Multiple Discourses in a Diversifying Student World
The ELP: Ethnography Learning Paper (one pager)

Luke Schnickel

1. Placing theory into action, I find myself continually trying to accommodate, actuate, and view my practicum class as a place “where inquiry into culture takes place, where dialogue across cultural boundaries occurs” (Fecho 371). My classroom interactions and processes have driven me to inquire into language itself, through the eyes and written works of established Standard English and the multiple discourses presented in school settings. This inquiry has led to further inquiries which now form the basis of my case study.
Case Study Inquiry- Can a teacher maintain a class with multiple discourses in relation to Standard English learning and home dialect, and if so, how?
Inquiry Questions
- What are students’ attitudes and reactions to Standard English?
- How, and when, do students replace S.E. for home dialect (and vice versus)?
- How can a teacher enable a student “to consider and use language in diverse ways (Fecho 368)?
- What is the impact of language upon, and in, a diverse classroom?
- How does language, both S.E. and home dialect complicate student identity?
2. List of Primary Sources
- Blevins Junior High
- Teacher Becky Hauser
- Students Jasmine, Devon, Kristina
3. Major Findings
-In relation to Jasmine- It is the teacher’s job to make sure she has the base of Standard English, and to make certain that her transfiguration of Standard English is not impeded upon, as it does not impede upon her learning.
- The best method to analyze data is through active questioning and review.
-I learned to constantly question how I can help further the content understanding and language development of the students. I found that through the review of what occurs in the classroom, I am able to make progress and modify lessons to fit the students. The constant review and active modification has helped me develop results and start to understand my own inquiry question.
- The most interesting aspect I encountered while researching and analyzing the findings of said research was the fragmentation of student identity through multiple discourses.
4. Implications/further questions
- It takes a teacher who has the belief that students can “transcend the circumstances into which they were born…” (Delpit 156).
- The correction of grammar during class can sometimes force a teacher to lose a student, and also lose a teachable moment.
- It is important to let students’ natural discourse become the one from which they communicate. However, it is important for students to acquire Standard English as a second discourse, so it is up to a teacher to find other methods in which to apply its teaching, such as a grammar chart.
5. List of Secondary Sources
Wheeler, Rebecca S. "Teaching English in the World: Code-Switch to Teach Standard English." English Journal 94.5 (May 2005): -. October 2008. .
Delpit, Lisa. "The Politics of Teaching Literate Discourse." Other People's Children: Cultural Conflit in the Classroom. Ed. New York: New York Press, 1995. 152-156.
Gee, James P. "Literary Discourse, and Linguistics: Introduction and What is LIteracy ." Journal of Education 171.1 (1989): 5-25.
Fecho, Bob. "Critical Inquiries into Language in an Urban Classroom." Research in the Teaching of English 34 (February 2000): 368-395.

The first three moved from theory to practice to the complications of putting the question into practice. The gap missing is long-term use and the actuality of the application. I feel that theory falls upon theory and practice forgets to follow suit, or becomes complicated until a new theory presents itself. It is a cycle where nothing gets completed. I want to address this, but the research so far is lacking.

Language Inquiry

How does a teacher maintain a class with multiple discourses in relation to SE learning and home dialect? The reason I choose this question and then modified it is because I dont completely know how I would handle this situation but Fecho offered me some solutions, or at least directions towards solutions. Fecho talks about students as inquirers into language, and creating an environment in which students question where language comes from and how it works, especially within different settings. He gave three examples of students, Robert, Crea and some other girl whose name I forgot. The three students had different perspectives even though they came from similar environments. through discussion, after Crea gave her speech, the idea of when SE and when home dialect are appropriate came into the classroom. Some students saw SE as a means, some saw it as a problem, and some students offered (in their own words) the idea of crossing the borders and using both. Delpit offers the idea and some methods in which this is possible, and I agree with a chart. The chart would help the different student discourses and Luke is awesome!

Am I stuck in my discourse?

