Teach Me to Write; But Respec’ Meh Right: a critical ... · University of the West Indies, St Augustine, Trinidad with LEIBA-ANN FERREIRA University of the Southern Caribbean, St

Research in Comparative and International Education Volume 9 Number 1 2014 www.wwwords.co.uk/RCIE

56 http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/rcie.2014.9.1.56

Teach Me to Write; But Respec’ Meh Right: a critical exploration of vernacular accommodation in tertiary education for all in Trinidad and Tobago

RENÉE FIGUERA University of the West Indies, St Augustine, Trinidad with LEIBA-ANN FERREIRA University of the Southern Caribbean, St Joseph, Trinidad

ABSTRACT Since the introduction of the Education for All policy of the Government Assistance for Tuition Expenses (GATE) in Trinidad and Tobago, more tertiary level classrooms have been furnished with mixed linguistic and academic abilities and have accommodated more non-traditional tertiary-level entrants into the educational system. The expansion of the tertiary sector has also fostered lower minimum requirements for candidates entering tertiary institutions of learning (TILs), which differ from higher institutions of learning (HILs). More inclusive strategies in English composition courses are therefore needed to manage the reality of mixed abilities and greater non-standard language use among some of these learners, as part of the educational process. Therefore, the author proposes limited vernacular accommodation as a response to sectoral diversity and as a viable strategy for more inclusive education that would match the learner characteristics and the socio-educational contexts of TILs. In support of this recommendation, evidence-based findings from a case study among 39 students at a large private university exemplify the outcomes of vernacular accommodation in relation to student performance, linguistic identity and learner confidence. These outcomes further the cause of vernacular integration policies in education towards ensuring that true inclusion is upheld in the educational process. Moreover, the participatory power balance between students and teachers in this context will provide students with greater confidence and success in the short- and long-term, and will provide teachers with the critical awareness for transacting more equitable appraisals and for resisting hegemonic teaching and learning practices. In this way, true inclusion will extend beyond the mere financial ease of the GATE funding which is now available to all eligible students by consolidating the voice of marginalised learners in a conservative tertiary education system.

Background

Between 2000 and 2006, the de-shifting and conversion of 18 three-year and 13 two-year senior secondary and comprehensive schools formed part of an expansion policy of Education for All in the secondary sector of Trinidad and Tobago.[1] This initiative was accompanied by the construction and expansion of thirty-three government five-year and denominational schools. Five years later, the tertiary sector in Trinidad and Tobago also saw an enlarged number of potential university candidates aspiring to tertiary education through the domino effect of Education for All in the secondary sector. Hence, the former bias in education towards the middle class began to shift towards the working class and aspiring middle class. Additionally, a major sociocultural challenge emerged from the increase in educational access at the tertiary level for formerly marginalised learners.

Teach Me to Write

57

Linguistic and sociocultural diversity among university level students resulted from gross enrolment in the post-secondary and tertiary education sector in Trinidad and Tobago, which stood at 11.5% in 2005, compared with 46.9% in 2009-10. Additionally, according to the statistical digest for 2009-10, 39.67% of applicants to the tertiary sector possessed Ordinary level (O level) passes, and 25.53% were mature students, compared with only 10.42% who possessed Caribbean Advanced Placement Exams (CAPE) or General Certificate of Education Advanced level (A level) qualifications (Ministry of Science Technology and Tertiary Education, 2010). In the same year, 95.56% of eligible tertiary institutions, who were providing tertiary education, were private – in which case, one would anticipate wide variation in pre-registration requirements. Varying competencies in academic English resulted from non-traditional entry routes into the tertiary sector and lowered entry requirements. Also, dependent on the students’ course of study or future emphasis, entry-level communication skills in English were perhaps not even a priority for entering university.

Newsday, a daily newspaper in Trinidad and Tobago, brought needed language awareness to the public about the linguistic diversity in education as it headlined that, ‘English is a Foreign Language in Trinidad and Tobago’ (Pickford-Gordon, 2013, p. 8). English is not foreign to Trinidad and Tobago nationals as students are schooled, from primary to the tertiary level, in a Standard variety of English which is internationally acceptable. However, the boundaries between the use of the vernacular and the standard variety have become more blurred by code-switching and code-mixing for many Trinidadians and Tobagonians, so it is possible for a speaker or learner to have less or more control over one code or the other. Lack of control over the standard variety can be detrimental to learner success for reasons of an ideological bias in education which favours the standard variety. This reality can restrict mobility and participation for local and regional students within globalised sectors of education and social interaction.

As the standard variety of Trinidad and Tobago English shares some lexical, syntactic and phonological elements in common with mesolectal Trinidadian and Tobagonian English Creole, teachers of English sometimes presume that learners who are more dominant in the vernacular can increase their level of Standard English competence through a combined remedy of intense classroom instruction, which includes practising ideal linguistic behaviours, and increased exposure to standardised teaching and learning models – strategies based on a longstanding monolectal ideology of mainstream teaching using Standard English. Campbell’s (2007) essay, ‘There Goes the Neighborhood: hip hop creepin on a come up at u’ makes a potent allusion to our formerly academically segregated communities making room for new neighbours who risk ‘undermining the noble work that we do’, since the default mode of teaching English composition is by ‘middle class teachers in middle class institutions to students who are middle class either in actuality or in aspiration – economic if not cultural’ (p. 330).

Since the Government Assistance for Tuition Expenses (GATE) funding policy in 2004, institutional accreditation and regulation have also become part of the landscape of Education for All in the tertiary sector. This has come about because tertiary institutions now receive payment per student by government subvention once they meet the compliance criteria for the sector. As newer institutions try to conform with sectoral standards, isomorphism – a tendency to mimic the teaching and learning models of ‘successful’ institutions in higher education – has become a prominent feature of the tertiary landscape (Finnegan & Gamson, 1996; Morphew, 2002). This practice excludes learners because of the potential for adopting irrelevant course content vis-à-vis learner characteristics. In parallel, there might be a tendency within the sector to model the content of academic English programmes on the curriculum at the University of the West Indies, for example.

Tertiary institutions of learning (TILs) differ from higher institutions of learning (HILs). Newer institutions (TILs) may not offer postgraduate degrees, or may do so to a limited extent, and are also not likely to have specialised academic English programmes, including bridging programmes. They may also have more mixed proficiency levels within any given class in English composition or English usage because of flexible entry routes. These characteristics will be explored later in a case study at a large private university in Trinidad and Tobago.

In a diversified tertiary sector, true inclusion, or education for all, transcends social distance, class, culture, geography, socio-educational background, level of schooling, and language variety, as potential challenges to the educational-linguistic power transactions between teachers and

Renée Figuera with Leiba-Ann Ferreira

58

students in the process of teaching and learning. Therefore, the ongoing liberalisation of tertiary education in Trinidad and Tobago within the last nine years obliges language educators to become more sensitive to elitist education approaches, which formerly excluded approximately 85% of potential learners (Trinidad Express, 2012). Education for all in the tertiary sector ought to transcend the local funding policy – namely the fully subsidised GATE programme which began in 2004 and which was created to reduce the exclusion of marginalised socio-economic groups within tertiary education. Amstrong et al, (2011) recommend that ‘true inclusion’ is not a prescription of social policy by international funding agencies, but a localised educational policy that is re-framed for the cultural contexts of the developing world. Therefore, inclusive education should be understood in the context of an approach to the ‘problems’ of social diversity in societies that are highly diversified internally and yet globally interconnected (p. 30).

Given the potential for more vernacular use as part of the educational process, and a paradigm shift in educational practice towards the inclusion of marginalised groups, this article makes recommendations for linguistic accommodation at TILs through limited low-stake assessment in the vernacular. Siegel (2006a) highlights that in accommodation programmes, ‘students’ vernacular varieties are not taught, but are accepted in the classroom and the standard remains the medium of instruction and the only subject of study’ (p. 47). Roberts (1994) refers to similar circumstances as vernacular ‘integration’.

Craig (2006a) defines the vernacular ‘as excluding the Standard local variety of English (SE) that is part of internationally Acceptable English (IAE) and as being a continuum of language which can include basilect English Creole or French Lexicon Creole [2] and a Mesolect somewhere between English Creole and Standard English in all countries’ (p. 99). Validating the vernacular and vernacular ways of knowing in English composition has the potential to create an environment for social justice, in the face of a diverse learner population in the tertiary sector, since Education for All.

One salient outcome hoped for from vernacular accommodation strategies in the tertiary sector is that disadvantageous assessment practices which favour the prestige variety (Trinidadian Standard English) over the limited-prestige variety (Trinidadian Creole English) might be mitigated within the education process. Moreover, positive affect should result from short-term learner success and creative experimentation in one’s own language. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation towards greater dimensions of second dialect acquisition, that is, Trinidadian Standard English, may also become part of the learner experience in the long-term.

Apart from the effects on student motivation and performance, it is also hoped that teachers will be challenged to re-examine their hegemonic educational practices towards reducing the inequalities of decontextualised standardised curricula and assessment, while taking learner characteristics within the sector into account. Craig (1983) criticises an ‘English-as-a-mother-tongue tradition’ among teachers, which has resulted in inappropriate teaching methodologies for classroom instruction in Standard English in the anglophone Caribbean.

A case study of two English composition classes at a large private university in Trinidad and Tobago reveals the sociocultural, sociolinguistic and educational complexities of the learner population at a relatively new, large tertiary level institution, which was afforded university status by the Accreditation Council of Trinidad and Tobago in February 2006. The institution in question has been classified as large in the Statistical Digest on the Post-Secondary and Tertiary Sector (Ministry of Science Technology and Tertiary Education, 2010).[3] Its population is predominantly Afro-Trinidadian, with a high intake of Caribbean nationals into the tertiary sector. In this case study, the findings and recommendations will reveal the anomalies of English language education for all at the tertiary level in Trinidad and Tobago, and imply lessons for the wider Caribbean context. The research will also draw on questionnaires and performance data from 39 students and propose vernacular accommodation as a post-colonial strategy for teaching academic writing skills in English.

Teach Me to Write

59

A Theoretical Framework for Vernacular Accommodation Initiatives in the Anglophone Caribbean

Cummins (1999) claims that the vernacular is an asset in learning mainstream languages among children. However, researchers have dedicated less of a focus to the use of the vernacular among adult learners of academic English in the classroom context. Siegel’s (2010) survey of bidialectal learners emphasises studies on the acquisition of a second dialect in naturalistic rather than classroom contexts. For this reason, more studies in the field of bidialectal acquisition need to be conducted in non-naturalistic and adult language learning settings, such as in the present context.

