Other People’s Children by Lisa Delpit: Relevance for Language in Education

Lisa Delpit is an African-American educationalist. She obtained her Bachelor of Science Degree in Education from Antioch College in Ohio. Her first teaching position was at an inner-city open elementary school in Southern Philadelphia. After this, Delpit attended Harvard Graduate School of Education to pursue her Master's and Doctoral degrees in Curriculum, Instruction and Research. Most of her work has been focused on literacy development of poor, black children. The book Other People’s Children: Cultural Conflict in the Classroom (1995) is a collection of essays written by Delpit which were published at different times.

Skills and Other Dilemmas of a Progressive Black Educator

In this chapter, Delpit discusses the problems she and other Black teachers faced in educational institutions mainly dominated by White people. She says that as a teacher, the difficulties she came across while dealing with children of minority groups were similar to those she had when she was a student in a black Catholic school. The fact that children learn to write by writing in meaningful contexts is emphasized and she herself learnt writing in Standard English in this way. But the importance given to correct grammar and dialect more than writing itself makes it difficult for children from poor black communities to learn writing.

Just like her White colleagues in school, even she used the methods of open classroom, learning stations, use of games and shared writing to teach the children reading and writing. But gradually she observed that the Black students were unable to learn as quickly as others and were lagging behind. The writing process to literacy which focuses more on fluency than correctness was also one of the factors in the failure of these children to learn. Delpit says that such methods of teaching which integrate reading and writing, emphasize meaningful texts more than the form of writing are not helpful to the children from poor, minority backgrounds. These students do not get opportunities to read and write in Standard English because even their home environment lacks people who are aware of the correct form of literacy. Thus, when these students write, the structure and the grammar of the sentences are often not correct and instead of blaming the inadequate teaching practices, their socio-economic backgrounds are blamed for these mistakes.

I feel this is similar to the situation in my M.A. classroom where some of the teachers repeatedly keep saying that some students have ‘language problem’ and I completely disagree with the use of this term. If fluency in English and writing grammatically correct sentences is the only requirement to be called as proficient in language, then we are highly mistaken. We should keep in mind that they can read and write very well in their mother-tongue not only because they are familiar with it, but also because they have been taught the skills of literacy in that language. Hence, when we as teachers encounter children from various linguistic and social backgrounds, we need to teach them the skills of reading and writing instead of focusing on fluency of the language. Delpit says that making them practice handwriting, correcting their mistakes, giving them time to be ready for learning are very important factors which affect their learning. She defines skills as “useful and usable knowledge which contribute to a student’s ability to communicate effectively in standard, generally acceptable literary forms” (p. 18).

It is essential for all the students irrespective of where they come from, to develop technical skills and think critically as well as creatively to succeed in any field-education, social, economic or politics. In the end of this chapter, she asserts that for progressive education to benefit the all the students, the problems and suggestions of teachers from minority communities should be heard seriously and implemented wherever possible.

The Silenced Dialogue: Power and Pedagogy in Educating Other People’s Children

In this chapter, Delpit focuses on the teaching methods used in the classrooms and what effects these methods have on the learning of children from poor and Black community in America. She takes the debate of process-oriented versus skills-oriented writing instruction as the base to argue what teachers should do to help the children from minority groups in learning and grasping concepts easily. In the skills-oriented approach, the learning occurs from top (teacher) to down (student).

The teacher is like an instructor who tells the student everything he needs to know using lectures, assignments, and such conventional methods in order to attain a certain goal mostly good results in the examination, graduation, etc. (Knowles, 1975, cited in Morris, 2010). The process-oriented approach engages students in self-study, group activities, discussions which are guided by the teacher but does not need him to interfere continually. Students are given the freedom to express themselves by writing on topics relevant to them personally as well as culturally and the teacher later gives them feedback and follow-up instruction so that they can improve their writing skills (Troia et al., 2009, cited in Morris, 2010). This approach is useful for classes where number of students is large. Forming groups allows them to discuss and write on a given topic which helps the teacher to manage and focus on individual students.

