Author Archives: brownsg4

Implementation of Code-Meshing in the Classroom

Posted on by
Reply

by Sophia Brown

The students of today’s classrooms come from varying backgrounds with a mixture of different languages and dialects. Unfortunately, teachers and the subsequent education system do not always take this fact into consideration when it comes to learning. As a result, many students are forced to master material from a curriculum that does not cater to their linguistic and cultural  diversity. Such a lack of inclusivity inevitably leads students to feel as though their language is “incorrect” and does not belong in an educational environment. Instead of simply forcing learners to comply with the rigidity of monolingualism, it is important that teachers and educators actively implement strategies to promote the use of an assortment of languages and dialects. In other words, teachers should encourage the concept of code-meshing, defined by author Vershawn Ashanti Young as the mixing of “dialects, international languages, local idioms, chat-room lingo, and the rhetorical styles of various ethnic and cultural groups in both formal and informal speech acts” (114). These strategies contribute not only to the general enrichment of students’ educational experiences, but also encourage students to embrace their unique language and most natural way of speaking. Through the application of multiple methods of linguistic diversity in schools, teachers can directly invite the use of multiple languages in the classroom. In this blog post, I will examine the implementation of multilingual code-meshing in specifically early education via a three-pronged approach: reading activities, writing techniques, and affirmation of students’ languages. 

To encourage code-meshing in classrooms, it is vital that teachers take an active role in mixing different languages during learning experiences, especially through reading exercises. By incorporating multiple languages during readings, teachers are able to teach their young students comprehension skills that go beyond the English language. For instance, a study titled “Code-Meshing and Writing Instruction in Multilingual Classrooms” notes the significance of providing readings to students that mix languages. This can be accomplished through the usage of bilingual picture books, such as books that involve both Spanish and English. Books like these are especially effective during class read-alouds, as it encourages students to think critically about language. Ultimately, having books in the classroom that incorporate multiple languages is beneficial because it can help students learn about various concepts involved in reading, such as composition, syntax, and semantics (164). Similarly, in an academic journal that examines code-meshing methods used by instructors in early and higher education, a teacher by the name of Tom emphasizes the importance of using texts that are “linguistically and culturally relevant” in his instruction (Michael-Luna and Canagarajah 61). He uses books that are primarily in English, but include Spanish dialogue and vocabulary. In particular, he makes sure to select books that contain narrative elements that both his Spanish-speaking students and English-speaking students are familiar with. By selecting multilingual texts, Tom’s students are able to learn themes, structure, rhetoric, and grammar that are present in multiple languages and cultures. In this way, readings that include two or more languages cater to a variety of students and avoid conforming to monolingualism. Students’ reading skills are greatly enhanced because children have an opportunity to learn about the beauty of other ways of speaking and their attached cultures rather than exclusively learning about the rules of standard English.

Additionally, code-meshing can also be achieved through writing exercises in the classroom. Using multi-language strategies in writing is effective because it puts learning into practice and enables students to express themselves via code-meshing. In the previously mentioned source “Code-Meshing and Writing Instruction in Multilingual Classrooms,” the authors discuss an example involving a fourth grade bilingual class. The students were tasked with creating stories that followed a similar form to the text Lucha Libre: The Man in the Silver Mask: A Bilingual Cuento, a children’s story that involves both Spanish and English narration. The students mixed English and Spanish vocabulary in their writings, including entire sentences in Spanish or simply replacing certain English words with Spanish (e.g., “shouted el representador) (162-164). Writing activities like these that prompt students to utilize more than one language are valuable in learning because they encourage students to synthesize and piece together meaningful sentences that blend different ways of speaking and writing. This positively challenges the students that speak the dominant language while allowing linguistically diverse students to express themselves. Additionally, techniques that involve using writing models to create sentences have proven to be helpful to students in putting their multilingual knowledge into practice. Authors S. Michael-Luna and A. Suresh Canagarajah’s article provides a real-life scenario in which students used a premade sentence that the teacher had written, but were prompted to substitute Spanish vocabulary into the wording. For example, students in the class completed the English fragment “Our earth gives us…” with supplied Spanish words such as arboles (trees) or agua (water). This particular activity proved to be useful to students in the long run, with students scoring high in both English and Spanish reading level evaluations. Writing activities that integrate code-meshing serve a dual purpose in that they allow students to achieve a level of comprehension in numerous languages while supporting meaningful expression.