A high degree of code-switching and mixing in the Trinidad and Tobago context makes it challenging for learners and users to be always conscious of the linguistic and pragmatic distinctions between the varieties. Hence, strategies for conscious and discrete language use and learning should form part of classroom practices. Moreover, the absence of language in education ‘working’ policies on bidialectal educational strategies shows that the Caribbean has not yet caught up with global trends of truly including marginalised linguistic populations within the educational context. At the moment, only a few studies in Caribbean language in education show some limited use of the vernacular alongside the standard variety for educational purposes in the tertiary sector. So far, regional linguists have recommended oral production of Creole in primary and secondary school classrooms as a bridge to literacy in Standard English (Craig, 1971, 1977, 2006a; Roberts, 1994). Migge et al (2010) also note that inclusive strategies involving Creole language use are mostly informally tolerated to varying degrees as transitional measures to facilitate acquisition of the official language(s) and (European) language(s) of education (p. 1). Siegel (1999) suggests that reader-oriented literacy strategies in Creole are common in the Caribbean, whereby Creole texts are included to create language awareness.

At the primary level, the Jamaica Language Project is perhaps the only true tried and tested experiment on the viability of instruction in an English-based vernacular in the Caribbean, showing no adverse effect on learner performance in national tests (Devonish & Carpenter, 2010). At the tertiary level, Elsasser and Irvine (1987) recorded a quasi-experiment in Creole at the tertiary level at the College of the Virgin Islands. However, these researchers separated the Creole-based course from the standard-based course, which was mounted for six weeks in the first case, and in the second case, after one semester, among freshmen and honours students. In their language awareness approach to Creole literacy, Elsasser and Irvine created an immersion type setting within the classroom and presented anecdotal data on motivation and continued use of these writing modes beyond the classroom. From this initiative, students produced editorials for local newspapers, a radio show, and research papers on the vernacular, as tangible evidence of learner motivation beyond the classroom experience.

London (2003) records that colonial models of English have not accommodated formal experimentation with Creole linguistic forms in education in Trinidad and Tobago as a means of self-expression at any level. However, Winer (1990) suggests that since the Ministry of Education’s (1975) primary education syllabus called for the recognition of ‘the vernacular as a real language and as a legitimate vehicle for oral and written expression’ (n.p.), whereby Creole has a recognised educational function in the Trinidadian and Tobagonian classroom.

Nevertheless, in the contemporary situation, learners who have less control of an acceptable variety of school-based English are likely to be denied fair educational assessment in educational contexts, which would require the production of school-based English from the outset. This implicit policy precludes the teaching and learning processes for many Creole dominant speakers who have not yet acquired expert levels of school-based English for communicating their ideas with appropriate organisational and stylistic competence, despite five to seven years of secondary level instruction. In this context, an exclusive preference for the standard variety is likely to promote assessment bias and to foster an unfair advantage to students who are closest to being speakers of the acrolect (or the standard variety of Trinidadian English). Despite this reality, a significantly low volume of research is currently being done in Anglophone Caribbean classrooms on the use of the vernacular as a legitimate assessment tool, with goals oriented towards the acquisition of mainstream academic English and learner success.

Critical theories on teaching English Language, language education pedagogy, and quality in education as balanced social interaction in education inform the theoretical framework of this


60

article. In the first instance, the term ‘critical’ is oriented towards uncovering education–linguistic practices which give rise to discrimination, inequality, dominance or domination in the process of teaching and learning. Arguments against linguistic imperialism in English language teaching, reminiscent of Braj Kachru’s liberation linguistics, which opposes Randolph Quirk’s deficit linguistics (see Jenkins, 2006), are also relevant to the notion of vernacular accommodation. In this context, nativised or indigenous varieties of English (and their vernacular counterparts) are not devalued in relation to a monolithic concept of English. Hence, diverse speech communities will be taken into account in teaching and learning and intercultural communication. According to Paulo Freire (1970) and Freire and Macedo (1998), ‘critical’ also refers to pedagogical approaches that challenge dominant ideologies, uncover and question power structures, and foster students’ abilities to effect changes in the society. Drawing on these perspectives, critical language education pedagogy questions and recommends alternatives to counteract dominant ideologies and policies which maintain unequal power structures and promote inequality. Canagarajah (2006) also proposes a postmodern perspective of bringing together the learner’s linguistic knowledge and expertise from spaces external to the traditional academic English Language classroom to facilitate language use which is more deliberate, uninhibited, intuitive, constructivist, and oriented towards personal strategies for multilingual and intercultural negotiation. Tikly and Barrett’s (2007) Multidimensional Social Interaction Approach to quality in education reveals that the multiple interests of educational stakeholders – such as learning achievement and the cognitive development of learners (among educational authorities), social promotion, access to information and employment (among parents and communities), and national socio-economic development outcomes (among international aid agencies and governments) – result in an ‘often overlooked perception of learners themselves and the meaning they attribute to learning with reference to their expectations, their identity, and their prospects for the future’ (p. 19). Thus, assessment practices which consider the identities, expectations and prospects of the contemporary learner offer a more balanced paradigm of quality education.

Finally, Siegel (2010) identifies three components of critical language awareness approaches to second dialect acquisition, which include sociolinguistic awareness, accommodation, and contrastive elements. The sociolinguistic element examines the system of beliefs of standard language ideology and its effects on marginalised groups, while the accommodation element allows students to speak or write in their first dialect and to use their cultural experience, which gives them a voice in the educational process. Finally, the contrastive component facilitates equitable classroom exchange, thereby shifting the power relations between teacher and student by making use of the knowledge and capabilities of the student, with the teacher as facilitator. In this article, the sociolinguistic and contrastive components of the current context are subordinate to the outcomes of accommodation, which include more inclusive and more equitable and realistic learner assessment.

Cummins (1988, 2001) shows that ‘cognitive/academic language proficiency’ (CALP), once acquired in one language or dialect, can be transferred to another. On the other hand, the aim is not to promote exclusion by reverse of standard language dominant language learners, who might be forced to function competently in a non-standard variety. Actually, this article recommends the treatment of Trinidadian English Creole and its concomitant cultural knowledge as a subset of the learner’s linguistic and cultural expertise which can be useful to learning the standard variety for academic purposes. In other words, language use, structure, organisation, and voice can be reinforced in an English-based Creole, while reducing educational disadvantage among learners who function more competently in a non-standard variety. Brown (2004) reminds us that the issues involved in the relationships among test bias, test purposes, and the various Englishes of the world are complicated. He also suggests that empirical research in this area is important and long overdue (p. 319). The quasi-experiment which constitutes the following case study approximates this type of needed research. The proposed method of analysis considers historical, sociolinguistic, and educational factors, which relate to the Trinidad and Tobago context, as a background to a quasi-experiment at a large private university.

Teach Me to Write

61

A Case Methodology

This section of the article uses historical analysis to situate a case study of vernacular accommodation at a TIL in Trinidad and Tobago. Findings from this quasi-experimental case study at a large private university provide a premise for generalisable conclusions on students’ performance in relation to standard-based and vernacular-based assessments and learner attitudes in similar contexts. Johansson (2003) observes that researchers emphasise different features and combine a range of methodologies in case study analysis. However, an important part of a case analysis approach is triangulation or illuminating the case from different angles. In the current case, the researcher applies two significant angles of analysis to the case study: a historical-interpretative dimension and a quasi-experimental dimension.

The Historical Interpretation

The interpretative historical dimension of the case study combines historical data as a logical interpretation of issues related to: (1) the linguistic profile of Trinidad and Tobago as a bidialectal speech community; (2) the relevance of local and regional language in education policies which might support vernacular accommodation as inclusion in the educational process; and (3) Education for All initiatives between 2000 and 2010 which have contributed to the learner diversity within the system. Although GATE funding (the current Education for All initiative) has been part of the tertiary sector since 2004, inclusionary initiatives at the level of national policy can still propagate discrimination on the ideological and education–linguistic levels through monolectal education ideologies. This is at the heart of the current case study, as a critical exploration of vernacular accommodation in tertiary for in Trinidad and Tobago.

Trinidad as a bidialectal speech community. English was introduced into Trinidad and Tobago after British capture in 1791. Up to this time, the then Spanish colony was mainly populated by French and French-Lexicon Creole speaking immigrants and a minority of Spanish speakers. Complete political domination by the English in 1802, and the anglicisation of the primary education system in 1854, imposed a policy of English as a lingua franca upon ex-slaves, free citizens, non-English-speaking whites, the educated black and mixed-race middle class, French-Lexicon Creole speaking masses, and English-Creole speaking islanders who migrated to Trinidad in the nineteenth century. Colonial educators also propagated English as a lingua franca and forged a monolectal–monocultural identity among labour populations transplanted notably from Africa and India (London, 2003), and among dominant linguistic groups from France, Spain and England. However, minority groups from Syria, Portugal and China had no influence on the languages in use in colonial society.

The vernacular in Trinidad therefore evolved in a situation of multilinguistic and multicultural contact. Ultimately, a mesolectal variety or intermediate variety of the vernacular emerged during the colonial period because of contact between the colonising language (English) and minority languages in the nineteenth century, including African languages, Bhojpuri, French-Lexicon Creole and Spanish.

Although the linguistic situation of Trinidad and Tobago is also referred to as bidialectal (Craig, 2009), or varilingual (Youssef, 1996), the English-based Creole is generally perceived as illegitimate and lacking in acceptability in academic contexts for historical reasons. Devonish (2003) suggests that the language situation in many anglophone Caribbean states is truly diglossic, which is a situation of interaction between English as the official language of government business and schooling, and an English-lexicon Creole.

Creole, the language of informal interactions. Trinidad and Tobago is also one such diglossic context. While the vernacular has permeated advertising, politics, and all spheres of television programming, its continued restricted use in education has been afforded by a resistant attitude by the governments of the anglophone Caribbean to offending their elites (Craig, 2006a, p. 101). In Trinidad in particular, middle-class resistance to the vernacular and vernacular ways of knowing in education in Trinidad and Tobago dates back to a public outcry in the 1920s against the insertion of Anansi stories in Cutteridge’s West Indian Readers (Campbell, 1996, p. 99).


62

Local and regional language in education policies. The right to educational assessment in the mother tongue is usually discussed as a safeguard against linguistic discrimination and inequality of access in relation to early childhood and primary education (UNESCO, 1953). However, Robertson (2010) observes that the tertiary level is not considered to be part of the integrated education programme for learners of school age. Nevertheless, Winer (2006) recommends a focus on different aspects of language on different assignments, and respect for the logic of the student’s language as a measure for bridging the Creole–Standard divide in tertiary settings. The prevailing context of Education for All in the tertiary sector, which was once the domain of the standard dominant learner, now favours solutions and strategies for coping with learner diversity and the participation of minority sociolinguistic groups in the educational process.

