Because literacy practices and literacy learning are products of a culture’s history and values—and a force for shaping a culture’s future—writing is unavoidably and necessarily a site of ideological production. People with power and influence to shape what matters in social contexts have historically decided how we write, what we write, and how we judge writing.
At the Writing Center, we learn about these historical and social contexts to examine how we respond to writers and writing within a linguistic justice framework. April Baker-Bell articulates linguistic justice as a framework that "is an antiracist approach to language and literacy education" (p. 7). Such an approach aligns with our DePaul University Mission Statement that commits to honoring the dignity of each person: “Guided by an ethic of Vincentian personalism and professionalism, DePaul compassionately upholds the dignity of all members of its diverse, multi-faith, and inclusive community.” Dignity also relates to our Writing Center core value of respect; thus, we respect the dignity of each writer we serve, including consideration for writers whose languages and/or dialects have been historically marginalized or devalued.
Baker-Bell emphasizes that "as a pedagogy, Linguistic Justice places Black language at the center of Black students' language education and experiences. Linguistic Justice does not see White Mainstream English as the be-all and end-all for Black speakers. Linguistic Justice does not side-step fairness and freedom. Instead, it affords Black students the same kinds of linguistic liberties that are afforded to white students" (p. 7). Extending Baker-Bell's definition of linguistic justice to writers of any racial or ethnic background, we recognize that all people have the right to use their languages, dialects, and rhetorics within any context--personal, professional, academic, or otherwise--so that they have the full range of their rhetorical knowledge to express themselves in ways that feel authentic.
<aside> 🌏
In addition to the strategies elaborated here, we enact linguistic justice and diversity by using the best practices for working with writers who use English as an Additional Language.
</aside>
The language we use is always impactful. As tutors responding to others’ use of language and using language to interact with writers, we must consider the impact of our language thoughtfully.
Below you will find some of the key terms and concepts used throughout the Writing Center’s Linguistic Justice and Diversity work. Familiarize yourself with this background to better understand the goals of the program and support our writers.
Understanding some of the key concepts defined in this glossary can help each of us bring a mindset to our work that both
Knowing more about the contingent and ideological nature of Standard English, for example, and ways of working to push back on the damaging aspects of that concept through a linguistic justice and post-colonial approach to our work, can help you show respect in your appointments for each and every writer's linguistic background and traditions.
📕Linguistic Justice Glossary
| Term | Definition & Scholarly Context | Application in the Writing Center |
|---|---|---|
| Standard Written English | • “Standard language ideology | |
| is the belief that there is one set of dominant language rules that stem from a single dominant discourse (like standard English) that all writers and speakers of English must conform to in order to communicate effectively” (111). |
• Within the context of standard language ideology, standard written English is a locally-bound variety of written English derived from a process of standardization in spelling, usage, & style that must be explicitly taught (unlike speech).
• Standard written English is a product of social, political, and commercial power dynamics (Milroy & Milroy, 19)***. Therefore, standard written English is representative of societal norms that mirror historical oppression and thus becomes the standard by which all written English is measured against.
***More broadly, a product of "a historical process which – to a greater or lesser degree – is always in progress...motivated in the first place by various social, political and commercial needs...[and thus] an ideology...an idea in the mind rather than a reality—a set of abstract norms to which actual usage may conform to a greater or lesser extent" (19).
James Milroy and Lesley Milroy, 2012 | This concept appears in Writing Center appointments where writers who may use multiple rhetorics in their daily lives may want help from a tutor to revise their English to align with Standard Written English that is often prioritized in academic contexts.
In these appointments, tutors have the opportunity to draw on the knowledge they have about Standard Written English and Linguistic Justice to empower writers and remind them of their agency to make decisions about their writing that feel authentic to them. Sometimes this looks like assisting writers in incorporating their own rhetoric, voice, or dialects in their writing, but this may also look like talking through a professor's expectations and possible perceptions of their writing. In any case, our job is always to provide information that allows writers to make their own choices about their writing, not to tell them to conform or not conform to Standard Written English. | | Linguistic Justice | • "an antiracist approach to language and literacy education. It is about dismantling Anti-Black Linguistic Racism and white linguistic hegemony and supremacy in classrooms and in the world" (7).
• A framework for language and writing pedagogy that "implicates...the undoing of monolingual thinking and practices [and calls for] actions that would advocate for a plurality of languages, writing, and pedagogies" (288).
Ligia A. Mihut, 2020 | Linguistic Justice is a framework that tutors can apply to the whole of their tutoring. In appointments, this may look like affirming to writers that all ways of knowing, speaking, and writing are valuable and add to the collective knowledge and diversity of our DePaul community.
Since conventional language and writing in universities draw from racist power structures, writers may come to us upon the advice of a professor who misunderstands or devalues their multilingualism. Here, you have the opportunity to affirm the inherent value and worth of a writer's way of knowing and writing while navigating with them the choices they have in their writing. | | Contact Zone | • “social spaces where cultures meet, clash, and grapple with each other, often in contexts of highly asymmetrical relations of power” (34).
