Fish Web). Additionally, the ability of a student to perform cannot be limited to his dialect because some will face challenges in writing either dialect. In fact, all students face problems in transferring fluent speeches to skillful writing (Fish Web). Additionally, dialects play a very little role in determining the ability of a student to write EAE. Hence, actual performance is not about the dialects as the resolution assumes. Similarly, all speakers have the ability to modulate and change their dialect. In fact, students make language changes depending on various circumstances. Hence, the question will not be about the likelihood of students changing their language but the ability to overcome the defined boundaries between certain dialects (CCCC 8). This depends on the student’s will to accept other dialects and is thus beyond the teachers scope of duty contrary to what the resolution assumes. All languages including the EAE possess the same structure. Hence, the focus on the native dialects as seen in the resolution is not justified. The idea of passing this resolution to other professional bodies may not be beneficial. This is because other organisations might not accommodate other dialects in their jurisdiction. The legal profession largely applies the EAE and other legal languages with no allowance for other dialects. I support the content of the resolution with informed reasons. The fact that we have diverse languages and dialects in America proves the diverse cultures we have therein. Because America does not discriminate against race, this characteristic should extend to the education sector. Learning to write and writing competently in the EAE has proved to be difficult among students especially those with non-American dialect. Hence, students should use their most fluent language and dialects in expressing themselves in all academic work. This will enable the students to communicate their points with ease and clarity. This will ensure fairness in the education sector, boost self-esteem, and guarantee success. The support of the American dialect will amount to discrimination of my dialect and by extension the adoption of another culture that I am not ready to profess. In fact switching my dialect to another dialect is more complicated than learning how to write competently in my dialect. Additionally, the diverse and plural world that we are living in will require us to be multiple in all aspects including communication. It will also ensure conservation of one’s culture that defines way of life, code of ethics, and personality. The aim of making sure that students and teachers understand and respect the diversity of all dialects is significant in uniting and promoting democracy in America (NCTE Web). In conclusion, I find that there was need for American education sector to take a common position in matters relating to the language and dialect use in academic work. Teachers of composition and communication should respond to the diverse students' dialects (NCTE Web). The fact that there are many immigrants in the US who harbor different cultures, and the fact that more will be coming to the education sector, necessitated the resolution by the National Council of Teachers of English in 1974, on Students Right to Their Own Language (NCTE Web). Although the resolution put more focus on allowing student to use their convenient language and dialects, it is arguably true that this is not enough to boost their performance in writing. The training skills and experience required on the teachers is very significant in articulating this resolution. However, more training that is practical is necessary to implement this resolution. Additionally, more research on performance and the effects of the diverse cultural backgrounds as manifested by students in their academic work is important. Works Cited Conference on College Composition and Communication (CCCC). Students’ Right to Their Own Language. NCTE, 1974. Web 5, March 2012. Fish, Stanley What Should Colleges Teach? Part 3 opinionator, 2009. Web 5, March 2012. < http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/07/what-should-colleges-teach-part-3/> Goode, Stephen. Porter Challenges Bilingual Education Web 5, March 2012. < http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_34_17/ai_78334941/ > NCTE Resolution on the Students' Right to Their Own Language NCTE, 1974 Web 5, March 2012. < http://www.ncte.org/positions/statements/righttoownlanguage> Read More