Although, Winer proposes that bidialectalism in local English Creole and local Standard English is as an accepted part of the Caribbean school system among educators, a disparity actually exists between the frequency of Creole use in day to day teacher–student interactions in Caribbean classrooms and its sense of legitimacy and acceptability for instructional and assessment purposes within the academic context. For this reason, Craig (2006b) questions whether mother-tongue instruction is being adequately pursued in Caribbean classrooms.

As a first to step to circumvent unequal language rights in any social setting, linguists and government officials ratified a charter on 14 January 2011 in Kingston, Jamaica, on language policy and language rights in the Creole-speaking Caribbean, and made provisions for a Regional Council of Languages within the Creole-speaking Caribbean and a Territorial Council of Languages for each of the Creole-speaking territories. Article 30 of the Charter recommends that ‘all members of the language community have the right to a quality education and literacy in their first language, outside of the formal school system. This includes youth and adults who have not had the opportunity to attend school or who have dropped out. They also have the right to study (in) a second (and other) language(s)’ (Charter on Language Policy and Language Rights, 2011).

Despite policy suggestions, the newly articulated language in education policy of bidialectal literacy for the early childhood to secondary sectors in Trinidad and Tobago has not yet reached an implementation phase, and has not yet been adopted as a working policy. In fact, the existing policy does not even include the tertiary sector and has not proactively considered vernacular-oriented approaches in assessing educational outcomes. Hence, critically addressing the fallout between traditional language in education practices in Trinidad and Tobago and the atypical learners in the contemporary tertiary sector is left to linguists, activists, researchers, and teachers, who are prepared to accommodate rather than reject the tide of linguistic variation among learners in mainstream education. Canagarajah (2006) explains that ‘the classroom is a powerful site of policy negotiation and the pedagogies practiced and texts produced in the classroom can reconstruct policies ground up’ (p. 587).

Education for All initiatives by the Trinidad and Tobago government. In 2000, the massification of secondary education in Trinidad and Tobago created 20,600 secondary school places for those exiting primary school and those intending to further their education at the secondary level. Prior to this year, 108,994 places were available in the secondary system. Assuming no student attrition, 129,584 students should have been eligible for the Caribbean Secondary Education Certificate (CSEC) examination by 2005. In 2004, the tertiary sector followed with GATE, a system of tertiary education for all, whereby private tertiary institution became eligible for state subventions per student, subject to institutional compliance and government regulation. In 2004-05, the arms of state-funded tertiary education extended to all, by admitting 24,434 beneficiaries into the tertiary sector (Observatory on Borderless Higher Education, 2005). That number became 52,620 by the academic year 2009-10.

While the Trinidad and Tobago government’s role in addressing elitism in tertiary education system must be lauded (Trinidad Express, 2012), the system has been ill-prepared to accommodate the linguistic and sociocultural diversity which has been thrust upon it since 2004. Siegel (2006b) highlights that mainstream policies in global education are increasingly based on ‘egalitarian pluralism’. Implicitly, he criticises policies such as Education for All for ignoring differentials in advantage and privilege between various social groups, as true inclusion obligates modifications in

Teach Me to Write

63

academic content and strategies to accommodate all learners, with realistic linguistic and sociocultural objectives.

Since the expansion of the tertiary sector in 2004 through GATE, more non-middle class members of the population, and predominantly high school graduates without advanced preparation in academic English, now challenge the ideology of outputting monolectal automatons, armed with expertise in a standard variety of English for academic and occupational purposes. In spite of the democratisation of the tertiary sector, the curriculum continues to overlook the sociolinguistic characteristics of these learners, ultimately excluding them. In the meantime, the Dakar Framework of Education for All (2000) for adult and continuing education calls for ‘closer linkages among formal and non-formal approaches to learning [in response to] the diverse needs and circumstance of adults’ (World Education Forum Drafting Committee, 2000). Therefore, the time has now come to give legitimacy to vernacular-based assessment, even while mainstream English language education goals are being maintained. Consideration of inclusive language education strategies will further the agenda of Education for All on the basic level of language, culture and participation within a still conservative class-oriented education system.

Quasi-Experimentation

Beyond the historical dimension, the secondary phase of this case methodology is quasi-experimental in nature, which means that it is not a true experiment in terms of a control group and an experimental group. Instead, the focus is on two groups of learners to which the same set of variables is applied. This quasi-experimental dimension of the case study features the collection of multiple forms of data, which include descriptive data, fidelity data, and outcome data on learner preparation, performance, and learner attitudes. The descriptive data include the context and the details of the environment in which the quasi-experiment took place and the participants in the experiment. The fidelity data includes external verification of aspects of the descriptive data, as given by subjects surveyed. Specifically, these include teacher observations and the official student records of the University which have been accessed with permission. The outcome data include test scores and survey responses (asking subjects to rate answers on a scale, e.g. strongly agree, agree, disagree, and strongly disagree) about being assessed in the standard or the vernacular, their experience learning English, and their attitudes to being assessed in two varieties.

Altogether, the data seeks to determine whether there is enough supporting evidence to support ‘low-stake’ vernacular-based assessment as a strategy for true inclusion in the educational process for marginalised learners. Against a backdrop of outcomes based on the standard variety of teaching English, the findings from this quasi-experiment will critically examine the impact of vernacular assessment on learner performance and motivation.

The case study consisted of data collection from two classes in two phases among thirty-nine students during Semester Two in 2012-13 and Semester One in 2013-14. English Composition or English Usage is the title assigned to the entry level course in academic English designed to teach students how to write formal, factual, expository essays. As such, these courses are usually incremental in nature and focus on structure and organisation. Two written assignments were integrated into the same course of English Composition using Trinidadian Standard English and Trinidadian English Creole (the vernacular). The strategy of introducing at least one writing assessment that was vernacular-based was intended to include Trinidadian English Creole and Trinidadian folk knowledge within the traditional assessment practices of the teaching and learning process.

Subjects

A total of forty-five students from two English Communication I classes during Semester Two in 2012-13 and Semester One in 2013-14 participated in the quasi-experiment, comprising groups of twenty-one and twenty-five students, respectively. A total of thirty-eight students returned questionnaires and completed all assignments overall. Among these students, twenty-three were of African descent, twelve were mixed race, and three were Indian. The subjects ranged in ages from 16 to 45, with the largest group comprising ages 16 to 21 – the age range used to calculate the Gross


64

Enrolment Ratio of 2009-10 (Ministry of Science Technology and Tertiary Education, 2010). Among the total number of students, twenty-nine of the group were Trinidadian, three were Dominican, one was St Lucian, one a St Kittian, one Jamaican, one Vincentian, and one was of Surinamese and Spanish heritage. Two students were citizens of the United States of America. These subjects were mostly first year students of the university pursuing undergraduate degrees in Natural Sciences, Social Sciences, Education, Business and Theology, except for ten students who were in their second year and one final year student.

Only seven students among the thirty-nine respondents had done the Caribbean Advanced Proficiency Exam (CAPE), which is a level beyond the American high school diploma or Cambridge O level exams. Otherwise, students entered the class with varying degrees of proficiency in Standard English, as certified by the CSEC and in one case a high school diploma, which certified competence in Standard American English. One other student had O levels, while one mature student had no formal qualification in English at O level. The overall assessment procedures for the course were conducted in two phases.

Phase one: determining prior knowledge. At the beginning of the semester, a pre-test was conducted in order to ascertain students’ writing proficiency in academic English. The pre-test required that students write four paragraphs: one introductory paragraph, two body paragraphs, and one concluding paragraph, using the prompt ‘The Importance of Effective Writing’. This assessment was intended not only to provide insight into students’ beginning competence, but also to nudge students into reflecting on the significance of the course, self-evaluation through feedback, and the role of style and structure in academic English. The pre-test also provided a benchmark of students’ knowledge of the expository mode of writing in Standard English.

Phase two: instruction and assessment. The second phase of experimentation entailed preparation and instruction for assessment in two language varieties. Since the secondary school curriculum in Trinidad and Tobago up to the O level teaches the students the rudiments of narrative essay writing, one class session was spent in discussion with students on the topic. Students were encouraged to express their views on this subject about the communicative strengths and weakness of writing in Trinidadian English Creole. The teacher revised the structure of the narrative essay and presented a list of 12 prompts written in the vernacular from which students would make a selection (See Appendix 1). The students were also reminded that the vernacular does not have a standardised orthographic system and were encouraged to use as much of the Creole as they were comfortable with to enliven their narrative essays. The narrative essay was a take-home assignment usually given in the twelfth week of the semester and students were given one week to complete and return the assignment.

Students were also instructed in expository modes of writing and were required to master the development of a thesis statement, a topic to sentence outline, an expository paragraph (introductory, body and concluding), and finally, the expository essay. In week six of the semester, they were provided with a list of expository topics, were required to make a selection, and to begin researching a topic for an informational essay. Since students were afforded 12 weeks of instructional time in the standard variety for the purpose of expository writing in the standard code, they completed this assessment in class, using preparatory research notes. In week thirteen of the semester, the students wrote the expository essay in class during a one hour and fifteen minute session. Any relative advantage which might create a research bias regarding the take-home assignment to be produced in the vernacular mode was diminished by advanced preparation for the expository essay by six weeks and the availability of assistive material.

In the final analysis, the students produced two samples of writing – a narrative essay incorporating the vernacular and an expository essay in Standard English. The pre-tests, narrative essays and expository essays were assessed using a rubric with standardised evaluation criteria.

Instrumentation

Test assignments. Both assignments – the essay in the vernacular and the essay in Trinidadian Standard English – required a word-length of 500 words with guiding instructions for development. The narrative essay in the vernacular was prompted by their interpretation of proverbs in Trinidadian Creole English. Students were provided with clear guidelines to include a thesis

Teach Me to Write

65

statement and the subject’s psychological state prior to a transformative experience. The subsequent body paragraphs showed or discussed who or what influenced the author’s personal transformation, and the impact on the author’s subsequent outlook. The concluding paragraph recounted the author’s psychological healing vis-à-vis the personal experience in question, or gave insight into how the author’s values were formed, or how new motives were shaped. Students were also advised to use as much of the vernacular as possible.

The expository essay required strict adherence to the expository method identified, and was based on selected topics in Trinidadian Standard English, using an appropriate mode of writing. The essay consisted of an introduction that culminated with a clear thesis statement, while the body expanded on the three sub-topics identified in the thesis, in the same order. The concluding paragraph required a restatement of the thesis and closure without any new information.

