Delpit and Smitherman

DELPIT

Discussion and Journaling

1) Yes I feel that identifying her race would allow readers to see the passion in her writing and show a personal relationship between Delpit and what she is writing about. Identifying her race would show readers that she is not just writing about a topic in general to her. It would show that she is part of the discourse that she is writing about. I feel that her race identity does matter in context with the article. The message really doesn't change I don't think,knowing she is African American. Her message is still the same but identifying herself with the discourse that she is writing about would show readers that she really knows what she is talking about. Perhaps if she would put personal experiences good or bad this would also I think help to get her message across.

3)I do agree with what Delpit is arguing but I don;t necessarily agree with her views entirely with reference to Gee's writings. She defines 2 problems with Gee's writings when it comes to teaching literacy in the classroom. One being born into a particular social class and the other being values of one discourse conflicting with another discourse. However in his writing he also gives examples of how these problems can be over come. I feel he refers to them as problems that in fact do need changed, not that he feels this is and should be the norm. He gives in which students can over come this and even how sometimes those that have to work a little harder end up being better off in the the end. I do agree with Delpit however that teachers can and should have a big influence on students and they should be able to have resources available to them to achieve this.

applying and exploring

3)Yes I do see generalizations in Delpit's text.She says that just about any African American or disenfranchised person who has become successful has done it by acquiring a discourse other then the one they were born into.I feel this applies to anyone. We all have our primary discourse, family and heritage. In order to become successful we all have to acquire a secondary discourse, which then allows us to gain goods or money, or status from obtaining this discourse. Which you cannot do within a primary discourse.I feel that she is too vague in her explanation of this. She generalizes what Gee writes and should go into some greater detail on how things can be overcome as he states and not just skip over it. 

SMITHERMAN

pre-reading

Yes I would say that we all have. For the most part I think you can tell a lot about a person from there speech .Stereotypically people with poor speech are from poor neighborhoods.They speak differently then most people. When I was in the military,people often ask where I was from because of my Appalachian accent. People from Chicago talk really fast. People from New England say words differently.They accent the A's.

Questions for Discussion

2) I think that she is just trying to show everyone that would read this article that just because you speak differently you are not necessarily different. I think that when this article was wrote that it was in the 70's, at a time when white people and African American people didn't see each other as equals. and she is just trying to get this point across.

Applying and Exploring

5) I feel that she is trying to say that no matter who you are, that God is God. There are people who are Catholic and Muslim. They have  the same beliefs but they call God by different names. Therefore God does not ever change.