The Impact of Linguistic Diversity on the Social Justice and Equity Pedagogy to Knowledge Construction

Heyder Sabir Hasan; Ali Mahmood Jukil

doi:10.25212/lfu.qzj.6.1.29

Authors

Heyder Sabir Hasan Department of English Language, College of Languages, Salahaddin University, Erbil, Kurdistan Region, Iraq
Ali Mahmood Jukil Department of English Language, College of Basic Education, Salahaddin University, Erbil, Kurdistan Region, Iraq

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.25212/lfu.qzj.6.1.29

Keywords:

LD, social justice, Equity Pedagogy, identity and Knowledge Construction

Abstract

Linguistic Diversity (LD) refers to linguistic variety. Here, it refers to the students’ functional linguistic or sociolinguistic academic and non-academic linguistic variation. Also, social justice and equity pedagogy are the representations of equal opportunities that ensure equal and constant development which leads to knowledge re/constructions.

Ecologically in and out of the institutional settings of Humanity Sciences studies (HSs) the situation is diverse linguistically and sub/culturally. The problem is that the humanity sciences students are supposed to be linguistically and professionally proficient and knowledgeable but the language policy, plan and practice do not assist them to reach their higher education standards.

So the questions are: Is LD implemented properly? Does the LD lead to knowledge re/construction and development? How is the social justice and equity pedagogy in the processes of teaching, leaning and classroom management?

The hypothesis is that the LD is not implemented as it is and as the requirements and needs of students. So the graduates might not be skillfully and academically prepared locally, nationally and internationally.

The study aims at finding the sociolinguistic diversity obstacles that affect teaching, learning and developmental knowledge construction via the investigation of the degree of social justice, equity pedagogy and distinctive individuals’ identity.

A questionnaire was constructed on the basis of the correlated contents of the study and some absolutely related resources. The items ask the quantitative and qualitative attitudes and perspectives of the senior students who are towards the topic.

The participants are the seniors at the HSs at Salahaddin University- Erbil (SU-E) who are diverse linguistically and culturally. Their attitudes can be reliable and valid because they had had experiences the university learning process strengths and weaknesses.

It has been confirmed and concluded that the de facto or LD praxis of implementation requires more accurate related techniques of teaching, learning and socialization processes. Because the students approve that they are not actively and skillfully learnt the academic languages, also, problems of social justice and equity pedagogy so that it does not help the students to have the ability to comprehend the contents of the curricula and have the ability to enroll in the lifelong national and international developmental knowledge reconstruction and creative constructions, careers of marketing and academic professional proficiencies

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

AITCHESON, JEAN. 1999. Teach Yourself Linguistics. London, Hodders Headlins.

BELL, ROGER T.. 1976. Sociolinguistics – goals, approaches and problems. London: Batsford.

Blommaert, Jan. 2013. Language and the study of diversity. In: Handbook of Diversity Studies (Routledge, Steve Vertovec, ed. 2014). Tilburg Papers in Cultural Studies 74. [pdf] available at https://www.tilburguniversity.edu/upload/2648cf26-31f2-4138-83d3-3176cabc28b0_TPCS_74_Blommaert.pdf (accessed 10 November 2017).

Cheshire, Jenny and Edwards, Viv. 1993. Sociolinguistics in the classroom: exploring LD. In: Real English: the grammar of English dialects in the British Isles. Longman, Editors: James Milroy, Lesley Milroy. Taylor & Francis. Routledge (2014). [pdf] available at:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274364652_Sociolinguistics_in_the_classroom_exploring_linguistic_diversity Accessed in 11 January 2018.

COMMINS, NANCY L. & MIRAMONTES, OFELIA B. 2005. LD and Teaching. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. New Jersey.

CRUZ, BARBARA C. ELLERBROCK, CHERYL R. VASQUEZ, ANETE. & HOWES, ELAINE V. 2014. Talking Diversity with Teachers and Teacher Educators: Exercises and Critical Conversations Across the Curriculum. Ed. Teachers College, Colombia University. New York.