• A way of understanding social spaces, like the writing center, in a way that "foregrounds the necessary conflict and struggle involved in any attempt to achieve multiculturalism in the United States of today [but which can be] challenging for all members of our society, those at the center as well as those on the margins" because it challenges "common-sense views of diversity," including the tendencies to "perceive cultures as discrete and self-contained rather than interactive and constructed in relation to others;... perceive ourselves as strictly inside one and outside the rest of cultures;...view our cultural identity as strictly determined by such markers as place of birth, nationality, skin color, or other biological features;...view issues of race, class, and gender as separate rather than intersecting" (232).
Min-Zhan Lu, 2014 | Tutors find themselves in the contact zone frequently, and providing competent and respectful tutoring requires tactful navigation of difficult situations.
Consider the situation where a writer brings in a paper that contains information that interacts with a tutor's own culture/identity/beliefs in a way that is positive, difficult, or even problematic. Tutors always have agency in these appointments to make observations about the writing based on their own experiences as readers. Through grounding their reactions to writing in their experiences as a reader, tutors enact two Writing Center core values: transparency and respect. Letting writers in on your experiences as a reader of their writing is one strategy for tutoring in the contact zone.
Tutors may also choose to employ one of the Writing Center’s core practices of asking questions. Through asking writers questions, a tutor can come to understand how a writer arrived to their conclusion, and this context may help a tutor hone their suggestions. Overall, leading with curiosity, not judgement, is a vital strategy when working in the contact zone. | | Post-Colonial Writing Center | • A writing center "in which [tutors and writers] explicitly examine why and how certain features of academic discourse come to be features in the first place" (54).
Anis Bawarshi and Stephanie Peklowski, 1999
• Where tutors work with writers to "demystify writing processes by giving marginalized students insight into why certain conventions exist for certain discourses" and where tutors "aim to equip these students with the skills necessary for analyzing conventions so that they can translate their knowledge into successful writing practices beyond the university" (55).
Anis Bawarshi and Stephanie Peklowski, 1999 | When tutors' ethos and strategies are rooted in linguistic justice and diversity values, they help maintain a Post-Colonial Writing Center.
This may show up in appointments when tutors choose to discuss the standards of writing in academic spaces. For example, when a writer comes in looking to revise their writing to what is considered academic standard written English, perhaps to the extent of relinquishing their own voices in their writing, tutors may engage them in a meta-conversation about how these standards have come exist, and then empower the writer to choose how they would like to revise their writing based on this knowledge. | | Myth of Linguistic Homogeneity | • "the assumption that college students are by default native speakers of a privileged variety of English [which is] seriously out of sync with the sociolinguistic reality of today's U.S. higher education as well as of U.S. society at large" (641).
Paul Kei Matsuda, 2006Anis Bawarshi and Stephanie Peklowski, 1999 | In appointments, tutors will often encounter the term "college-level grammar/writing" as a rubric category. The idea that there is one standard for what is "college-level writing" is rooted in the Myth of Linguistic Homogeneity. The terminology of “college-level writing” is often confusing because it is vague, and is also usually indicative of western, colonial standards of what written English should be. Letting writers in on this myth can be a way to affirm their own rhetorics and ways of writing, but also empower them to make choices about their writing with this knowledge. | | Code Switching
Code Meshing | • The act and art of intermingling two or more languages or dialects within a single speech act or piece of writing.
• “Code switching, from a linguistic perspective, is not translatin one dialect into another one. It’s blendin two or mo dialects, languages, or rhetorical forms into one sentence, one utterance, one paper. And not all the time is this blendin intentional, sometime it unintentional. And that’s the point.The two dialects sometime naturally, sometime intentionally, co-exist! This is code switching from a linguistic perspective: two languages and dialects co-existing in one speech act (Auer)” (114).
“But since so many teachers be jackin up code switching with they ‘speak this way at school and a different way at home,’ we need a new term. I call it CODE MESHING! Code meshing is the new code switching; it’s mulitdialectalism and pluralingual-ism in one speech act, in one paper. Let me drop some code meshing knowledge on y’all. Code meshing what we all do whenever we communicate—writin, speakin, whateva. Code meshing blend dialects, international languages, local idioms, chat-room lingo, and the rhetorical styles of various ethnic and cultural groups in both formal and informal speech acts” (114).
Vershawn Ashanti Young, 2010 | Tutors may see drafts where writers include parts in languages or dialects beyond English or “standard written English.” Such inclusion may be intentional or unintentional on the writer’s part, and it’s important to respect the writer’s agency in deciding what to preserve and what to revise.
Remember that understanding meaning is the crux of effective communication, so ask the writer questions if their use of code meshing impedes your understanding of their point. Do not automatically correct code-meshed writing or assume that it is in error; respect the writer and their linguistic diversity by inquiring about their language usage and inviting them to (further) consider its impact on their intended audience. |
The Writing Center’s Linguistic Justice and Diversity training has become a cornerstone for our work. Here you will find the principles behind the program and how you can apply them to your own work within the Writing Center. Keep in mind that collaboration is foundational to all of our work; connecting with other tutors is an effective way to bolster your understanding of and capacity for enacting linguistic justice.
🕔 Take the Time & Make the Effort to Enact Linguistic Justice