| Abstract
|
:
|
The term Academic English (henceforth AE) refers here to any form of English that includes features that are expected in academic settings, especially in academic writing, features that for the most part no one uses in his or her native English. Some parents may use many AE features in the home. Most people, however, must acquire the features of AE at school. Yet, the starting point of the current study is the recognition that the home varieties of English of upperand middle-class children have many more AE features than the home variety of children of lower socioeconomic classes. And, because people of color make up a disproportionate percent of lower socioeconomic classes in the United States, students of color are less likely that white students to have AE features in their home variety. For students of any racial or ethnic group who grow up using vernacular English (henceforth VE) features such as those associated with African American Vernacular English, Nigerian English, Appalachian English, Ozark English, etc., the task of acquiring AE features is more challenging. The current study intends to illuminate the best way to teach AE features to college students who have not successfully incorporated these features into their writing. The goal of the research presented here is to reveal the relative effectiveness of two elements found in many successful programs teaching AE features. The first element, contrastive analysis focus on form (CAFF), helps students focus on language structure in context and to see the contrasts between the linguistic features that they use and the corresponding AE features. The second element, sociolinguistic awareness raising (SLAR), develops students’ understanding of the sociolinguistic reality within which their variety exists. In the current study, students were exposed to three treatment conditions: 1. CAFF-only, 2. SLAR-only, 3.Combined (CAFF+SLAR). The study’s main hypotheses are that SLAR instruction, present in both the SLAR-only and Combined treatment conditions, will increase participants’ sociolinguistic understanding, as well as their VE and AE appreciation. And that these increases will facilitate and act as a catalyst for the CAFF instruction. Therefore, the Combined treatment condition will have as a result a greater decrease in VE features than the CAFF-only or SLAR-only treatment conditions. The data collected for this study show that the Combined treatment condition was the only one that decreased the use of VE features in the participants’ writing. These results suggest that the combination of SLAR and CAFF instruction may represent a better way to help students reduce vernacular English features in their academic writing than CAFF or SLAR on their own. Finally, this study provides evidence that SLAR instruction adds value to form focused instruction when the target is acquisition of AE features.
|