Finally, affirming students in their usage of multiple languages or dialects helps to reinforce the implementation of code-meshing in classrooms. Instead of critically analyzing and correcting the language of students, it is important to highlight the significance of encouraging students to comfortably express themselves through their natural manner of speaking. In turn, this allows students to avoid feeling as though their language or dialect is subordinate to the dominant language. Authors Alice Y. Lee and Lara J. Handsfield offer an excellent perspective on this topic when they refer to the usage of code-meshing as “hidden gems” in students’ writing rather than mistakes to fix (165). These should be things that teachers should celebrate with students, as they display a level of linguistic and cultural understanding specific to the student’s background and knowledge. An example of a “hidden gem” also discussed by Lee and Handsfield is the usage of AAVE (African American Vernacular English) by a student named Jacobi. In this case, Jacobi’s teacher transcribed his verbal message onto a Mother’s Day card that included standard English and AAVE (e.g., “My mom is the prettiest when she smile” and “My mom is funniest when she laugh”). Instead of correcting these rhetorical choices, Jacobi’s teacher chose to transcribe the messages onto the card as said by Jacobi in his code-meshed speech because AAVE is a part of his linguistic identity (161-162). Teachers should follow this example, as it is essential to refrain from erasing the distinct, unique way that children communicate. It is imperative that students should feel free to express themselves in the way that they find to be most natural.

Though the benefits of learning multiple languages and code-meshing in early education are evident, some argue that exposure to other languages at a young age could be potentially confusing. The belief in this debate is that when children learn a secondary language, they will begin to swap words from their primary language and secondary language while communicating. This is a concern for many parents because they feel that this is disorienting for their children and for others. However, it is important to refrain from labeling this mixing of languages as being “confused”; rather, we must recognize that this intertwining of languages is simply code-meshing (Byers-Heinlein and Lew-Williams). Additionally, the idea that acquiring two or more languages hinders communication during early development is incorrect. According to Montreal Children’s Hospital, there is “no proof that young children who learn two languages at the same time get mixed up between the two” and that children will “adapt according to the language spoken by the person with whom they’re interacting and will know how to make the distinction between the two languages” (“Can a Young Child Learn Two Languages at the Same Time?”). From this information, it can be concluded that having knowledge of multiple languages is ultimately beneficial and that code-meshing is not a disturbance to a child’s linguistic growth.

In summary, the concept of code-meshing should be the new status quo in educational environments. With an array of diverse backgrounds and languages, it is only natural that teachers should make an effort to support and enable code-meshing in educational settings. Through strategies like writing activities, readings, and affirming students in their language usage, students are able to use code-meshing effectively and without the restraints of standardized English or monolingualism. Above all, it is crucial to recognize that code-meshing is a productive approach to language in educational environments as opposed to restricting students to one traditional manner of speaking. Code-meshing goes beyond simply gaining knowledge of languages and their subsequent composition; rather, it is the acceptance and integration of one’s identity in the context of communication.

 

Works Cited 

Byers-Heinlein, Krista, and Casey Lew-Williams. “Bilingualism in the Early Years: What the Science Says.” National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, 2013, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6168212/. Accessed 5 November 2021.

“Can a Young Child Learn Two Languages at the Same Time?” Montreal Children’s Hospital, The Montreal Children’s Hospital, https://www.thechildren.com/health-info/conditions-and-illnesses/can-young-child-learn-two-languages-same-time. Accessed 5 November 2021.

Lee, Alice Y., and Lara J. Handsfield. “Code-Meshing and Writing Instruction in Multilingual Classrooms.” The Reading Teacher, International Literacy Association, 2018, https://www.una.edu/education/educator-preparation/praxis-resources/Code%20Meshing%20and%20Writing%20Instruction%20in%20Multi-Lingual%20Classrooms.pdf. Accessed 30 October 2021.