Rating/Scoring. The instructor used a standardised rubric with evaluation criteria for organisation, ideas and content, voice, word choice, and sentence fluency. However, spelling was not assessed in both assessment types (vernacular-based and standard-based), and was used as a control variable since Trinidadian Creole English does not have a standard system of orthography. The descriptors for grading within the rubric were worded to suggest a gradable increase or decrease in performance by using a minimum of three descriptive statements under each criterion, and by making use of repetition to qualify the competencies being described throughout. This standardised rubric was applied for both assessments and the essays were scored out of 20, with a minimum of 1 mark and a maximum of 4 marks awarded for the categories of Ideas and Content, Organisation, Voice, Word Choice and Sentence Fluency (see Appendix 2).

Questionnaires. Apart from their assignments, the students completed questionnaires voluntarily. Students gave their consent for their learner profiles to be used for research purposes. The researcher used the questionnaires to determine whether the students’ linguistic background and level of qualification affected their performance. The data were analysed in relation to linguistic identity, demographics, and entry grade to determine the background of language learners within the education system. Additionally the researcher considered the students’attitudes to assessment strategies in the vernacular and Standard English.

Findings

The results included a combination of teacher observations, scores from the assignments, and data from the questionnaires. The first category of results compared the teacher’s observation and the learners’ self-assessments of their linguistic competence. A second category of results considered the students’ performance in the expository (the standard-based essay) and the narrative essay (vernacular-based essay) in relation to their entry grades (Grades 1-3 in CSEC English). The correlation between entry grade and performance also helped to confirm or reject the hypothesis that entry grades might positively or negatively impact learner performance at the tertiary level – as some educators believe – since they laud the pre-existing system of learner selection by A level qualifications, prior to the democratisation of the sector in 2004. A third set of data examined the relationship between the students’ linguistic profiles (their self-assessments) and the outcome of both assignments, based on the use of the vernacular and the standard variety, respectively. Finally, the fourth set of results reflected the attitudes of learners to assessments in the standard and vernacular varieties. These findings showed the sociolinguistic and educational characteristics of the contemporary tertiary level student, learner attitudes to being assessed in the standard variety and the vernacular, and the potential for vernacular accommodation at TILs, in the context of Education for All.

Students’ Linguistic Profiles in the Education for All context

The first set of findings related to students’ linguistic profiles as representing a sample of the learner population at a large private TIL. In order to determine their linguistic profiles, students responded to the item, ‘I speak the following languages fluently …’, and were able to select from eight fields


66

(including one open-ended field). Their answers represented a sample of the linguistic profiles of GATE beneficiaries, under the Education for All programme, from two English Composition classes at a large private university. At the university in question, the practice of prior assessment in English preceding placement or referral in an English Composition class was discontinued for 2013-14. Hence, the students were characteristically more mixed in ability levels in the second English Composition class of 2013-14 because of this change in institutional policy.

Of the 39 students who should have returned questionnaires, 13 claimed to be standard dominant. However, the researcher still presumed varying degrees of receptive or productive competence in the vernacular among these students. A total of 14 students claimed to be competent in both varieties. A total of 9 respondents indicated that they were dominant in the vernacular (although one could still presume receptive and productive competence in the standard at the same time). Two respondents omitted the question on the questionnaire. One student, whose scores were included in the outcome data, did not submit questionnaire data. Therefore, excluding the 13 standard dominant speakers, 24 learners openly claimed some degree of competence or identification with the vernacular.

The results in Figures 1(a) and 1(b) show the teacher’s open coding of the same learners’ linguistic competence by observation in the classroom, compared with the students’ self-evaluations.

Key: 1 = Creole code (dominance/preference in one code – dialect 1); 2 = Standard code (dominance/preference in one code – dialect 2); 1.5 = Both codes (competence in two codes, but not necessarily bilingual in the true sense); LI-TJ = Linguistic identity judgements by the teacher; LI- SJ = Linguistic identity judgements by the student.

Figure 1(a). Data chart showing comparative linguistic identity judgements by the students and teacher in two classes (Class One).

Key: 1 = Creole code (dominance/preference in one code – dialect 1); 2 = Standard code (dominance/preference in one code – dialect 2); 1.5 = Both codes (competence in two codes, but not necessarily bilingual in the true sense); LI-TJ = Linguistic identity judgements by the teacher; LI- SJ = Linguistic identity judgements by the student. Figure 1(b). Data chart showing comparative linguistic identity judgements by the students and teacher in two classes (Class Two). The teacher’s coding of students’ linguistic competence by observation in the same two classes of English Composition, over Semester Two in 2012-13 and Semester One in 2013-14, illustrates the challenge of determining learner expertise in the language varieties which are spoken in Trinidad and Tobago. Figures 1(a) and 1(b) show some of these contradictions as the assessments by the

0

1

2

3

Names

Ling

uist

ic C

ompe

tenc

e

LI St

LI TJ

LI St 0 2 1.5 1 1.5 1.5 1.5 2 1.5 1.5 2 1.5 0 2 2 1 1.5 1.5 1

LI TJ 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 1

Abi Les Nie Col Sara Tan Wan Sop Mark Yok Den Kae Lau Che Carl Hut Arn Ama Glen

0

1

2

3

Names

Ling

uist

ic C

ompe

tenc

e

LI St

LI TJ

LI St 1.5 2 2 1 2 1 2 1.5 1.5 2 1 2 2 1.5 2 1.5 1 1 0 1

LI TJ 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1

Dyl OD Brit Kim Jen Nat Dav Kry Ron Al Rac AK Jam KK Shae Ky Lin Kez Van Ket

Teach Me to Write

67

teacher and learners coincided only four times among nineteen learners in Class One and eleven times in Class Two among twenty learners. In addition, both sets of data for Class One and Class Two, shared between the teacher’s and the students’ judgements, showed that when the teacher coded specific students as (1) or dominant in the vernacular, students generally counter-assessed their own abilities as (1.5), or as being competent in both the vernacular and the standard varieties.

Learner Identity through Qualification and Self-Esteem

By cross-checking the data entered on the questionnaire and the official records of the University, the researcher discovered that some learners provided incorrect CSEC grades on their questionnaires.

Of the thirty-nine students surveyed, three students who received Grade Three at the CSEC level inflated their grades by at least one proficiency level, or even two levels in one case. Two students exhibited a similar behaviour by substituting their Grade Twos for Grade Ones on their questionnaire. Four of these students were pursuing degrees in Natural Sciences and Computer Science. The others were pursuing Social Sciences and Education degrees, while one other student did not indicate the field of study. Most of these students were Trinidadian, two were American by citizenship, and one was Jamaican. Finally, two students had no formal qualification in English. One had received an exemption as a mature student, but had recorded a Grade One in spite of no formal qualification in English. Another, for whom no official record could be established, might have received a Grade Four; however, the result did not debar the student entry into the university.

The tendency towards self-effacement and deception among students suggested the potential effects of stigma associated with a ‘low grade’ in CSEC English and the impact of monolectal assessment and schooling on learners’ self-concept. Students possibly behaved in this manner because they perceived some level of threat regarding their eligibility for university education or some negative outcome in relation to their final grade.

Entry Grades and Performance in the Target Assignments

In principle, only Grades One to Three should be admitted to university. However, results in the previous section indicate that students gained access to the tertiary sector under GATE and through diverse routes.

Similarly, the class of 2012-13 showed a distribution of eight Grade Ones, three Grade Twos, two Grade Threes, three A level graduates, one high school diploma, and one exemption without a formal qualification in English. Among the students surveyed for 2013-14, four had Grade Ones, four had Grade Twos and seven had Grade Threes. Four had A level qualifications with an average grade of Grade Two at O Level. The predomination of O level qualification profiles at this private university is in keeping with records from the Statistical Digest for 2009-10 for institutions receiving GATE funding in the tertiary sector (Ministry of Science Technology and Tertiary Education, 2010).

According to the learner profiles of the Caribbean Examination Council, candidates with Grade One show a comprehensive grasp of the key concepts, knowledge, skills and competencies required by the syllabus. Candidates with Grade Two show a good grasp of the key concepts, knowledge, skills and competencies required by the syllabus. Finally, candidates with Grade Three show a fairly good grasp of the key concepts, knowledge, skills and abilities required by the syllabus. However, among 39 students, CSEC Grades One to Three provided no predictive benchmarks of performance in general in the tertiary level English Composition I course, by the mean score among students. In fact, Grade One score averages were slightly lower than Grade Twos and showed no marked correlation between the CSEC levels of proficiency in English and the mean scores in the narrative and expository essays ‒ the highest possible score being twenty. Grade Threes averaged lower than the other grades in the narrative essay in the vernacular. Figure 2 illustrates the mean score by entry grade in two classes, in each mode of writing.

In the narrative essay, Class One (2012-13) actually showed little difference in average performance between students with Grade One and Grade Three. In addition, there was no


68

significant difference between the mean scores of learners who either had CSEC Grade One in English or CAPE level Communication Studies in either the narrative or expository essay within this same class. Class Two (2013-14) showed an almost congruent average result for all CSEC proficiencies in the narrative essay, with less significant variation in the expository essay for those students with Grade Three.

Mode of writing Classes Grade 1s Grade 2s Grade 3s A levels Narrative Exposition

2012-13 Class One

12.00 15.00 11.75 13.3012.93 13.33 10.00 12.50

Narrative Exposition

2013-14 Class Two

13.37 13.50 13.00 13.6210.80 11.75 9.90 11.43

Figure 2. Students’ performance by entry-level qualification and average performance by class and CSEC grade.

Key: NQ = No qualification in English; NG = No grade in the University’s records; ND = No data; (A) = Advanced Level; (AD) = Associate Degree.

Figure 3(a). Students’ performance by entry-level qualification and performance by class (Class One).

Key: NQ = No qualification in English; NG = No grade in the University’s records; ND = No data; (A) = Advanced level.

Figure 3(b). Students’ performance by entry-level qualification and performance by class (Class Two). Contrary to teachers’ beliefs within the tertiary sector, the data showed no significant advantage in performance afforded by prolonged exposure to classroom instruction in academic English for learners who had CAPE A level qualifications, when learners also averaged at Grade Two at the O level prior to their advanced certification in English. Nevertheless, the prevailing assumption within the tertiary sector is that A level qualifications better equip the student for learning English for academic purposes at university level since some teachers lament that entry qualifications for the tertiary sector have been lowered since the government’s Education for All policy of GATE funding. In reality, the results among seven students with A level Communication Studies showed no advantage resulting from pursuing academic English at A level. Figures 3(a) and 3(b) detail

02468

101214161820

Pass

NQThr

ee

Three Two

Two

Two/Dip

One One One One One One A/OOne

One (A

)

Two (A)

Three

(A)

One

(AD)

Grade/Last Qualification

Raw

Sco

re

Narrative

Exposition

02468

1012141618

NG (o

)

Three

Three

Three

Three

Three

(Dp)

Three

Three

Credit

(Two)

Two

Two (Cer

t)Two

One One One One

Two (A)

Two (A)

Two (A)

Three

(A)

Grade/ Last Qualification

Raw

Sco

re

Narrative

Exposition

Teach Me to Write

69

students’ performance by entry level qualification and the average raw score per class of 2012-13 and 2013-14.

