際際滷

際際滷Share a Scribd company logo
April Cobos
EFFECTIVE
PEDAGOGICAL TOOLS
FOR MULTILINGUAL AND
NONSTANDARD DIALECT
STUDENTS IN THE
WRITING CLASSROOM
My main objective is to advocate for more
professional development opportunities in
the form of conferences, workshops, and
in-services for current and future English
instructors that allow for a more well-
rounded understanding of how to work
with nonstandard dialect and multilingual
students in the classroom.
PURPOSE:
To have current and future English college
level instructors walk away from linguistic
and language based professional
development with a better understanding
of how to provide student agency for
students with nonstandard dialects in the
various stages of their own writing
process.
GOAL:
 Overview of common problems with nonstandard
dialect students and multilingual students in the
classroom.
 Explore scholarship, specifically bidialectialism,
critical contrastive rhetoric and code-meshing.
 Provide instructors with pedagogical tools that
can be applied to specific classroom settings
 Provide instructors effective, best pedagogical
practices in their own classrooms and to find
methods for transforming current practices into
more effective practices.
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
OBJECTIVES
Baxter and Hollands categories of
student awareness:
 Low awareness:
Those Black American students who
speak Ebonics and lack adequate code-
switching abilities
 Some awareness:
Those Black American students who
speak Ebonics and show some code-
switching abilities
 High awareness:
Those Black American students who
speak Standard English only or who are
bidialectical, speaking Ebonics and
having strong code-switching abilities
(Baxter and Holland 149)
Baxter and
Holland present
a study about
the levels of
awareness of
code-switching
in a study to
suggest that
instructors need
to provide more
awareness to
their
nonstandard
dialect students
to allow them to
have student
agency over
their own
choices in the
writing
classroom.
Rosina Lippi-
Greens text
would be a
valuable resource
for a professional
development for
English
instructors. It
covers
nonstandard
dialects, language
myths, Standard
English myths,
etc.
≠In aiming for praxis with and among students,
critical teachers consistently question what they
do and critique the means by which they teach
students.
There is a need for consistent and constant
reevaluation of purpose and methodology. In
this regard, teachers ask themselves:
What am I doing?, Where is it leading?,
What do I intend to achieve?, Where
might I be better informed?
KUBOTA AND LEHNER
CRITICAL CONTRASTIVE RHETORIC (PG. 23)
The differences
between asking
students to
code-switch
and asking
students to
code-mesh.
They advocate
for code-
meshing in
order to
provide more
STUDENT
AGENCY.
CANAGARJAH
AND LUNA
CODE-MESHING STRATEGIES
C A N AG A R A JA H A N D M I C H A E L - L U N A , 6 0
 Baxter, Milton, and Rochelle Holland. Addressing the Needs
of Students Who Speak a Nonstandard English Dialect. Adult
Basic Education and Literacy Journal 1.3 (Fall 2007) 145-
153. EBSCO. Web. 29 January 2013.
 Kubota, Ryuko, and Al Lehner. Toward Critical Contrastive
Rhetoric. Journal of Second Language Writing 13: (2004), 7-
27. ERIC. Web. 4 March 2013.
 Lippi-Green, Rosina. English With An Accent. 2nd Edition.
Routledge, New York: 2012. Print.
------Companion Website. Routledge. Web. 13 February 2013.
http://www.routledge.com/cw/lippi-green-9780415559119/
 Michael-Luna, Sarah, and A. Suresh Canagarajah.
Multilingual Academic Literacies:Pedagogical Foundations for
Code Meshing in Primary and Higher Education.Journal of
Applied Linguistics 4.1 (2007): 55-77. EBSCO. Web. 17 Feb
2013.
WORKS CITED

More Related Content

E poster

  • 1. April Cobos EFFECTIVE PEDAGOGICAL TOOLS FOR MULTILINGUAL AND NONSTANDARD DIALECT STUDENTS IN THE WRITING CLASSROOM
  • 2. My main objective is to advocate for more professional development opportunities in the form of conferences, workshops, and in-services for current and future English instructors that allow for a more well- rounded understanding of how to work with nonstandard dialect and multilingual students in the classroom. PURPOSE:
  • 3. To have current and future English college level instructors walk away from linguistic and language based professional development with a better understanding of how to provide student agency for students with nonstandard dialects in the various stages of their own writing process. GOAL:
  • 4. Overview of common problems with nonstandard dialect students and multilingual students in the classroom. Explore scholarship, specifically bidialectialism, critical contrastive rhetoric and code-meshing. Provide instructors with pedagogical tools that can be applied to specific classroom settings Provide instructors effective, best pedagogical practices in their own classrooms and to find methods for transforming current practices into more effective practices. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES
  • 5. Baxter and Hollands categories of student awareness: Low awareness: Those Black American students who speak Ebonics and lack adequate code- switching abilities Some awareness: Those Black American students who speak Ebonics and show some code- switching abilities High awareness: Those Black American students who speak Standard English only or who are bidialectical, speaking Ebonics and having strong code-switching abilities (Baxter and Holland 149) Baxter and Holland present a study about the levels of awareness of code-switching in a study to suggest that instructors need to provide more awareness to their nonstandard dialect students to allow them to have student agency over their own choices in the writing classroom.
  • 6. Rosina Lippi- Greens text would be a valuable resource for a professional development for English instructors. It covers nonstandard dialects, language myths, Standard English myths, etc.
  • 7. ≠In aiming for praxis with and among students, critical teachers consistently question what they do and critique the means by which they teach students. There is a need for consistent and constant reevaluation of purpose and methodology. In this regard, teachers ask themselves: What am I doing?, Where is it leading?, What do I intend to achieve?, Where might I be better informed? KUBOTA AND LEHNER CRITICAL CONTRASTIVE RHETORIC (PG. 23)
  • 8. The differences between asking students to code-switch and asking students to code-mesh. They advocate for code- meshing in order to provide more STUDENT AGENCY. CANAGARJAH AND LUNA
  • 9. CODE-MESHING STRATEGIES C A N AG A R A JA H A N D M I C H A E L - L U N A , 6 0
  • 10. Baxter, Milton, and Rochelle Holland. Addressing the Needs of Students Who Speak a Nonstandard English Dialect. Adult Basic Education and Literacy Journal 1.3 (Fall 2007) 145- 153. EBSCO. Web. 29 January 2013. Kubota, Ryuko, and Al Lehner. Toward Critical Contrastive Rhetoric. Journal of Second Language Writing 13: (2004), 7- 27. ERIC. Web. 4 March 2013. Lippi-Green, Rosina. English With An Accent. 2nd Edition. Routledge, New York: 2012. Print. ------Companion Website. Routledge. Web. 13 February 2013. http://www.routledge.com/cw/lippi-green-9780415559119/ Michael-Luna, Sarah, and A. Suresh Canagarajah. Multilingual Academic Literacies:Pedagogical Foundations for Code Meshing in Primary and Higher Education.Journal of Applied Linguistics 4.1 (2007): 55-77. EBSCO. Web. 17 Feb 2013. WORKS CITED