Michael-Luna, S., and A. Suresh Canagarajah. “Multilingual Academic Literacies: Pedagogical Foundations for Code Meshing in Primary and Higher Education.” EBSCO, Equinox Publishing, https://web.s.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=1&sid=efd3377e-cdd7-400f-9aa8-673c4e3a985c%40redis. Accessed 30 October 2021.

Young, Vershawn Ashanti. “Should Writers Use They Own English?” Iowa Journal of Cultural Studies, vol. 12, no. 1, 2010, p. 114. Accessed 27 October 2021.

Enough is Enough: TIME Magazine’s Response to a Rhetorical Situation – Sophia Brown

Posted on by
Reply

Enough is Enough: TIME Magazine’s Response to a Rhetorical Situation

On Valentine’s Day of 2018, a shooter entered Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida and took the lives of seventeen people. The nation reacted in horror as yet another instance of gun violence in schools was stamped in the history books of America. But as the community of Parkland and the rest of the country mourned the loss of life, a sense of urgency and responsibility to prevent another devastating school shooting began to gain traction. This was felt most strongly among the witnesses of the shooting: Parkland’s own students. These students spear-headed a nation-wide (and arguably world-wide) movement known as March for Our Lives in an effort to halt gun violence in the United States and did so with immense bravery and passion. TIME Magazine best captured this movement when it featured five leaders of March for Our Lives on its cover of March 2018, with “ENOUGH.” plastered in bold lettering across the foreground. With this simple yet profound cover, TIME Magazine utilizes various aspects of rhetoric, including visual and textual elements, to effectively address the issue of gun violence in schools across the country. More specifically, TIME Magazine appropriately responds to the “rhetorical situation.”

As best put by American rhetorician Lloyd F. Bitzer, a rhetorical situation is defined as a “natural context of persons, events, objects, relations, and an exigence which strongly invites utterance” (4). In short, a rhetorical situation is a specific occasion that requires an appropriate rhetorical response. It should be noted that a rhetorical situation consists of three elements: exigence, audience, and constraint. Firstly, Bitzer explains that exigence is the issue that prompts the rhetorical response (6). Secondly, in terms of a rhetorical situation, Bitzer defines audience as people who are “capable of being influenced” by the rhetoric and then can act as “mediators of change” (7). Lastly, the constraints of a situation include anything that has the “power to constrain decision and action” that would be necessary to mediate the exigence (8). Constraint can exist in a rhetorical situation in various forms, from a reader’s personal beliefs to the medium in which a text is presented. Additionally, constraints can also stem from the rhetor themself. To fully comprehend the rhetorical situation presented by TIME Magazine, it is essential to understand the three fundamentals of exigence, audience, and constraint. 

In TIME Magazine’s rhetorical situation, the exigence is the need to address the issue of gun violence in the wake of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting. It is also important to acknowledge the backdrop of this situation, as the United States has been afflicted by a history of deaths as a result of gun violence. According to the book When Students Protest: Secondary and High Schools, more than thirty thousand cases of gun-related deaths occur in the United States annually (Bessant and Lohmeyer 39). With this context in mind, the TIME Magazine cover brings attention to the mounting calls of young students, particularly those of the Parkland students of the March for Our Lives organization, to restrict the usage of assault weapons in the United States. As best explained by the March for Our Lives website, the intention is to put a complete end to the unnecessary deaths of students due to gun violence and to create a world in which the country is “free from gun violence in all of its forms” (“How We Save Lives”). The exigence in this situation is rhetorical because if enough people demanded stricter gun reform across the country, politicians and lawmakers would be potentially more inclined to deliver policies that would ensure gun safety. In turn, this would create less occurrences of shootings, particularly in school settings. The fact that the exigence is capable of being modified is fitting of Bitzer’s description of exigence, as well. 

