Evaluate the idea that schools should ban the use of non-standard language. [30
marks]
Standard English is a dialect that is seen as a ‘correct’ way of speaking and is widely
encouraged in formal contexts such as schools. However, there are arguments as to say we
should not ban non standard English in schools.
One argument comes from prescriptivists who see Standard English as the only ‘correct’
way to speak. It can be argued that because Standard English is seen as basic literacy and
desirable, if we allow students to speak in non-standard language we would be
disadvantaging them in life. For example, the GCSE national curriculum states ‘ students
should be able to write effectively and coherently using Standard English appropriately’.
Therefore, if children were to use non-standard language then they may be deprived of such
qualifications having a significant impact on their future. Researchers have found that
teenagers are good at code switching and so banning non standard English in schools does
not mean pupils cannot speak in their own dialects outside of schools. For example, David
Crystal notes both street grammar and classroom grammar are needed to face all situations
in life. It is wrong to say teachers who correct non standard English are discriminatory as it
can be argued they are simply improving the life chances of their pupils. A school in
Halesowen banned Black country dialect and the headteacher explained the reason was due
to getting the best for their children. Headteacher, Mr White, said literacy was the school’s
biggest challenge with 40% of the intake on free school meals, and this was an attempt at
boosting the children’s academics. However, critics argue this is not an appropriate
approach to the situation and instead adds a stigma towards regional dialects which results
in accent bias. Ian Cushing also notes there is no evidence to say Standard English is
actually any more linguistically correct than any other dialect, this is simply a social
construct.
Linguist Ian Cushing argues strongly against the policing and correction of non standard
spoken grammar. Cushing notes it is a form of discriminative language policy. He draws on
the fact each variety of English is an entirely legitimate, grammatical set of socially
meaningful forms. Standard English, however, is seen as the institutional norm used in
contexts such as law, education, media and business. However, a misconception is
Standard English is incompatible with non-standard varieties, yet standard English can be
spoken in any accent. There is an increasing concern over accents as well as dialects where
a primary teacher was told by Ofsted to make her accent more ‘southern’ as it is too
northern. This is another example of how school is increasingly becoming a form of linguistic
purism which has negative effects on both teachers and staff who are being told they cannot
express their regional identities. Ian Cushing argues an approach may be to not treat non
standard English as ungrammatical which will not damage students' linguistic confidence.
Secondly, schools should develop students Standard English by adding to their grammatical
repertoire not replacing it. Finally, allowing pupils to discuss standard English and treat it
critically. Overall, Ian Cushing provides evidence to say schools banning non standard
English is simply blanket banning and may actually have a negative impact on their
achievement by creating a self fulfilling prophecy.
Another reason we should not ban non standard English in schools is because of the sense
of identity it may give pupils. Eckert shows teenagers are the movers and shakers of
marks]
Standard English is a dialect that is seen as a ‘correct’ way of speaking and is widely
encouraged in formal contexts such as schools. However, there are arguments as to say we
should not ban non standard English in schools.
One argument comes from prescriptivists who see Standard English as the only ‘correct’
way to speak. It can be argued that because Standard English is seen as basic literacy and
desirable, if we allow students to speak in non-standard language we would be
disadvantaging them in life. For example, the GCSE national curriculum states ‘ students
should be able to write effectively and coherently using Standard English appropriately’.
Therefore, if children were to use non-standard language then they may be deprived of such
qualifications having a significant impact on their future. Researchers have found that
teenagers are good at code switching and so banning non standard English in schools does
not mean pupils cannot speak in their own dialects outside of schools. For example, David
Crystal notes both street grammar and classroom grammar are needed to face all situations
in life. It is wrong to say teachers who correct non standard English are discriminatory as it
can be argued they are simply improving the life chances of their pupils. A school in
Halesowen banned Black country dialect and the headteacher explained the reason was due
to getting the best for their children. Headteacher, Mr White, said literacy was the school’s
biggest challenge with 40% of the intake on free school meals, and this was an attempt at
boosting the children’s academics. However, critics argue this is not an appropriate
approach to the situation and instead adds a stigma towards regional dialects which results
in accent bias. Ian Cushing also notes there is no evidence to say Standard English is
actually any more linguistically correct than any other dialect, this is simply a social
construct.
Linguist Ian Cushing argues strongly against the policing and correction of non standard
spoken grammar. Cushing notes it is a form of discriminative language policy. He draws on
the fact each variety of English is an entirely legitimate, grammatical set of socially
meaningful forms. Standard English, however, is seen as the institutional norm used in
contexts such as law, education, media and business. However, a misconception is
Standard English is incompatible with non-standard varieties, yet standard English can be
spoken in any accent. There is an increasing concern over accents as well as dialects where
a primary teacher was told by Ofsted to make her accent more ‘southern’ as it is too
northern. This is another example of how school is increasingly becoming a form of linguistic
purism which has negative effects on both teachers and staff who are being told they cannot
express their regional identities. Ian Cushing argues an approach may be to not treat non
standard English as ungrammatical which will not damage students' linguistic confidence.
Secondly, schools should develop students Standard English by adding to their grammatical
repertoire not replacing it. Finally, allowing pupils to discuss standard English and treat it
critically. Overall, Ian Cushing provides evidence to say schools banning non standard
English is simply blanket banning and may actually have a negative impact on their
achievement by creating a self fulfilling prophecy.
Another reason we should not ban non standard English in schools is because of the sense
of identity it may give pupils. Eckert shows teenagers are the movers and shakers of