Also, the students’ performance on the narrative and the expository essay showed a closer clustering of raw scores in the data series between both types of essays overall among the students the class of 2012-13 (See Figure 3(a)). This class had a greater proportion of Grade Ones, which is perhaps consistent with a cluster of scores between 10 and 15. On the other hand, the distribution of raw scores among students of the class of 2013-14 showed a wider disparity between the narrative vernacular-based essay and the standard expository essay in the clustering of scores, with the score for the narrative essay being generally higher. This class, with a larger number of Grade Twos and Threes, unlike the class of the previous semester, showed raw scores ranging from 9 to 13. Overall, students mean scores on the narrative essay were generally higher for both classes.

The difference in raw scores between Class One (2012-13) and Class Two (2013-14) might also be explained by the recently adopted policy to abolish the placement procedures for the English programme at this private university and replace them with an implicit policy of mixing abilities and linguistic levels within any one class. Therefore, this case exemplifies the absence of a ‘bridging programme’, as might obtain at most TILs in the tertiary sector.

The results in Figure 3(b) might reflect the outcome of this new ‘all inclusive policy’ as cited above – the former institutional policy being that students without Grade One would have to take a proficiency test to be placed in English Composition I. Failure on this test would have resulted in being referred to the Writing Centre and having an opportunity to re-sit the test for future entry.

Linguistic Self-Assessment and Learner Performance in Both Essays

The results in this section are based on the students’ self-assessments matched with their raw scores. In this presentation of data students were not aware of any of their scores at the point of completing their linguistic profiles.

When the students’ linguistic values of ‘2’ for the standard dominant student, ‘1.5’ for competencies in both varieties, and ‘1’ for the vernacular dominant student were plotted against the raw scores for the narrative essay (in the vernacular), the data showed no significant difference in the mean score between standard dominant speakers and those of two varieties – the vernacular and the standard variety. This translated as an average score of 12.67 among standard dominant students and 13.75 among those with competence in both varieties. This result might suggest that the linguistic abilities of both sets of learners is quite close and that standard dominant students still have receptive and even productive knowledge of the vernacular with which they may or may not regularly engage. Predictably, the vernacular dominant students, coded as ‘1’, scored the most creditably on the narrative essay which required greater competence in the vernacular, yet an ability to compose the essay using appropriate organisation, ideas and content, voice, word choice, and sentence fluency. Figures 4(a) and 4(b) provide a graphic representation of the students’ overall performance according to their linguistic profiles.

The performance of standard dominant students in the expository essay (in Standard English) was less predictable. Those students who claimed Creole dominance, coded as (1), slightly outperformed those who self-identified as having competence in both varieties, coded as (1.5), and even those who asserted dominance in Standard English, coded as (2). Specifically, the mean score for the Creole dominant student was 12.35, compared with 11.6 for the standard dominant learner, and 11.5 for the learner with competence in two varieties.

By the same token, the mean score for the standard-based essay was quite low overall, despite 12 weeks of preparation, research, assistive notes and an open-book forum of assessment. The lecturer in English at this private university also reported that some students applied rote learning to expository mode of writing, even after 12 weeks of English Language instruction. It would seem that learners were too driven by the fear of failure to perform well. These conclusions are further supported by data which indicate the students’ attitudes to assessment in the vernacular compared with their attitudes to assessment in the standard variety.


70

Key: 1 = Creole code (dominance/preference in one code – dialect 1); 2 = Standard code (dominance/preference in one code – dialect 2); 1.5 = Both codes (competence in two codes, but not necessarily bilingual in the true sense).

Figure 4(a). Students’ self-assessment and performance by essay (Narrative).

Key: 1 = Creole code (dominance/preference in one code – dialect 1); 2 = Standard code (dominance/preference in one code – dialect 2); 1.5 = Both codes (competence in two codes, but not necessarily bilingual in the true sense).

Figure 4(b). Students’ self-assessment and performance by essay (Exposition).

Learner Confidence

In response to the questionnaire item which asked learners to provide an open-ended response for the degree of success they anticipated on the expository essay, 50% of the students registered positive attitudes and the other 50% registered negative attitudes towards the same assessment type. The largest percentage – 22% of positive attitudes – resulted from planning and research. It is also ironic that uncertainty would be the main negative attitude expressed in 33% of the learners’ comments, such as ‘I did not know where to start’. One learner (1%) did not provide feedback on this item in the questionnaire. Figure 5(a) shows the distribution of feedback.

In response to the same questionnaire item on their anticipated degree of success in the narrative essay, 84% of the students registered positive attitudes. The highest values of anecdotal comments were recorded for: ‘born speaking in Creole’ (40%); ‘invested time and effort’ (9%); and ‘the assignment was well-written’ (12%). Positive motivation is also implicit in these comments. On the other hand, 36% of the students shared negative attitudes, with 18% of learners feeling ‘unsure’. Figure 5(b) provides an attitudinal summary for the narrative essay.

02468

101214161820

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

1.5

1.5

1.5

1.5

1.5

1.5

1.5 1 1 1

NR

NR

Linguistic Self-Assessment

Raw

Sco

re

Narrative

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

1.5

1.5

1.5

1.5

1.5

1.5

1.5 1 1 1

NR

NR

Linguistic Self-Assessment

Raw

Sco

re

Exposition

Teach Me to Write

71

Note: CXC = Caribbean Examination Council (used interchangeably for CSEC).

Figure 5(a). Summary of attitudes to the essay in standard English.

Figure 5(b). Summary of attitudes to the essay in the vernacular.

Implications of the Findings and Education for All: discussion

The findings make it possible to refute and confirm prevailing beliefs about learner diversity and learning English for academic purposes as a result of Education for All in the tertiary sector. Beyond the economic accessibility of tertiary Education for All, specific education-linguistic factors should be taken into account, in particular, in making English language education truly inclusive by addressing such issues as, sociolinguistic diversity, learner preparation and motivation, and the content of the English curriculum within the sector. In this context, vernacular accommodation or integration is likely to play a more central role in the teaching of English for academic purposes in a democratised tertiary sector.

Issue 1: sociolinguistic diversity in the tertiary sector in Trinidad and Tobago since Education for All

In the preceding section, the students’ responses, which were coded according to vernacular dominance (1), mixed competence (1.5), and standard dominance (2), are representative of the complexities of the English Composition or English Usage classroom in the contemporary tertiary sector in Trinidad and Tobago. Also, the potential for varilingualism was still indicated within all of these individual codes. For instance, the number value of ‘1’ indicated ‘D1’ or dialect one, which is the students’ psychological, ideological, or productive preference for the vernacular (even though one still expected that students would have some competence in the standard variety). The code of ‘1.5’ indicated students’ competence in the vernacular, as well as competence in the standard variety. In this case, while some students indicated being fluent in both varieties – the vernacular

working on improvement

6%

rushed and jumbled3%

did not know to how start33%

not my best work8%

used to it11%

good at CXC17%

planning and research

22%working on improvement

rushed and jumbled

did not know to how start

not my best work

used to it

good at CXC

planning and research

born speaking40%

time and effort9%

difficult9%

not trained9%

not sure18%

fun3%

well-written12%

born speaking

time and effort

well-written

fun

difficult

not trained

not sure


72

and the standard – they were not considered to be true bilinguals or experts in both codes. This could be, rather, an acknowledgement of bidialectalism or varilingualism on the student’s part. Finally, the code of ‘2’ indicated full competence in the standard variety, as dialect ‘D2’. This number value of ‘2’ indicated the learners’ preference or comfort level in the standard variety, either in a psychological, ideological, or productive sense.

One explanation for the relatively superior performance of self-professed ‘vernacular dominant speakers’ in both essay types could be that learners who self-identified as Creole dominant speakers, coded as ‘2’, were perhaps more self-critical and discriminating in their approach to language learning. They were, therefore, more honest in their self-assessment at the level of linguistic competence and cognitive ability. This type of self-awareness would foster a non-permeable learner personality and cultural identity, which were not subject to the cultural hegemony, language attitudes, or the psychological effect of negative feedback with a monolectal culture in education. In other words, these students ‘knew who they were’ and ‘were proud of their identity’, which actually enhanced their performance as learners.

In contrast, the teacher’s open coding system by observation was more dichotomous as ‘1’ and ‘2’, in the sense of the vernacular versus the standard dominant identities, which did not consider varying competences in between, compared with the student’s auto-assessments, which were coded as ‘1’, ‘1.5’, or ‘2’, respectively. Such a system, on the teacher’s part, was representative of an exclusionary ideology that perceived ‘non-standard’ speech as ‘othered’ speech. Indeed, an exclusionary bias in favour of the standard variety can disregard all other linguistic nuances of language competence, and can imply the limited ability of the non-reflective teacher to judge a student’s true linguistic competence based on the limited situational context of a few classroom interactions and non-inclusive tasks, as assessment types. In summary, despite increased financial access to tertiary education under Education for All, through GATE funding, cultural and linguistic access to education for the non-traditional learner can remain limited if instructional leaders persist in teaching and using assessment practices which privilege one linguistic or class group over the other. This default mode of teaching English Composition is by ‘middle class teachers in middle class institutions to students who are middle class either in actuality or in aspiration – economic if not cultural’ (Campbell, 2007, p. 330). These ideologies are also discriminatory and anti-student.

A monolectal ideology in teaching English can also exclude passive and active areas of linguistic knowledge in the linguistic repertoire of both Creole dominant and standard dominant students, as subsets of the student’s overall language competence. In these circumstances, limited vernacular accommodation will offer a practical compromise between the exclusionary potential of monolectal teaching models and assessment strategies, and provide opportunities for the teacher to assess students’ linguistic potential in a holistic way. To not consider the linguistic and cultural background of the average university student as relevant to the teaching and learning experiences and assessment practices in contemporary courses in English Composition and English Usage, in a diversified tertiary sector, is to deny the language learner the opportunity to appreciate his own cultural identity in relation to the ‘critical’ skills and values that are required for university life, employability, and lifelong learning.