The rhetorical audience in this circumstance is the many readers of TIME Magazine across America who consume this text in either a digital or print form. The audience can also be classified as rhetorical because the readers are capable of being influenced and being mediators of change in the push for gun control. It is important to note the demographics when considering the audience, as well. According to a media bias evaluation by website All Sides, TIME Magazine is a left-leaning publication (“Time Magazine”). Therefore, one can assume that the primary base of TIME’s audience holds more democratic beliefs. Furthermore, TIME magazine traditionally has a generally older audience. According to a study conducted in 2016, the average age of a reader of this publication was fifty years old (Gaille). However, with the popularization of digital media in recent years, the magazine has become accessible to those of younger generations. A 2017 survey found that TIME was the second-most read or subscribed magazine among readers aged thirteen to thirty-five (“What Magazines Are Millennials & Gen Z Actually Reading?”). These demographics are crucial in understanding the audience because it impacts how receptive an audience member will be to receiving the message that TIME Magazine is attempting to communicate. 

The constraints of this situation include the audience demographics, the medium of the text, and the knowledge that is required to fully comprehend the text. Firstly, the audience can be considered a constraint because of its previously mentioned age and political demographics. Because TIME readers are more likely to be liberal, the magazine is able to publish content that a more conservative audience would be less accepting of. In this case, stricter gun control is a polarizing issue that conservatives are typically not in favor of. In contrast, liberals tend to support the passing of more restrictive gun laws. Consequently, TIME Magazine has the ability to comfortably print a cover with such a strong statement against gun use because they are aware that their message will most likely register with its left-leaning audience and that their rhetoric will not fall upon deaf ears. Furthermore, it is important to observe the ages of TIME Magazine’s audience as a constraint. As stated beforehand, the ages of TIME’s readers vary, with most of its print readers being older and its digital readers being younger. In this situation, it can be said that a younger audience will most likely connect with the rhetoric of the magazine cover because it is centered around the issue of gun violence in schools. With this in mind, an older audience may not be as understanding of the goals of the younger population in regard to curbing gun accessibility. 

The medium of the text can be considered a constraint, as it is in the form of a magazine cover. Due to the expansion of digital media, one could argue that print magazines are in decline and are not as widespread. As a result, this potentially constrains the accessibility of this text, especially in print form, among its target audience. However, with the popularization of digital publications comes greater availability to media across online platforms. TIME Magazine happens to fall into this category, as the magazine has an online website featuring its articles and cover stories. In turn, the audience is able to more easily access its content, including the March 2018 cover. 

In addition to the audience demographics and the text’s medium, the knowledge necessary to understand the text could be considered a constraint because the text is responding to an incredibly layered, multifaceted situation that requires contextual information. While this cover is addressing the shooting that occurred at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, it is also taking into account the preceding cases of gun violence that have plagued the country. According to the Sandy Hook Promise, there have been 1,316 school shootings in the United States since the year of 1970 (“16 Facts About Gun Violence and School Shootings”). Without understanding the context of school shootings in the history of the United States, one cannot not understand the urgency of the text’s message. Moreover, it is essential to be aware of who the figures featured on the cover of the magazine are: Emma González, David Hogg, Cameron Kasky, Alex Wind, and Jaclyn Corin. The audience simply cannot interpret the significance of this TIME Magazine cover without having the previous knowledge that these five students were witnesses to the Parkland shooting. It is also vital for the audience to know that the students are leaders of the March for Our Lives movement and are strong supporters of gun control and reform. With these pieces of information, the audience can entirely register the text’s rhetoric and the gravity of the single word emboldened on the magazine’s cover: “ENOUGH.”  