Narratives of some Black students and teachers about their experience in White majority classrooms all say the same thing- they are not heard by the White (teachers and students). Their personal experiences, problems and socio-economic background are not counted in as important in the classroom. The White people believe that they know what is appropriate to be taught for all children including the Black. They trust research work done by other White people but do not consider the suggestions of fellow Black teachers and students in improving education for the Black. Delpit herself is a Black educator and she also faced such situations in classrooms where the process-oriented approach which is mostly used in American schools, did not prove to be beneficial for the Black students as compared to the White. She says that the dismissal of skills-oriented approach by the progressive educators is not good for the poor and Black children as they are not acquainted with the culture of the White people which dominates the curriculum and pedagogy in classroom. She says that this unquestioned authority of a particular section over the educational practices of the society can be termed as “culture of power”.

The authority of the teacher over students and the curriculum makers’ power to design the content and methods as per their world views are some of the issues of power that are enacted in the classroom. Mannerism of interacting, writing and dressing are the rules to be a part of the culture of power. These all represent the people i.e., middle class and upper class who hold this power but children from the lower class who are alien to this culture find it difficult to follow and survive in this code of conduct. The most important thing Delpit brings out of this discussion is that if rules of a culture are told explicitly, it is easier to follow them and succeed for people from other cultures. She gives example of a reading program called Distar which needs the teacher “to maintain the full attention of the group by continuous questioning, eye contact, finger snaps, hand claps, and other gestures, and by eliciting choral responses and initiating some sort of award system” (p.27). She says that this initiative helped all the children including the culturally deprived ones in learning to read. She refers to a study by Siddle (1988) which shows that direct instruction of standard writing procedures by teacher resulted in improvement in writing skills of the Black children while peer conferencing had the least effect.

But here comes the last aspect of the culture of power. She says that those who have the power do not acknowledge it while those who are deprived of it are more conscious of the need to acquire it. Liberal educators believe that expressing the power of knowledge a teacher has in the classroom will not give opportunities to students to explore and grow. Children from upper class come to the school with the knowledge of mannerism and skills required by the education system but other children do not have that culture at home and so they need to be told explicitly what is expected from them and how they can achieve it. Thus the belief of the liberal educators deprives the poor and Black children from success even before they could try for it.

She gives an example of a Native Alaskan teacher who deals with children who talk in what is called as Black English while the schools expect them to write in Formal English. She says that activities like letting the children interact with “various personnel officers in actual workplaces about their attitudes toward divergent styles in oral and written language” (p.44), asking the students to compare different writing styles, telling them the technical details of formal writing procedures, etc. helps them to learn writing in Formal English while not having to let go their own dialect of English which they use while talking within their groups.

I felt it interesting that throughout the paper, Delpit never promotes the methods or language of the dominant people but takes a pragmatic approach while saying that “they must be encouraged to understand the value of the code they already possess as well as to understand the power realities in this country” (p.40).

Delpit suggests that schools should teach these children the basic tenets of the culture which they do not get at home. Being from a different culture should not deny them access to quality education and later employment. She does not advocate the culture of power but says that “to act as if power does not exist is to ensure that the power status quo remains the same” (p.39). Thus, it is important that schools encourage the children from minority groups to value their own culture too but learn the styles and codes of the political world which exists outside the educational system. The teacher should not restrain herself from giving her expert knowledge to students but should also allow them to build concepts based on their contextual and socially relevant knowledge.

Delpit asserts that it is essential to involve the adults of the community in the decisions regarding content and methods appropriate for their children. If they wish their children to learn and abide by the rules of the dominant culture because that will lead them to success, they have the right to demand for it and State should provide them with such education. No one from other cultures should interfere and decide what children of minority groups should study. She presents a wonderful thought that “We do not really see through our eyes or hear through our ears, but through our beliefs” (p.46) and thus the people from both the sides i.e., those who are in majority and those who are deprived from power should communicate their beliefs and needs with an open mind so that it can be decided properly and in a just manner what is best for the children of the poor and children of color.  

