Position Statements- SRTOL

I like your idea of posting that resolution on community literacy up, AJ. We can reference that as we move through texts and use it in our teaching practice to guide what we do. In the same spirit, I thought I'd throw up the 1972 resolution of Students Rights to Their Own Language (which was amended in '74 to read like the following):

We affirm the students' right to their own patterns and varieties of language -- the dialects of their nurture or whatever dialects in which they find their own identity and style. Language scholars long ago denied that the myth of a standard American dialect has any validity. The claim that any one dialect is unacceptable amounts to an attempt of one social group to exert its dominance over another. Such a claim leads to false advice for speakers and writers, and immoral advice for humans. A nation proud of its diverse heritage and its cultural and racial variety will preserve its heritage of dialects. We affirm strongly that teachers must have the experiences and training that will enable them to respect diversity and uphold the right of students to their own language.

Since this was controversial, they published the linguistic and cultural justifications and have that up for reading as well, with an updated bibliography.

I've been reading Parks's book about the SRTOL. While he argues that the truly radical language and history of the resolution were cut out, this statement still looks progressive today, and I don't think we do nearly enough to make this part of our classroom practice (as Parks mentions too).

CCC position statement

I was just navigating the CCC web site a little bit and came across the section containing the position statements. There is something undeniably encouraging, and inspiring, about being part of an academic field that sees the importance of explicitly laying out a position on the value and importance of community service work as scholarship. I cannot envision this existing in another discipline within the humanities. Here are the four reasons why "community-based literacy work should be valued and rewarded as institutional service by universities, colleges:"

1. Enriching the literacy environment of a region contributes to the welfare of all, including higher-ed institutions well positioned to take a leadership role on these matters.
2. Postsecondary students, instructors, and institutions can benefit from the curricular innovations developed by working with learners of all types. Innovations with one population can contribute to improvements with other types of learners.
3. Productive partnerships with non-academic organizations promote the reputation and stature of post-secondary institutions with local communities, business partners, and others interested in student learning.
4. College/community partnerships provide opportunities for students at various levels to meet, interact, and learn.

Very cool. I'm interested to see how these ideas are expressed, performed, explored in actual composition programs.