Overall, the data indicated the potential for sociolinguistic diversity in the tertiary level English classroom in the era of Education for All. Youssef (1996) described the sociolinguistic competence of most learners as varilingual, which comes about among young children in Trinidad and Tobago while they ‘grow and learn to mix codes in multidimensional linguistic spaces, and learn to use the spaces non-discretely, according to dependent situational factors and to [their] input exposure’ (p. 4).

Canagarajah’s (2006) use of the terms ‘novice’ and ‘expert’ (monolectal descriptors for speakers of nativised English), or ‘native speaker’ (the colonial alternative with ethnic or class undertones), is less relevant to bi-varietal contexts of code-switching or mixing between the vernacular with the standard variety, as in the Trinidad and Tobago context of tertiary education for all. If ‘expert’ suggests that the learner has complete control over keeping vernacular and standard varieties separate, according to required linguistic spaces and situations, then ‘novice’ would indicate the opposite lack of control over these codes without accounting for competencies in between. Hence in the bidialectal, or varilingual context, emphasis should be placed less on a monolectal scale of speaker competence and more on the students’ relative cognitive and linguistic

Teach Me to Write

73

abilities in relation to their language awareness, identity negotiation and problem-solving skills for required communicative tasks.

Issue 2: CSEC English, student preparation and student motivation at the tertiary level

Owing to the minimum entry requirement of CSEC English for entry into the tertiary sector, bridging the gap between report writing and narrative skills, to which the majority of students would have been exposed at the secondary level, and expository skills in English for Academic Purposes at the tertiary level, can prove challenging. Unless students had done the CAPE or GCE O Levels or General Paper at the Advanced Level, they may find that expository writing deviates significantly from the modes of writing to which they had grown accustomed to in CSEC English A (English Language). The low scores in expository writing from the case study might suggest that students may not yet have had the time to adjust to these new demands (see Figure 2 and Figures 3(a) and 3(b)).

In this case, finding ways to bridge the gap between old and new knowledge is paramount. In these circumstances, use of the narrative essay, in a different register and for a different purpose, may prove to be effective. In this context, true inclusion should seek to lower the level of learner anxiety and promote constructivist strategies, such as storytelling in vernacular, while still using an expository frame. In this way, teaching and assessing organisation, content, voice, word choice, and sentence fluency, as part of essay-writing skills, will be less intimidating and more implicit. Opportunities for building on pre-existing knowledge will make learning more pleasurable and creatively engaging. According to the data, the learners’ performance in the vernacular-based assignment seemed superior to the traditional expository essay by most of their raw scores (Figure 2), and learner’s seemed more confident by their positive attitudes (Figure 5(b)) to the essay in the vernacular.

Additionally, CSEC English teachers at secondary schools in Trinidad and Tobago also testify that exit assessments for the secondary level assign lower weightings to style in their assessment of written discourse in Standard English, compared with high weightings for similar assessments in English for academic purposes in the tertiary sector. While the Caribbean Examination Council does not divulge details of its rubric, five teachers and examiners from the Caribbean Secondary Examinations Council who were interviewed confirmed an orientation towards content in evaluating the students’ competence at the CSEC level, with less overt emphasis on language in the secondary level exam. Despite this assessment policy at the CSEC level, students with Grades One to Three are recommended as competent candidates for student uptake into regional and international institutions. Therefore, candidates who are mainstreamed into the tertiary sector in the region tend to navigate through tertiary level English courses with a false sense of expertise in academic English. This false sense of competence might explain why data from the case study showed no significant advantage among students with Grade One or among those who had more longstanding linguistic exposure to academic English at A level, by their performance in the expository essay.

Craig (1966, 1971) also points out that areas of active and passive knowledge of Standard English also contribute to a lack of motivation towards acquiring Standard English in the classroom context on the part of the Caribbean Creole speaker, and to a superficial sense of competence in the standard variety. Learners are also cognisant of the shared culture between the informal vernacular variety and target standard variety. Consequently, instrumental and integrative degrees of learner motivation, which are present in true bilingual learning situations, are absent in bidialectal learning situations where the target variety has shared Creole cultural components with one’s own mother tongue. In other words, Schumann’s (1976) notion of ‘social distance’, which refers to the cultural proximity of Trinidadian Creole English to Trinidadian Standard English, reduces the effort of the learner towards actively learning the standard variety. This situation differs from the situation of Creole English speaking students abroad who might be motivated to learn the standard variety of English of their host culture because of the prospect of assimilation and social mobility within a dominant culture.

Porter (1990) and Glazer and Cummins (1985) also suggest that time and immersion produce positive effects for low-socioeconomic level, limited-English students, who are exposed to


74

academic English upon entry into primary school. However, for the adult second language learner, expert competence in a second language or second variety is not a likely outcome through classroom instruction, with time and immersion. In the results of the case study, relatively low mean scores in the traditional expository essay, compared with the narrative essay in the vernacular, suggest the low impact of monolectal and mainstream assessments from the classroom setting on overall language learning in this context. Ultimately, the degree of standard or Creole dominance within the adult speaker’s bidialectal repertoire is dependent upon linguistic enculturation resulting from domestic and/or social use of one variety or another, to a greater or lesser extent. Length of instruction in the classroom does not usually play a role in learner expertise in the standard variety and may have a negative correlation to learner motivation. Sociocultural assimilation from non-academic contexts is likely to play a greater role in language dominance and motivation. Thus, as the tertiary sector becomes more diversified, English teachers will be obligated to explore relevant strategies which are cross-culturally and cross-linguistically stimulating, yet incisive and selective for achieving mainstream goals. This may mean some departure from a dependency on the expository essay only, to teach exposition, and a greater reliance on other culturally relevant frames for teaching structure and organisation in the interest of short-term learner success and long-term academic motivation and mobility.

On the other hand, the cultural and social networks of many students may not allow them ease or exposure to Standard English and standard language dominant cognitive processes, except for in the classroom setting. Consequently, the level of confidence expressed by students who are not used to writing in the vernacular, compared with the sense of ‘dread’ felt by those who had received five to seven years of schooling in Trinidadian Standard English, is significant to our understanding the role of cultural relevance and enculturation to the practice of teaching and learning in a bidialectal context.

Given all the circumstances of academic preparation, linguistic complexity and motivation, more time and balance may have to be given to vernacular integration strategies as part of the new mainstream curriculum in contemporary context of Education for All.

Issue 3: contradictions of a mainstream curriculum of uniformity in diversity

Currently at newly accredited institutions, course titles, such as English Composition and English Usage, are suggestive of general English content, which differs from the functional career-oriented streams of English found at HILs. Akin to a functional approach to English for academic purposes are streams in English for Natural Sciences, Social Sciences, Humanities, and Creative Arts, among others, having been developed in tandem with a diversity of career paths, which have burgeoned over decades of educational existence.

However, owing to the isomorphic effect of competition, accreditation, and non-specialised training among English Language teachers, a growing number of TILs have adopted the safe route of replicating a modular curriculum focus on rhetorical strategies in academic writing, which might be found at HILs, in general programmes, designed for Humanities students. This is at the expense of meeting their own students’ needs, as new TILs. Hence multi-varietal assessment strategies can be justified given the mis-match between the mainstream curriculum, which might have been adopted at TILs, and the true sociolinguistic characteristics of their actual student populations. Even HILs are moving towards more functionally relevant offerings in the face of increased enrolment under GATE, learner diversity, and expanded programmes. For instance, in the face of repeated failures by students in the Visual and Creative Arts, one institution has moved away from mainstream course offerings in expository writing preceding specialised ‘options’ per discipline, to offering more functionally relevant modes of academic English, such as creative writing for students of the Visual and Creative Arts. However, new large and medium TILs are less likely to have functional English programmes by discipline or proficiency level due to limited resources; so that, accommodation strategies within existing academic English curricula, which promote true inclusion, are of greater priority in these contexts in the absence of bridging programmes and the high incidence of mixed abilities within single classrooms. This is the only way that the true ethos of Education for All in a democratised tertiary sector will be realised, and more inclusive course delivery will be served to marginal linguistic groups within the sector.

Teach Me to Write

75

Limitations of the Quasi-Experiment

Although the quasi-experiment, which was part of this case study, was limited by a balance of instructional time between the assessments in the vernacular and Standard English, the structure of the course in English Composition I, and its accompanying assessment policies, the findings are significant for educators and policy makers within TILs of the medium and large category in the system. The exercise was conducted in the context of a large private university and the major findings of the quasi-experiment show that: 1. A total of 24 out of 38 students self-identified with some degree of full or partial competence in

the vernacular, which accounts for 63% of the subjects sampled. Even those students who claimed to be dominant in the standard variety showed competence in the vernacular by their relatively better performance in the vernacular-based essay, in relation to the expository essay.

2. Teachers can be inaccurate in their linguistic assessment of learners and can be unconsciously influenced by monolectal ideologies which make them instinctively biased towards the standard variety in determining the linguistic competence of their students. They are also limited by the situational context of the classroom. This reality can lead to inaccurate observations and lack of consideration for the learner’s holistic linguistic competence in terms of bidialectal abilities.

3. Some learners do feel a sense of stigma resulting from a perceived ‘low grade’ in CSEC English A (English Language) and manifest tendencies towards self-effacement and deception when asked to provide data on their entry grades for university.

4. CSEC grades are not generally reliable predictors of student’s competence in Standard English or their performance in academic English courses at the tertiary level. Neither is an A level certification a predictor of superior performance in English courses at the tertiary level, when students ordinary qualifications average at Grade Two. Proximate social distance, which refers to the cultural proximity of Trinidadian Creole English to Trinidadian Standard English, reduces the effort of the learner towards actively learning the standard variety.

5. Students who self-assessed as dominant vernacular speakers outperformed groups of students who self-identified as being fluent in the standard variety, as well as those who identified as being both vernacular and standard speakers, in both the standard-based expository essay and the vernacular-based narrative essay. This outcome is attributed to motivation and impermeable and secure learner identities among these high-achieving students.

6. Linguistic self-concept and identity are more significant predictors of student performance in English courses at the tertiary level than CSEC entry grades.

7. Students shared positive attitudes towards writing in the vernacular (84%), although 18% of the students felt unsure about the outcome. This result contrasts with positive attitudes which were shared by 50% of the students about the expository essay in Standard English, with 33% ‘not knowing where to start’. These results should be interpreted in the context of at least five years of secondary education for learners who were schooled in Standard English, but who were relatively untrained in writing in the vernacular.

In the anglophone Caribbean, the absence of codification in the vernacular continues to present a challenge to educators seeking to explore this medium for academic purposes. Nevertheless, the classroom is a powerful site of policy negotiation, and the pedagogies practiced and texts produced in the classroom can reconstruct policies from the ground up every time a teacher insists on one variety of language over the other or both (Canagarajah, 2006).