“Hello, Grandfather”: Lessons from Alaska

This chapter is not only enlightening but also an eye-opener for me and for people who want to work in the field of education. Delpit explains beautifully how important it is for an educational researcher to be one with the world and not view it as a subject of his/her study. Similarly, for a teacher it is very important to contextualize the subjects with the students’ cultural backgrounds so that they are interested in learning. Even if they are given the technical skills to master reading and writing, they may fail in it again because of the decontextualized nature of subject matter. Some of the practices in the classroom conflict with the values of a community. For example, solitary reading creates distances between people of a group who value connectedness among members. The traditional method of group reading and reading aloud in turn actually helps children to understand foreign concepts by discussing it and also maintains their interactions instead of assigning them individual tasks.

The most interesting fact that is brought to our notice is the effect of family atmosphere on literacy learning. Children from the communities where they are looked after by more and more people prefer learning anything new from human teachers while those who belong to middle-class families where toys and similar objects are used in interaction prefer computers and books to learn from. Thus, for the former group, oral communication of literacy becomes essential as they look for the context, relationship with individual delivering the instructions, gestures, facial expressions, etc. while the latter group of students depend more on decontextualized words (p.96). The Western academic worldview reinforces this system of over-dependence on decontextualized words. Children are expected to elucidate the steps of problem solving in words and the act of solving it is ignored. Every action/reaction has to be supported by a verbal explanation.

Children who belong to communities which allow them to build knowledge based on observations find it difficult to cope up with classroom setting where the teacher is the ultimate authority followed by the textbooks. They become increasingly dependent on external sources for knowledge instead of being independent. Even if we want the children to be able to articulate their actions, we should not force them to give up the sense of connectedness they bring to schools. Most of these problems can be solved if the teacher is from the same community as the students. They understand the problems faced by these students and are in a better position to solve them. One of the most intriguing lines of this book says that learning which involves experiences of the children, encourages their connectedness and allows them to construct knowledge on the basis of their observations and insights, enables the children to be satisfied with what they learn and apply it in life.

Education in a Multicultural Society: Our Future’s Greatest Challenge

In the last part of the book, Delpit talks about some possible solutions to the problems encountered in classrooms with diverse population. This part is particularly important for teachers to understand where they may be making mistakes and how they can prevent them. Delpit clearly categorizes these problems which often arise because of cultural differences between the students and the school. The students’ perception of teacher is shaped by the discourse styles and the interaction between teachers and students. Certain ethnic groups use explicit display of power at home and if teachers are not explicit about their authority then students do not feel respectful about the teacher. If teachers are not aware of the ethos of a community, they may misinterpret the behaviour of children belonging to these communities. For example, girls of certain ethnic groups find it difficult to speak up in gender-mixed settings while boys of some communities are overt about their expression of pleasure or displeasure. Teachers should take into account these different attitudes and deal with the students accordingly instead of judging them collectively as a group.

Delpit gives examples from African-American and Native American classrooms to explain how stereotyping of children from these groups by teachers negatively impacts the teaching-learning process. Teachers often tend to look at the students’ weaknesses instead of focusing on their skills and do not think it essential to work on their problems. She says that unless teachers become aware of the cultural background of children and their inherent talent, no matter what method they use, the teaching will be ineffective for these children. She suggests that the teacher training programs should expose them to programs which have been successful in educating poor children instead of telling them about the failures of educators in teaching children of ‘disadvantaged’ classes. She proposes that during the teacher education program, community members should be invited to classrooms to know their views about education for their children and the changes they may want in the system.

This book raises important issues about traditional progressive education and its implication on education of poor, black children. Delpit uses narratives of teachers, parents and students which give us a broader view of the problems faced in educating these children. Her language is simple and reaches a larger audience especially teachers. It acts like a guide to teachers in devising practices helpful for both students and themselves.

References

Delpit, L. (2006). Other People’s Children: Cultural Conflict in the Classroom (2nd ed.). New York, NY: The New Press

Morris, C. (2010). The Effect of Process-Oriented versus Teacher-Directed Instructional Approaches with Students of Varying Levels of Social Development within the Community College. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/394483/The_Effect_of_Process-Oriented_versus_Teacher-Directed_Instructional_Approaches_with_Students_of_Varying_Levels_of_Social_Development_within_the_Community_College