According to this article, teacher attitudes can affect a lot. If a teacher has a stereotypic attitude toward “standard English” and views all other variations as incorrect, then they are basically dooming those students that do not fit into the “norm”. According to the research teachers view students with different languages variations, as not necessarily incompetent, but behind the normal level. They did this without even actually talking to, or meeting these students. If just collecting data is this drastic then it makes me wonder how bad these teachers are doing with these students in their classrooms. Because of these attitudes a student’s entire schooling could be compromised. They will not be judged or graded fairly, which means that assessments will be effected. It doesn’t always have to be from a bad attitude either. If a teacher is overly easy on students with different dialects or assumes that they need more help because of their dialect, then this is also affecting the students because it is hindering them from doing their best.
Three approaches are awareness approach, critical pedagogy, and critical awareness approach.
I am not entirely sure how I feel about it. I want to be certain that I am teaching to all of my students and not just the “norm”. I feel that students should be judged or graded based on their abilities and not on how they speak or anything else. Also I want to reach all of my students, so if that means adjusting my plans or learning a language or dialect, then so be it.
Can you explain how the three approaches help teachers transform language variations from liabilities to assesses?
ReplyDeleteDo not forget to cite the reading! Let me know when you make these changes.
Total - 3/5