In spite of the limitations, the findings are of crucial importance to policy makers and educators at TILs because they show the importance of a multi-dimensional, social interaction approach to quality education and inclusion, which considers the perspectives of learners and the meaning they attribute to the educational process. With this being said, vernacular integration is a relevant education–linguistic and cultural strategy which is suited to language education for all in the anglophone Caribbean context.


76

Recommendations and Conclusions

The growth of the tertiary sector in the Caribbean region will continue to present challenges to educators in improving the reach of education in the home territories of the anglophone Caribbean, as national agendas accelerate to swell enrolment targets for tertiary education by 2015. This is the year targeted for the achievement of all of the goals of the Dakar Framework of Education for All (2000), particularly Goal 6 for ‘achieving 50 percent improvement in levels of adult literacy by 2015, especially for women, and equitable access to basic and continuing education for all adults’ (World Education Forum Drafting Committee, 2000).

Promoting humanistic goals, accommodating growing linguistic and sociocultural diversity, and addressing learner motivation within the tertiary sector, are paramount to eliminating covert forms of linguistic and ideological discrimination which are implicit to the implied monolectal educational policies of young post-colonial societies. Grappling with the education–linguistic dimension of Education for All, that is not tied to a former colonial agenda of a monolectal–monoculture, is new and unchartered territory for anglophone territories in the Caribbean, more so in the tertiary sector. In this context, the adoption of vernacular instructional strategies and assessment tools will foster greater social justice in the educational process through the integration of the cultural knowledge and the life experience of non-traditional learners within a diversified system.

Whether or not the non-middle class is now the certified ‘minority in the majority’ in tertiary education in Trinidad and Tobago because of Education for All is difficult to confirm without sectoral studies on the financial means of socio-economic groups within the system. Nevertheless, despite free tertiary education access through GATE funding to all eligible groups, teachers’ testimonies of mixed abilities and sociolinguistic diversity attest to the need for institutional adjustments at TILs within the local system. In fact, the Dakar Framework of Education for All calls for ‘closer linkages among formal and informal approaches to learning [in response to] diverse needs and circumstances of adults’ (World Education Forum Drafting Committee, 2000). In this context, students should have the option to be assessed in the vernacular even if the majority of instructional time is devoted to Standard English, so that their skills and cognitive abilities, which are untapped by the traditional classroom context, can be engaged in the academic setting.

The outcomes of this case study at a large private university show that some rhetorical elements of expository writing can be taught using a vernacular mode, and that learner attitudes towards this possibility are mainly positive. Additionally, a variety of assessment types can also be provided whereby minority learners who have met the requirements for tertiary level education can explore and develop their first language and its system of communication, alongside the standard variety, through a number of strategies, including personal narratives, translation exercises, and paraphrasing. However, the idea is not to overturn assessment in Standard English, but to create opportunities for social justice in educational assessment by including a range of linguistic competencies and sociocultural knowledge for a more democratic tertiary system. Secondary objectives for adopting vernacular-based assessment would include counteracting negative language attitudes towards vernacular use in education, and debunking the false premise that the global marketplace obligates monolectal competence from tertiary level graduates in keeping with archaic colonial ideals.

Through vernacular accommodation, adult students will not only benefit from the application of linguistic concepts of coherence and organisation to knowledge and experience that emerges out of their own life experience and cultural space, but they will also benefit from the principle of interdependency that first values what is their own language and culture, while they embrace the language of traditional education for consolidating their own mobility as marginalised learners in a conservative tertiary education sector. Only then, will true education for all be achieved.

Notes

[1] Junior secondary schools were formerly three-year schools from which candidates could be placed in a senior secondary school (an academic stream) or a comprehensive school (a vocationally oriented stream). With the expansion of the secondary sector by the Education for All policy between 2000

Teach Me to Write

77

and 2006, both junior and senior levels have been made into five-year academic streams. As five-year schools, former junior and senior colleges offer CSEC certificates at the end of five years of schooling (the minimum entry requirement for tertiary level education).

[2] French Lexicon Creole is still spoken in rural Dominica and St Lucia. Therefore, regional students from these islands may have to contend with French Creole, English Creole and Standard English.

[3] The University of the Southern Caribbean reported 2750 students for first time undergraduate enrolment (Official Statistics for the University of the Southern Caribbean 2009-2010). The University of the West Indies reported 3436 for the same period (University of the West Indies Statistical Review Academic Year 2009-2010).

References

Amstrong, D., Amstrong, A.C. & Spandagou, I. (2011) Inclusion: by choice or by chance?, International Journal of Inclusive Education, 15(1), 29-39. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20456950

Brown, J.D. (2004) What do We Mean by Bias, Englishes, Englishes in Testing, and English Language Proficiency?, World Englishes, 23(2), 317-319. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0883-2919.2004.00355.x

Campbell, C. (1996) The Young Colonials: a social history of education in Trinidad and Tobago 1834-1939. Kingston: University of the West Indies Press.

Campbell, K.E. (2007) There Goes the Neighborhood: hip hop creepin’ on a come up at u, College Composition and Communication, 58(3), 325-344. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20456950

Canagarajah, S.A. (2006) The Place of World Englishes in Composition: pluralization continued, College Composition and Communication, 57(4), 586-619. http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/20456910?uid=3739200&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21102702212063

Cepeda, F.C. (2012) Personal Narrative Rubrics: scoring guide for narrative/descriptive writing. Glendale Community College. http://web.gccaz.edu/~mdinchak/101online_new/rubric_narrativeessay.htm

Charter on Language Policy and Language Rights in the Creole-speaking Caribbean (2011). Mona: International Centre for Caribbean Language Research at the University of the West Indies.

Craig, D. (1966) Some Development in Language Teaching in the West Indies, Caribbean Quarterly, 12(1). Craig, D. (1971) Education and Creole English in the West Indies, in D. Hymes (Ed.) Pidginization and

Creolization of Languages, pp. 371-391. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Craig, D. (1977) Creole Languages and Primary Education, in Albert Valdman (Ed.) Pidgin and Creole

Linguistics, pp. 313-332. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Craig, D. (1982) Toward a Description of Caribbean English, in B. Kachru (Ed.) The Other Tongue: English

across cultures, pp. 198-209. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Craig, D. (1983) Teaching Standard English to Non-standard Speakers: some methodological implications,

Journal of Negro Education, 52(1), 65-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2294749 Craig, D.R. (2006a) The Use of the Vernacular in West Indian Education, in H. Simmons Mcdonald &

I.Robertson (Eds.) Caribbean Creole Language, pp. 99-117. Kingston, Jamaica: University of the West Indies Press.

Craig, D.R. (2006b) Teaching Language and Literacy to Caribbean Students. Kingston: Ian Randle Publishers. Craig, D.R. (2009) Bidialectal Education: Creole and standard in the West Indies, Linguistics, 14(175).

http://www.degruyter.com/dg/view/1$002fling.1976.14.175 Cummins, J. (1988) Second Language Acquisition within Bilingual Education Programs, in L.M. Beebe (Ed.)

Issues in Second Language Acquisition: multiple perspectives, pp. 145-166. New York: Newbury House. Cummins, J. (1999) Biliteracy, Empowerment, and Transformative Pedagogy, in J.V. Tinajero &

R.A.DeVillar (Eds) The Power of Two Languages: 2000, pp. 9-19. New York: McGraw-Hill. Cummins, J. (2001) Language, Power and Pedagogy: bilingual children in the crossfire. Clevedon: Multilingual

Matters. Devonish, H. (2003) Language Advocacy and ‘Conquest’ Diglossia in the ‘Anglophone’ Caribbean, in

Christian Mair (Ed.) The Politics of English as a World Language, pp. 157-177. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Devonish, H. & Carpenter, K. (2010) Swimming Against the Tide: Jamaican creole in education, in B. Migge,

A.Bartens & I. Léglise (Eds.) Creoles in Education: a critical assessment and comparison of existing projects, pp. 167-182. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.


78

Elsasser, Nan & Irvine, Patricia (1987) English and Creole: the dialectics of choice in a college writing program, in Ira Shor (Ed.) Freire for the Classroom: a sourcebook for literacy teaching, pp. 129-149. Portsmouth, MA: Boynton/Cook.

Finnegan, D.E. & Gamson, Z.F. (1996) Disciplinary Adaptations to Research Culture in Comprehensive Institutions, Review of Higher Education, 19(2), 141-177.

Freire, P. (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Seabury. Freire, P. & Macedo, D. (1998) Ideology Matters. Boulder: Rowman & Littlefield. Glazer, N. & Cummins, J. (1985) Viewpoints on Bilingual Education, Equity and Choice, 2, 47-52. Jenkins, B. (2006) Current Perspectives on Teaching World Englishes and English as a Lingua Franca, TESOL

Quarterly, 40(1), 157-181. http://www2.hawaii.edu/~cmhiggin/PDFs/Jenkins%20TQ%202006.pdf Johansson, R. (2003) Feature Speech at International Conference, Methodologies in Housing Research, pp. 1-14. London. N. (2003) Ideology and Politics in English-language Education in Trinidad and Tobago: the colonial

experience and a postcolonial critique, Comparative Education Review, 47(3), 287-320. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3542221

Migge, B., Léglise, I. & Bartens, A. (2010) Creoles in Education: a discussion of pertinent issues, in B. Migge, A. Bartens & I. Léglise (Eds) Creoles in Education: a critical assessment and comparison of existing projects, pp. 1-30.Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Ministry of Education (1975) New Primary School Syllabus: the aims of the language arts programme. Port of Spain: Ministry of Education of Trinidad and Tobago.

Ministry of Science Technology and Tertiary Education (MSTTE) (2010) Republic of Trinidad and Tobago: statistical digest on post-secondary and tertiary sector, pp. 1-76. Port of Spain: MSTTE.

Morphew, C.C. (2002) ‘A rose by any other name:’ which colleges become universities?, Review of Higher Education, 25(2), 207-223. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2002.0005

Observatory on Borderless Higher Education (2005) Trinidad and Tobago Announces ‘free university education for all’ – but at what cost to private and foreign providers? Observatory on Borderless Higher Education. http://www.obhe.ac.uk/

Official Statistics for the University of the Southern Caribbean (2009-2010): Enrolment 2009-2010 [Data file]. Available from the Quality Assurance Unit, University of the Southern Caribbean (2013).