Gee introduces the idea of the big "D", and its composition. A person is comprised of a primary discourse and many secondary discourses, all falling under the umbrella of the big "D." A person's primary discourse is acquired without conscious knowledge. It is natural. Gee states that a secondary discourse can never truly be taught, because it can never be truly acquired. A person has to consciously register that they are trying to enter another discourse. This is where the water gets murky, and I find myself optimistically disagreeing with Gee. Delpit, the author responding to Gee, believes dominant discourses can be learned, and further used to further oneself in the "system." This helps students work outside their primary discourse and fit into a larger culture, without the effort showing. This is the ground on which I choose to stand as a teacher. Even if it is not true, I believe it important to holster the negative and register the positive and the possibilities that can be given to students through teaching students outside of their natural discourse. I also find it important to consider Delpits "not-teaching" and "not-learning" ideas, so when teaching, I can recognize is someone is not-learning or I am making the mistake of not-teaching, that way I can correct the error. I believe that having multiple discourses is what creates a complex and intelligent person, and I plan to offer that to my students.

Quickwrites before blog entry

Gee
Gee redefines discourse, or more so clarifies his vision of the defining aspects of the word. He changes discourse to Discourse. What could this possibly mean? Well, in the world, as in education, there are primary discourse and secondary discourse. Primary discourse is the first and foremost, the epicenter of a person’s language being. The primary discourse is first learned by a person, and therefore cannot be replicated. You cannot once again relive childhood and reacquire a language, attitude, style, and personality as a primary discourse. Therefore languages (or more so discourses) that are acquired after the primary discourse are secondary discourses. Both primary and secondary discourses fall under the large “D,” the new definition of Discourse. A person has many discourses in their lives, not just one. Gee argues that a person has many secondary discourses, but only one primary discourse. Now ask yourself, what is your primary discourse and what are your secondary discourses?

Delpit is independent, strong, and forceful. She reminded me of the saying, “stand for something, or fall for everything.” She disagrees with master Gee on the acquisitions of discourse, but agrees with him on the nature of it. There is also a dispute over function. One aspect of Delpit that I was at first confused about, but now see the light, is what she thought about not-teaching. After hearing her definition, which is against non-teaching (a logical negative), I don’t know where I stand. I don’t know if I agree with Gee, or want to take a more optimistic view with Delpit. Maybe there is a ground I can find in-between, where I can correct on papers, but not in the classroom.

Language Invest. 3

Hello again.

My elementary school was quite mental, to be frank. The teachers were driven not by standards or teaching, by more so by humor. Therefore, I did not learn proper grammar, reading skills, or basic knowledge. I am not going to call my school out, but it is important to know that not a lot of rich children went there. I specifically remember my third grade teacher receiving a teacher of the year award, when he did not deserve it. My mother would complain, but only to my father, and not to the school.

Then we moved.

We moved to a upper-middle class suburb where the school systems cared. When the school system had parents baring their teeth, and their wallets. This was my sixth year of school, and it completely spun me around. I went from learning nothing, to being over my head with knowledge I should have already obtained. I was left behind, trailing. I became an outsider.

Catching up

I spent a good portion of my nights learning semantics, syntax, vocab, and any other worthy subject that the other students already had a grasp on. With the help of a few good teachers, upper-middle class teachers, I was able to have an outline of the content of the other students.

I dont remember middle school, as I have a poor memory and perhaps I am repressing it, so I am jumping into Columbine High School.

C-bine

At Columbine, I had two teachers who changed learning, writing, and reading for me. They would say things that conventional teachers would not even dare to approach. it was beautiful. We had learned the rules, and now we were breaking them. I felt dangerous, I felt alive. I was given a redeeming chance in these classes to become a writer, and that is what happened. I fell in love with language. I found myself craving words.

College

The power of knowledge is the beauty I see in the world. A teacher can provide that beauty and at CSU, one did. Dan Beachy Quick taught me how to enter words, how to enter my own mind, and how to swim in poetry. Now I can look at language and see. I can see past words and into the power behind the words.

Thanks

I wish to thank those few teachers who have led me to challenge myself and conventional language.

Warm UP 2-Rosary

As a future english teacher, I expect to find myself facing similar writing (although hopefully of higher accord) in my classroom setting. I may find students that write such things as, "I am going to take a crap," such as Rose was forced to face. I think that he handled that moment very well by not letting the student have the upper hand. There will be students that wish to get at the teacher, create awkward and terrible moments, and gain the classroom attention. I have always wondered how I would handle such a situation. What if the student wrote threatening work, or work that may seem like he/she would harm themselves? Would I keep my cool like Rose? Would I follow school policy exactly? I hope I would regard the student's background and context before responding. I hope that I dont find myself labeling students or placing them in rutted tracks. I believe in the power of Rose, the power to pull out of a set future. I will pray with the Rose-ary that I will be able to reach the students, through designed writing exercises such as Rose used. I believe that if I zoom in on a student, they become much more than a generalization, they become an actual student.

