Vershawn Ashanti Young, Rusty Barrett, Y’Shanda Young-Rivera, and Kim Brian Lovejoy. Working and Writing for Change edited by Steve Parks. With a new Foreword by April Baker-Bell and a new Preface by Vershawn Ashanti Young and Y’Shanda Young-Rivera, Other People’s Code-Meshing, Code-Switching, and African American Literacy presents an empirically grounded argument for a new approach to teaching writing to diverse students in the English language arts classroom. Responding to advocates of the “code-switching” approach, four uniquely qualified authors make the case for “code-meshing”—allowing students to use standard English, African American English, and other Englishes in formal academic writing and classroom discussions. This practical resource translates theory into a concrete road map for pre- and inservice teachers who wish to use code-meshing in the classroom to extend students’ abilities as writers and thinkers and to foster inclusiveness and creativity. The text provides activities and examples from middle and high school as well as college and addresses the question of how to advocate for code-meshing with skeptical administrators, parents, and students. Other People’s English provides a rationale for the social and educational value of code-meshing, including answers to frequently asked questions about language variation. It also includes teaching tips and action plans for professional development workshops that address cultural prejudices.
I really enjoyed this book as it opened my eyes to how code-meshing is an extremely important and undervalued teaching method for students who speak different languages and dialects that differ even the slightest bit from Standard English. The prejudices and blatant racism that impact each students ability and confidence to learn was also astounding to read about, and has definitely impacted me as a person.
I appreciated this book very much. So much history regarding the framework of which languages are appropriate or correct and a highly inclusive look at teaching applications.
Young and his co-authors persuasively argue for the value and feasibility of allowing students to code-mesh or blend their Englishes (Standard and undervalued) in communication. I especially appreciated the last section which focuses on code-meshing in the college classroom, demonstrating how code-meshing still allows students to learn the stages of the writing process and the importance of rhetorical choice. As a teacher of scientific writing, my only reservations for permitting my students to code-mesh is the lack of code-meshing examples in the scientific literature and that I will be unable to catch ungrammatical errors in students' use of undervalued Englishes. Then again, perhaps my students will teach me on both these points.