Developments such as the evolution of World Englishes (WE) and African American scholars’ use of African American Vernacular English (AAVE) have opened an important dialogue around academic writing standards, language ownership, and linguistic justice (Canagarajah, 2006; Young, 2010). Authors like Gloria Anzaldua who mix, for example, Native Indian, Spanish, and English in texts, are engaging in the literary tradition of code meshing, which has been shown to facilitate acquisition of English when used by multicultural students in the classroom, according to research (Canagarajah, 2006). By adopting inclusive practices, course designers can combat linguistic bias and promote writing achievement for all learners. This blog contains five recommendations for reducing linguistic bias in online education.
A New Paradigm for Education
Historically, not all classrooms have been created equal. For many marginalized groups, including American indigenous populations, the classroom represents a legacy of oppression where their cultural, linguistic, or ethnic identity was diminished or erased altogether. When writing programs and the assessment tools they employ are based on dominant or traditional education paradigms, they can reinforce language hierarchies and perpetuate bias (Canagarajah, 2006). These paradigms can “condition writing instructors to believe their job is to correct difference” (UConn Writing Center, n.d.). And, whether bias is intentional or not, it can take a toll on students’ academic progress and mental health. Linguistic racism is defined as “acts of racism perpetuated against individuals on the basis of their language use” (De Costa, 2021). Dovchin (2020) notes that, after experiencing linguistic bias, international students can develop inferiority complexes, withdraw socially, experience fear and anxiety, and more. And these ripple effects aren't limited to international students; they include speakers of AAVE, Chicano English, and Appalachian dialects that have been historically undervalued (Canagarajah, 2006).
Fortunately, instructors can combat linguistic bias through self-reflection and positive action. Among other things, this might mean redefining what it means to prepare students for the real world while respecting their diversity, including linguistic differences. De Costa (2021) advocates for exploring “how to create a culture of care that takes into account the socioemotional needs of minoritized speakers, with a long-term view to create an inclusive environment for these speakers, so the latter can survive and thrive linguistically” (p. 2). Adding diversity statements to course materials, honoring student voices, and designing assessments to promote linguistic social justice provide ways to make the classroom more inclusive for all learners.
Inclusive Educational Practices
The following recommendations can help you combat linguistic bias and create a more intentional and inclusive classroom.
Treat diversity as an asset.
Make classroom culture more inclusive by adopting translingual frameworks: acknowledging diversity, especially as it relates to language, and adding diversity statements to the course syllabus and other course materials (Savini, 2021; UConn Writing Center, n.d.).
Consider alternative assessments.
Current rubrics may reinforce the myth of standard correctness. In contrast, labor contracts value “the process of writing, not just its product,” increasing access to higher grades for all students (Athon, 2019, p. 2). Translingual assessments can also “creat[e] opportunity structures and positive consequences for all students” (Lee, 2016). Instead of standardized criteria, these assessments individualize grading, taking into account students’ needs, backgrounds, and aspirations.
Include student voice and choice.
Developing an inclusive classroom culture begins with students. Provide them with opportunities to define, measure, and self-reflect on their progress (Inoue and Poe, 2020; UConn Writing Center, n.d.). Students should be able to share their writing with the community and provide input on writing program policies and classroom policies.
Rethink penalties.
Consider eliminating penalties for not writing in standard English (Savini, 2021). Instead of penalties, provide comprehensive writing resources in online courses such as rubrics, peer groups, tutorials, and webinars in advance of major assignments.
Reflect on your teaching practice.
Per Inoe and Poe (2020), consider how an assessment’s purpose, the people who designed it, and the processes and materials used in the classroom promote or hinder opportunity for students. What language habits, standards, and expectations are present in the course and why?
References
Athon, A. (2019). Designing rubrics to foster students’ diverse language backgrounds. Journal of Basic Writing, 38(1), 78–104.
Canagarajah, A. S. (2006). The place of world Englishes in composition: Pluralization continued. College Composition and Communication, 57(4), 586–619.
De Costa, P. (2021, Jan. 6). Ask the expert: Understanding linguistic racism. MSU Today.
Dovchin, S. (2020). The psychological damages of linguistic racism and international students in Australia. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 23, 1-15. 10.1080/13670050.2020.1759504.
Inoue, A.B. & Poe, M. (2020.). How to stop harming students: An ecological guide to antiracist writing assessment. Composition Studies, 48(3).
Lee, J.W. (2016). Beyond translingual writing. College English, 79(2), 174-195.
Savini, C. (2021, January 27). 10 ways to tackle linguistic bias in our classrooms. Inside Higher Ed.
UConn Writing Center (n.d.). Racism in the margins: High-Impact practices. University of Connecticut.
Young, V. A., (2010). Should writers use they own English? Iowa Journal of Cultural Studies, 12(1), 110-117.