Language Investigation 2

Language Investigation 2- The expansion

The discourse community of my work

After the class discussion and language investigation, I noticed the unique discourse that my work used. I specifically noticed how no one outside of my work would understand our language. I work on campus, at Off-Campus Student Services and Resources for Adult Learners, where there is a lounge and work area for “adult students.” Adult students are often older returning students, who are quite different from traditional students, such as myself. Now within my work, there are two discourses, that of the Non-Traditional students, and that of my work.

Terms used by Non-Traditional students:

RAL-

Example- “I am going to the RAL.”

Meaning- RAL stands for Resources for Adult Learners, where there is a lounge. The example refers to the lounge.

Frac(k)-

Example- “That test frac(k)ed me up.”

Meaning- Apparently, frack is the television version of a swear word. The adult students use the term frac(k) in place of swearing.

Terms used by my work

OC team-

The OC team is the Off-Campus team, which is two members of the overall office.

Huggie Bear-

Name referring to Anne Hudgens, who works for CSU.

mittens:warm it up! 9-3-08

I spy with my little eye:

When reading the language investigation posts, I looked for differences. I am a student of individual inheritance and I crave the indepence desplayed by certain persons in a consumer society. However, in order to notice differences, I have to recognize similarites.

Similarities: A lot of "family" sayings were inspired by large scale media. Therefore, a lot of sayings were similar, or of the same stock.


However, there were beautiful differences found in some of the writing, inspired by events, gloreous outings, and creative thought. Some sayings were cast from children trying to understand standard english. Those sayings were a wonderful discourse within the certain families.

My family, which happens to include myself, is from open sunsets, white noise train incidents, black summers, frozen grass tips, biblical figures walking lonely street sides, and forgotten reckonings. We are secret people, lake side wonderers, tossing face coins into gutters, waiting for the rain. We are the figures of Nordic heritance and North American outlines, forgotten and remembered. Our people are not people, but folks, and are proud to wear suspenders and stained hats.
My family language derives from the past, from the tradition of traditions, and it revolves around the inheritance of lost understandings. We talk as if it is who we are, which might be a revolution. We tell jokes that have been told, and laugh at the remembrance of the first telling. Ollie and Lena are not fictional characters; the repetition of jokes has brought them to life. We make tales that become true, the alternatives fade.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“Did you hear how North Dakota was named?”
“Yes, father.”
“Well, let me tell you then. There was this young fellow, a lad just entering the job industry, and he was assigned the duty of naming two empty blocks of country. He pressed his mind and it continued to fill with nothings. As the days passed, and as his deadline approached, he began to panic. There were so many wonderful names for the other states, Colorado, Mississippi, and California for example. He decided to try and relax.
The young lad entered the local tavern, and sat down, ordering a dark beer. He drank softly, listening to the commotion of the bar. Behind him was a table full of men playing intensive games of poker. At the table sat the town doctor, an Indian named Ta, and the county practitioner. Ta and the Doc were in the middle of an argument.
‘I did not say such a thing sir,’ Doc said to the Indian.
The young lad listened in closer. Apparently, the Doc had bet his horse over a game of cards and had lost. The lad exchanged glances with the bartender as the argument heated up.
‘I said I did not say such a thing sir.’ The Doc said, throwing down his cards, standing up, and throwing his jacket over his shoulder. Ta, the Indian stood, flipping the table with his movement.
‘Yea did. Horse mine. Doc owe Ta.’
As the Indian’s words filled the bar, and a fight ensued, the young lad sitting at the bar had a revelation.
‘Doc-owe-ta,’ he said to himself. ‘Dakota…that is what I will name them. North and South Dakota.’
Well, son, that is the story of how North Dakota was named. The land from which you hail is named after a bar fight.”
I smiled as my father told the story.


We come from fictional bar fights, from foreign sayings, and tear drop islands. We are a repetition of important jokes, old sayings, and continued tradition. My family is torn secrets, long stories, and televisions with three working channels. Our sayings are ours, and cannot live outside of a family belonging. We are the Schnickels, our language and sayings as strange as our name.