Rutgers English Department to deemphasize traditional grammar ‘in solidarity with Black Lives Matter’

[Metaphor]

...a response deliberately misconstruing what was written into reverse racialism.

There's no 'reverse racialism'. The action and sentiment is racist.

Recently, the op author focuses on only one complaint which is merely about poor wording, allegedly....instead of his pushback against aniti-racism.

Yes, I'm responding to that because I remarked it was poorly worded, people have given multiple interpretations of it, inadvertently demonstrating it was poorly worded. And I still think it was poorly worded.

 

[Politesse]

Nope. It is very clear to me - do not focus exclusively on grammar, spelling and punctuation.

My college level writing classes already didn't focus exclusively on grammar, spelling, and punctuation. They assumed that basic grammar, spelling, and punctuation were already known... and they focused largely on style, organization, and effectiveness. My creative writing class, for example, had a lot of leeway for the basics, if the divergence from standard approaches was used to enhance the story. My public speaking classes and composition classes were far more focused on whether or not my approach was effective at communicating my message effectively.

So you are, I assume, okay with the approach Rutgers is taking?

 

[Emily Lake]

In your analogy, it would be more like ensuring that watermelons and BBQ ribs are occasionally in the menu rotation, and that people who order them aren't shamed for doing so by the staff.

Oh honeychile, don't forget about the fried chicken and the cornbread too!

Setting aside the unexpected implied racism there... Watermelon and BBQ were offered when I was in college in Colorado, mostly in the spring when it was more seasonal. I love watermelon, and eat it fairly regularly. I like ribs too, although I've grown to prefer mustard basted ribs rather than barbecue sauce.

 

[Emily Lake]

Well, it depends on context, doesn't it? The same sentence might be completely inappropriate for a medical journal, but acceptable in a poem or a political treatise. What she did was explain to the student in what context either spelling might be appropriate, and allowed him to make the call. HE still knows, now, that the capitalized spelling is what would be correct if talking about the disorder. He just hasn't been shamed for "getting it wrong", and then given no real explanation as to why (the "traditional" approach to proof-checking).

It's okay if you don't agree with this approach, but speaking as a college instructor myself, I can definitely see the virtue in what they are trying to do and will be interested in seeing how it affects success and retention in the years to come, if at all. I'm not an English teacher, so my usual response to spelling/grammatical errors has been to straightforwardly ignore them unless they impact comprehension of the sentence or disrespect an individual or group somehow. For time reasons alone, this is likely to continue to be my policy; I can't teach English and Anthropology at the same time without sacrificing one. But my job would be a lot easier if the English department were actually instructing students on the purpose and context of formal grammars, rather than shaming them for fluency in their own ...

Your post is a pretty good argument, and fairly compelling up to this point...

dialectic speech community and hoping that a purely punitive approach will somehow result in belated, magical mastery of an inconsistent acrolect that was never explained to them as anything other than a baldly hypocritical moral judgement (academics obviously make up words and speak incomprehensibly all the time, it just isn't called slang when a racially advantaged kyriarch does it).

... and I get the impression that the rest of this is supposed to be humor?

That aside, as you've outlined it, it seems very reasonable. Where I end up a bit baffled by the general category of critical theory as it's applied in academia is in the purposeful assumption that academic standards are tools of oppression. Language and grammar are not inherently oppressive constructs. Language can be used by oppressors, just as can any other tool. It's not the steak knife's fault that Larry cut Joe's throat with it.

What are your thoughts on the "critical math" approach proposed by the Seattle School System? Because, as a person with a math degree, I find it incredibly disturbing that they're trying to inculcate children with the idea that mathematics is a tool of oppression in and of itself.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

...a response deliberately misconstruing what was written into reverse racialism.

There's no 'reverse racialism'. The action and sentiment is racist.

Bullshit.

Recently, the op author focuses on only one complaint which is merely about poor wording, allegedly....instead of his pushback against aniti-racism.

Yes, I'm responding to that because I remarked it was poorly worded, people have given multiple interpretations of it, inadvertently demonstrating it was poorly worded. And I still think it was poorly worded.

Most people here do not have recent degrees in English and education.

 

[Emily Lake]

I'm just axing a question here.. what's a metathesis and what does using one mean?

Oh, and metathesis is a phonological phenomenon in which syllables are transposed within a word, usually a flow-of-speech correction in spoken language such as "axe" for "ask". Small changes like this are common as languages evolve over time. For instance, modern English "Thrill" is a metathetic shift from Old English "Thirlen".

What's the word for when you swap sounds (usually consonants) between two words? Like "swell foop" instead of "fell swoop"? I can never remember it.

 

[Emily Lake]

Nope. It is very clear to me - do not focus exclusively on grammar, spelling and punctuation.

My college level writing classes already didn't focus exclusively on grammar, spelling, and punctuation. They assumed that basic grammar, spelling, and punctuation were already known... and they focused largely on style, organization, and effectiveness. My creative writing class, for example, had a lot of leeway for the basics, if the divergence from standard approaches was used to enhance the story. My public speaking classes and composition classes were far more focused on whether or not my approach was effective at communicating my message effectively.

So you are, I assume, okay with the approach Rutgers is taking?

Really not sure. The handful of "critical theory" based approaches to teaching that I've run across are ones that I generally find appalling. I lack the terminology to be able to parse the but Metaphor was complaining about, so I honestly have no clue what it's supposed to be trying to say. It's very jargon laden, which might not be inappropriate for its audience, but definitely makes it incomprehensible to me.