With all the exigence, audience, and constraints taken into account, one is able to more adequately evaluate the text’s overall effectiveness in its endeavor to respond to the rhetorical situation. This text can be considered appropriate for the situation because it tactfully utilizes numerous rhetorical elements and strategies to respond to the exigence, appeal to its audience, and utilizes its constraints. For instance, TIME Magazine applies multiple modes of communication in its text that enhance its efficacy. Explained by literary scholars at the New London Group, modes of communication are deliberate aspects of a text that exist to skillfully convey a message to an audience (Ball, et al. 14). Of the five modes of communication (visual, spatial, aural, gestural, linguistic), TIME’s 2018 cover best utilizes the visual and gestural modes of communication. Visually, the magazine cover is simple in its composition. It features the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School student-activists, the iconic TIME lettering in the background, and “ENOUGH.” in bold print in the foreground. However, this uncomplicated design is incredibly impactful because it is direct and blunt; the reader can immediately grasp the intended response of the magazine cover. The fact that the word “ENOUGH” is in bold across the front of the cover also adds to its unambiguous nature because it clearly communicates the text’s message. Finally, the famous TIME Magazine logo is a visual aid in this situation because it adds a layer of credibility, since TIME is a publication known across the globe for its reporting and dialogue on current events. As for the gestural mode of communication (gestures, expressions, etc.), the cover expresses its message primarily through the body language and facial expressions of the Parkland activists. All five of the students in the photograph have a serious, somber look about them as they stare directly into the lens of the camera. In particular, the body language of Emma Gonzáles (front) is also incredibly telling, as her arms are crossed in front of her body to convey a no-nonsense attitude. These gestural elements are an integral part in the overall function of the rhetorical response because they evoke feelings in the audience and appeal to pathos, which in turn creates an investment in the response that TIME is attempting to impart regarding the issue of gun control. On the whole, TIME Magazine’s cover is a fitting response to the situation because it incorporates powerful rhetorical elements that directly address the exigence and the audience while utilizing constraints.

Though gun violence in schools is a heavy, multilayered topic, TIME Magazine’s cover expertly brings the issue to the forefront with a call to action. Using the three components of the rhetorical situation (exigence, audience, and constraints), TIME is able to directly respond to the national matter regarding gun violence and gun control and to appeal to its more liberal audience. Though limited by certain factors, such as the convoluted context required to understand the situation, the magazine also makes use of its constraints. Additionally, the visual and gestural modes of communication featured on the magazine cover reinforces the overall strength of the rhetorical response through layout, composition, and human expression. The TIME Magazine cover of March 2018 is incredibly impactful not only in the rhetorical sense, but in its greater significance in the context of the United States’ history. The cover powerfully communicated the urgent need for substantial change in the gun laws of the country with a single word: enough.

 

Works Cited

Ball, Cheryl E., and Kristin L. Arola. “What Are Multimodal Projects?” Writer/Designer, edited by Jennifer Sheppard, Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2018, p. 14. Accessed 7 Oct. 2021.

Bessant, Judith, and Ben A. Lohmeyer. When Students Protest: Secondary and High Schools, Rowman & Littlefield, 2021, p. 39, books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=zi89EAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA145&dq=goals+of+the+march+for+our+lives&ots=IhfNmeiETr&sig=fu1KoRTbVRc_EqVrpRaeLd3D1V4#v=onepage&q=goals%20of%20the%20march%20for%20our%20lives&f=false. Accessed 6 Oct. 2021.

Bitzer, Lloyd F. “The Rhetorical Situation.” Philosophy & Rhetoric, vol. 25, 1992, pp. 4, 6-8. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/40237697. Accessed 5 October 2021.

Gaille, Brandon. “43 Distressing Time Magazine Demographics.” BrandonGaille.com, 14 Jan. 2017, brandongaille.com/43-distressing-time-magazine-demographics/. Accessed 6 Oct. 2021.

“How We Save Lives.” March For Our Lives, March Four Our Lives, 19 Aug. 2021, marchforourlives.com/policy/. Accessed 6 Oct. 2021.

“What Magazines Are Millennials & Gen Z Actually Reading?” YPulse, YPulse, 16 Oct. 2017, www.ypulse.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/What_Magazines_Are_Millennials_Gen_Z_Actually_Reading_10.16.2017.pdf. Accessed 14 Oct. 2021.

“Time Magazine.” AllSides, AllSides.com, 1 Mar. 2021, www.allsides.com/news-source/time-magazine-news-media-bias. Accessed 6 Oct. 2021. 

“16 Facts About Gun Violence and School Shootings.” Sandy Hook Promise, Sandy Hook Promise, 9 Sept. 2021, www.sandyhookpromise.org/gun-violence/16-facts-about-gun-violence-and-school-shootings/. Accessed 14 Oct. 2021.