CRYSTAL, DAVID. 2011. Internet Linguistics. Routledge.

----------, DAVID. 2015. Towards a Philosophy of LD. [pdf] available at: http://www.davidcrystal.com/?fileid=-4132 (accessed 16 May 2019).

GOSLING, DAVID. Supporting Student. In: Fry, Heather. Ketteridge, Steve and Marshall, Stephanie. 2003. A handbook for Teaching & Learning in Higher Education. Ed2. Kogan Page Limited.

Halliday, M. A. K. Ed. by Webster, Jonathan J. 2007. Language and Education. The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday. London & New York. Biddies Ltd., King's Lynn, Norfolk.

HUDSON, R.A.1996.Sociolinguistics. Ed, 2. Cambridge University Press.

HUSZTI, ILONA. 2013. Glossary on Language Teaching and Learning. Beregszász. [pdf] available at libgen.com.

LIM, CHIH-ING. 2006. Cultural and LD in Early Childhood Teacher Preparation: The Impact of Contextual Characteristics on Coursework and Practica. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. [pdf] available at https://cdr.lib.unc.edu/indexablecontent/uuid:2c87780c-78cc-4806-b7e1-1bbecbe9109c [accesses in 5 March 2018].

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. 1966. [Pdf] available at https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/ccpr.pdf (accessed 2 November 2019).

JANSSENS, MADDY AND STEYAERT, CHRIS. 2003. Theories of Diversity within Organisation Studies: Debates and Future Trajectories. [pdf] available at: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/6264654.pdf Accessed [3 November 2017].

MURRAY, DENISE E. AND CHRISTISON, MARYANN. 2011.What English Language Teachers Need to Know? Volume I: Understanding Learning . Routledge. Taylor & Francis.

NASIR, NA’ILAH SUAD . Rowley, Stephanie J. . and Perez, William . 2016. Cultural, Racial/Ethnic, and LinguisticDiversity and Identity. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282709140_Cultural_racialethnic_and_linguistic_diversity_and_identity .9/10/2019.

NETTLE, DAANIEL. 2002. LD. New York, Oxford University Press.

NEVEZ, ADAM LE. 2006. Language Diversity and Linguistic Identity in Brittany: a Critical Analysis of the Changing Practice in Britton. Thesis. Available at: https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/bitstream/2100/312/2/02WholeThesis.pdf (Accessed in 12 May 2018).

O’NEILL, G. (2015). Curriculum Design in Higher Education: Theory to Practice. Dublin: UCD Teaching & Learning. ISBN 9781905254989 http://www.ucd.ie/t4cms/UCDTLP0068 . pdf . Also available from UCD Research repository at: http://researchrepository.ucd.ie/handle/10197/7137

PILLER, INGRID. 2016. LD and Social Justice; An Introduction to Applied Sociolinguistics. Oxford University press.

Pritchard, Alan. 2007. Effective Teaching with Internet Technologies Pedagogy and Practice. Paul Chapman. London.

RICHARDS, J.C. AND SCHMIDT R. WITH KENDRICKS, H. AND U KIM, Y., 2002. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics. ed3rd. London, New York: Pearson Education Limited.

JHA, MADAN MOHAN. Barriers to student access and Success: Is inclusive education an answer? In : Verma, Gajendra K. Bagley, Christopher R. and Jha, Madan Mohan. 2007 International Perspectives on Educational Diversity and Inclusion Studies from America, Europe and India. Routledge.

LAZARD, GILBERT. What are we Typologists Doing?. in: Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. Hodges Adam And Rood, David S. ed . 2005 . LD and Language Theories. John Benjamins B.V.ch 1.

SAMPSON, GEOFFREY. 1980. Schools of linguistics. Stanford University Press.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 2015. United Nations [PDF] available at : https://www.un.org/en/udhrbook/pdf/udhr_booklet_en_web.pdf (Accessed in November 2019).