If it's incorporating the same "everything is oppressive" view that I've seen in some other critical theory approaches, then no, I'm probably not going to be okay with it. Granted, I've not done a large amount of delving in on the topic, so perhaps I'm only being exposed to the gross bastardizations of an otherwise sound perspective. At present, however, the few other mentions I've seen of critical theory strike me as horribly misguided.

 

[Politesse]

In your analogy, it would be more like ensuring that watermelons and BBQ ribs are occasionally in the menu rotation, and that people who order them aren't shamed for doing so by the staff.

Oh honeychile, don't forget about the fried chicken and the cornbread too!

Setting aside the unexpected implied racism there... Watermelon and BBQ were offered when I was in college in Colorado, mostly in the spring when it was more seasonal. I love watermelon, and eat it fairly regularly. I like ribs too, although I've grown to prefer mustard basted ribs rather than barbecue sauce.

I'm not the one who brought the fucking watermelons into the metaphor.

 

[Politesse]

So you are, I assume, okay with the approach Rutgers is taking?

Really not sure. The handful of "critical theory" based approaches to teaching that I've run across are ones that I generally find appalling. I lack the terminology to be able to parse the but Metaphor was complaining about, so I honestly have no clue what it's supposed to be trying to say. It's very jargon laden, which might not be inappropriate for its audience, but definitely makes it incomprehensible to me.

If it's incorporating the same "everything is oppressive" view that I've seen in some other critical theory approaches, then no, I'm probably not going to be okay with it. Granted, I've not done a large amount of delving in on the topic, so perhaps I'm only being exposed to the gross bastardizations of an otherwise sound perspective. At present, however, the few other mentions I've seen of critical theory strike me as horribly misguided.

What exactly are we supposed to do with the mountains of evidence that minority populations are being underserved by higher ed, if it's considered politically offensive to observe that systemic oppression occurs? Despite the bullshit spread around by conservative media outlets, most of us have student success, not political correctness, as our first and final goal. That excludes both right- and left-wing conceptions of the "politically correct". But yes, Marxist models are always going to have more currency in policy-making conversations, for the sheer and simple reason that we need actionable goals. You people only get in the way, never suggesting anything useful we could do, just complaining about the things we've done and every new proposal. The status quo has never worked. So what will?

 

[ruby sparks]

I'm just axing a question here.. what's a metathesis and what does using one mean?

Oh, and metathesis is a phonological phenomenon in which syllables are transposed within a word, usually a flow-of-speech correction in spoken language such as "axe" for "ask". Small changes like this are common as languages evolve over time. For instance, modern English "Thrill" is a metathetic shift from Old English "Thirlen".

What's the word for when you swap sounds (usually consonants) between two words? Like "swell foop" instead of "fell swoop"? I can never remember it.

A spoonerism, I believe.

Or sponerism, If your, useing an! critikal grammeR pedagoggie, inwhich, case the: plurals is spoinerism’s,

 

[Emily Lake]

In your analogy, it would be more like ensuring that watermelons and BBQ ribs are occasionally in the menu rotation, and that people who order them aren't shamed for doing so by the staff.

Oh honeychile, don't forget about the fried chicken and the cornbread too!

Setting aside the unexpected implied racism there... Watermelon and BBQ were offered when I was in college in Colorado, mostly in the spring when it was more seasonal. I love watermelon, and eat it fairly regularly. I like ribs too, although I've grown to prefer mustard basted ribs rather than barbecue sauce.

I'm not the one who brought the fucking watermelons into the metaphor.

Yes, I see that I missed that bit. My apologies.

 

[Emily Lake]

What exactly are we supposed to do with the mountains of evidence that minority populations are being underserved by higher ed, if it's considered politically offensive to observe that systemic oppression occurs? Despite the bullshit spread around by conservative media outlets, most of us have student success, not political correctness, as our first and final goal. That excludes both right- and left-wing conceptions of the "politically correct". But yes, Marxist models are always going to have more currency in policy-making conversations, for the sheer and simple reason that we need actionable goals. You people only get in the way, never suggesting anything useful we could do, just complaining about the things we've done and every new proposal. The status quo has never worked. So what will?

Who you callin' "you people"?

No, it's not offensive to observe that systemic oppression occurs. I would have thought my view on this was relatively well established at this point. But the existence of systemic oppression does not imply that all systems are oppressive. I don't care if you're politically correct in your teaching, I find most political correctness to be idiotic. On the other hand, the Seattle School System wanting to incorporate social justice into mathematics is contrary to all the things I love about math - it's complete neutrality and objectivity. It's why I loved the hard sciences... and also some of why i never really liked biology, it was simply too squishy, being based so heavily in taxonomy.

There's a gulf between observing that disparate outcomes occur and acknowledging that a different approach is needed... and assuming the existence of oppression where it isn't present.

 

[Toni]

Nope. It is very clear to me - do not focus exclusively on grammar, spelling and punctuation.

My college level writing classes already didn't focus exclusively on grammar, spelling, and punctuation. They assumed that basic grammar, spelling, and punctuation were already known... and they focused largely on style, organization, and effectiveness. My creative writing class, for example, had a lot of leeway for the basics, if the divergence from standard approaches was used to enhance the story. My public speaking classes and composition classes were far more focused on whether or not my approach was effective at communicating my message effectively.

So, you agree with the email linked here without any context--to the extent that it's possible to tell, without the context?