Pickford-Gordon, L. (2013) English Foreign Language in TT, Newsday, May 18. http://www.newsday.co.tt/news/0,177818.html

Porter, R.P. (1990) Forked Tongue: the politics of bilingual education. New York: Basic Books. Roberts, P.A. (1994) Integrating Creole into Caribbean Classrooms, Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural

Development, 15, 47-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01434632.1994.9994556 Robertson, I. (2010) Language and Language Education Policy. Seamless Education Project Unit. Port of Spain:

Ministry of Education. Schumann, J.H. (1976) Affective Factors and the Problem of Age in Second Language Acquisition, Language

Learning, 4, 15-28. Siegel, J. (1999) Stigmatized and Standardized Varieties in the Classroom: interference of separation?, TESOL

Quarterly, 33(4), 701-728. Siegel, J. (2006a) Keeping Creoles and Dialects Out of the Classroom: is it justified?, in S. Nero (Ed.) Dialects,

Englishes, Creoles and Education. Malwah, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum. Siegel, J. (2006b) Language Ideologies and the Education of Speakers of Marginalized Varieties: adopting a

critical awareness approach, Linguistics and Education, 17, 157-174. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2006.08.002

Siegel, J. (2010) Second Dialect Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3587883

Tikly, L. & Barrett, A.M. (2007) Education Quality. Research Priorities and Approaches in the Global Era. Bristol: University of Bristol.

Trinidad Express (2012) Expanding the Gate on Tertiary Education: is it justified?, Trinidad Express, January 10. http://www.trinidadexpress.com/business-magazine

UNESCO (1953) The Use of Vernacular Languages in Education. Paris: UNESCO. University of the West Indies Statistical Review Academic Year 2009-2010: chart 10, 1-161.

http://www.mona.uwi.edu/opair/statistics/2009-2010/UWI+Statistical+Review+2009-10.pdf

Teach Me to Write

79

Winer, L. (1990) Caribbean Voices: the North York anthology (teacher’s guide). Toronto: North York Board of Education, Toronto.

Winer, L. (2006) Teaching English to Caribbean English Creole-speaking Students in the Caribbean and North America, in S. Nero (Ed.) Dialects, Englishes, Creoles and Education, pp. 105-118. Mahwah, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum.

World Education Forum Drafting Committee (2000) Expanded Commentary on the Dakar Framework for Action. Paris: UNESCO.

Youssef, V. (1996) Varilingualism: the competence underlying code-mixing in Trinidad and Tobago, Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 11(1), 1-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/jpcl.11.1.02you

APPENDIX 1 Narrative Essay

Write an essay of 500 words using the narrative mode. This essay will show a life changing experience and provide an opportunity for the reader to share in this experience. The essay should include an introductory paragraph, which outlines psychological state and implies thesis. You may choose one from the list or of your own choosing, while following the content guidelines. 1. Body paragraphs which show or discuss who or what influenced a personal transformation. 2. Body paragraphs which show how a personal transformation affected the author’s future

outlook. 3. A concluding paragraph which offers psychological healing to the author or the reader, or

insight into how the author’s values were formed, or how the author’s motives were shaped vis-à-vis the personal experience in question.

Topics

When grass grow on bottle (An unexpected turn of events) Gum make before teet (Respect for elders) Duck egg bigger than hen egg (Quantity is no guarantee of quality) Counting chicken in fowl belly (Prejudging the outcome) Gopaul Luck is not Seepaul luck (If God be for you, who can be against you?) Monkey know which tree to climb (A calculated risk) People in glass house should not throw stones (Judge not) Every tub mus’ sit on they own bottom (Personal independence) Where horse does reach, donkey does reach (Under estimating one’s potential)

APPENDIX 2

Table A1. Narrative rubric.

Trait 1 2 3 4 Ideas and Content

Creates little, if any picture of the situation being described. Severe digressions from the prompt. Lacks supporting details. Is repetitious, disconnected, or seemingly random.

Creates a somewhat confusing picture of the situation being explored. Notable digressions from the prompt. Contains limited, unclear details. Displays a vague storyline of narrative or description.

Creates a general understanding of the content being explored. Exhibits some digressions from the prompt. Contains some relevant details. Narrative or description is acceptable, if not distinctive.

Creates a clear picture of the situation being described. Is well-focused on prompt. Contains numerous, relevant details. Narrative or description is distinctive in its approach.


80

Organisation Structural development of a beginning, middle, and end is not identifiable. Sequencing is almost non-existent. Pacing is awkward. Transitions are missing.

Structural development of a beginning, middle, and end is not readily apparent. Sequencing often lacks coherence. Pacing is inconsistent. Transitions are often repetitious or missing.

Structural development includes a beginning, middle, and end. Sequencing is somewhat logical and effective. Pacing is fairly well-controlled. Transitions generally effective.

Structural development includes an effective beginning, middle, and end. Sequencing is logical and effective. Pacing is well-controlled and transitions clearly show how ideas connect.

Voice Conveys almost no sense of person behind the words. Uses bland boring tone and is lifeless and mechanical.

Seldom conveys a sense of person behind the words and generally lacks tone. Appropriate for the purpose and audience. Frequently seems lifeless and/or mechanical.

Conveys some sense of person behind the words. Generally uses tone appropriate for purpose and audience. Is occasionally individualistic, expressive and engaging.

Conveys a strong sense of the person behind the words. Uses tone appropriate for purpose and audience. Is frequently individualistic expressive and engaging.

Word Choice

Uses language that is neither specific nor precise. Displays an abundance of misused and overused words and phrases. Exhibits limited vocabulary. Uses clichés and jargon rather than original language.

Uses language that is occasionally specific and precise. Displays language that often seems forced or contrived for this purpose and audience. Uses few vivid words and phrases. Some overuse of clichés and jargon.

Uses language that is usually specific and precise. Displays language that occasionally seems forced or contrived for this purpose and audience. Uses some vivid words and phrases and generally avoids clichés and jargon.

Uses language that is specific and precise. Displays language that seems natural and appropriate to the purpose and audience. Effectively uses vivid words and phrases and avoids clichés and jargon.

Sentence Fluency

Uses sentences that almost never vary in length or structure. Uses phrasing that is choppy, incomplete, rambling, or awkward. Unintentional fragments confuse the reader. Dialogue, if present, is used inappropriately.

Uses sentences that seldom vary in length or structure. Uses phrasing that often seems rambling, forced, or contrived. Fragments, if present, often confuse the reader. Dialogue, if present, tends to sound unnatural.

Uses sentences that vary somewhat in length and structure. Uses phrasing that usually sounds natural and conveys meaning. Fragments, if present, usually add style. Dialogue, if present, usually sounds natural.

Uses sentences of varying length and structure. Uses phrasing that sounds natural and conveys meaning. Fragments, if present, add style. Dialogue, if present, sounds natural.

Teach Me to Write

81

Table AII. Expository rubric (adapted from Cepeda, 2012).

Trait 1 2 3 4 Ideas and Content

Creates little, if any understanding of the content being explored. Severe digressions from the prompt. Lacks supporting details. Is repetitious, disconnected, or seemingly random.

Creates a somewhat confused understanding of the content being explored. Notable digressions from the prompt. Contains limited, unclear details and displays a vague exposition.

Creates a general understanding of the content being explored. Exhibits some digressions from the prompt. Contains some relevant details. Exposition is acceptable, if not distinctive.

Creates a clear understanding of the content being explored. Is well-focused on prompt. Contains numerous, relevant details. Exposition is distinctive in its approach.

Organisation

Structural development of a beginning, middle, and end is not identifiable. Sequencing is almost non-existent and pacing is awkward. Transitions are missing.

Structural development of a beginning, middle, and end is not readily apparent. Sequencing often lacks coherence. Pacing is inconsistent. Transitions are often repetitious or missing.

Structural development includes a beginning, middle, and end. Sequencing is somewhat logical and effective. Pacing is fairly well-controlled. Transitions generally effective.

Structural development includes an effective beginning, middle, and end. Sequencing is logical and effective. Pacing is well-controlled and transitions clearly show how ideas connect.

Voice Inappropriate informal tone conveys no sense of objectivity. Individualistic and opinionated; not credible to an academic audience.

Generally lacks tone appropriate for purpose and audience. Generally lacks a sense of objectivity. Frequently individualistic and opinionated; not credible to an academic audience.

Generally uses tone appropriate for purpose and audience. Generally conveys a sense of objectivity. Generally insightful and engaging to an academic audience.

Conveys a strong sense of the person behind the words. Always conveys a strong sense of objectivity. Always insightful and engaging to an academic audience.

Word Choice

Uses language that is neither specific nor precise. Displays an abundance of misused and overused words and phrases. Exhibits limited vocabulary. Uses clichés and jargon rather than original language.

Uses language that is occasionally specific and precise. Displays language that often seems forced or contrived for this purpose and audience. Uses few vivid words and phrases. Some overuse of clichés and jargon.

Uses language that is usually specific and precise. Displays language that occasionally seems forced or contrived for this purpose and audience. Uses some vivid words and phrases. Generally avoids clichés and jargon.

Uses language that is specific and precise. Displays language that seems natural and appropriate to the purpose and audience. Effectively uses vivid words and phrases. Avoids clichés and jargon.

Sentence Fluency

Uses sentences that almost never vary in length or structure. Uses phrasing that is choppy, incomplete, rambling, or awkward.

Uses sentences that seldom vary in length or structure. Uses phrasing that often seems rambling, forced, or

Uses sentences that vary somewhat in length and structure. Uses phrasing that usually sounds natural and conveys meaning.

Uses sentences of varying length and structure. Uses phrasing that sounds natural and conveys meaning. Fragments, if


82

Unintentional fragments confuse the reader.

contrived. Fragments, if present, often confuse the reader.

Fragments, if present, usually add style.

present, add style.

RENÉE FIGUERA lectures in Applied Linguistics, at the University of the West Indies, St Augustine, Trinidad. Between 2003 and 2007, she was employed in the Secondary Education Modernisation Programme in Trinidad and Tobago, under the Education for All programme in the secondary sector, as an Education Specialist for Curriculum and Teaching and Learning Strategies. During this period, she managed curriculum writing projects and professional development for educators and personnel of the Ministry of Education. She was also part of the National Textbook Evaluation Committee during this same period. Her primary interests include applied critical discourse analysis, linguistics in sociocultural and educational contexts, TESOL, curriculum development and teaching and learning, and cultural history. Correspondence: [email protected]

LEIBA-ANN FERREIRA lectures in English Composition and Linguistics at the University of the Southern Caribbean. She holds an MA in Applied Linguistics and has taught for 26 years in the primary, secondary and tertiary sectors in Trinidad and Tobago. Correspondence: [email protected]

Documents

Teach Me to Write; But Respec’ Meh Right: a critical ... · University of the West Indies, St Augustine, Trinidad with LEIBA-ANN FERREIRA University of the Southern Caribbean, St