[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-598995-105":59,"doc-detail-598995-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","composition-forum-38-clarifying-the-multiple-dimensions-of-monolingualism","Composition Forum 38 - Clarifying the Multiple Dimensions of Monolingualism","","Composition Forum issue 38 argues that composition studies, despite growing openness to cultural and linguistic differences, still lacks unified pedagogical action against the politics of standardized English. The article clarifies the specific monolingualist ideologies educators contest and stresses the need to address the material consequences of linguistic hierarchies, moving beyond symbolic recognition of linguistic diversity to confronting institutional oppression and complicity in standard language ideology.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/composition-forum-38-clarifying-the-multiple-dimensions-of-monolingualism/598995/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/composition-forum-38-clarifying-the-multiple-dimensions-of-monolingualism/598995.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"jay","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-29","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":29},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What central goal does the article propose for linguistic justice in composition pedagogy?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"It calls for unified intention and action across the field to explicitly combat monolingualist ideologies that standardized English and institutional practices help uphold, even when educators have good intentions.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"Why does the article argue that current composition approaches may fall short?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"It contends that focusing mainly on cultivating rhetorical sensibility and treating linguistic differences as resources can miss the material consequences of monolingualist ideology and the harms produced by linguistic hierarchies.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"How does the article suggest shifting from classroom recognition to stronger intervention?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"It argues that inviting and honoring linguistic diversity is not sufficient on its own; research and teaching must more explicitly address how standardized languages historically suppressed varieties and oppressed their users, including educators’ own unchecked affinities for standardized English.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},598995,1792192290,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":29,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145},3985747858866,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_a8503ba1806abce46bf441b54a3ca4cd","Current Issue  From the Editors  Weblog  Editorial Board  Editorial Policy  Submissions Archives  Accessibility  Search  \nComposition Forum 38, Spring 2018  \nClarifying the Multiple Dimensions of Monolingualism: Keeping Our Sights on Language Politics  \nMissy Watson and Rachael Shapiro  \nAbstract: While we in composition studies may have grown more sensitive to and welcoming of cultural and linguistic differences in the classroom, we remain far from united in pursuits to combat explicitly in our pedagogies the politics of standardized English. To move toward linguistic justice, we call for unified intention and action across our field to explicitly combat the very monolingualist ideologies so many of us, no matter our good intentions, uphold and perpetuate in our classrooms and institutions. One issue preventing unified approaches in contesting monolingualist ideologies, as we see it, is that we do not forefront in our minds and our practices the material consequences of monolingualist ideology, nor have we come to a holistic consensus on the monolingualism paradigm. With this article, we hope to clarify just what it is we’re rejecting when we contest monolingualism, and, in so doing, be better prepared to combat more explicitly the harms of linguistic hierarchies.  \nDuring the spring 2016 semester, Missy’s department at City College of New York, CUNY embraced her request to propose a new course outcome for the first-year composition curriculum that reflected current disciplinary theories for better attending to linguistic diversity. Missy, excited at the opportunity and determined to craft an outcome that would endure, sought the expertise of scholars participating in a Transnational Writing Group on Facebook. She asked for feedback from the group and offered one option of an outcome to consider: “Acknowledge your and others'range of linguistic differences as resources, and draw on those resources to develop rhetorical sensibility.”  \nWhile all responses from the group were helpful, one made her pause. Ligia Mihut shared the following outcome that her department at Barry University includes in its first-year-writing curriculum: “Students recognize the extent to which cultural standards, institutional practices, and values oppress, marginalize, alienate, or create/enhance privilege and power.” Missy was at once refreshed by the explicitness of this outcome and hesitant to move forward with it, or some version of it, as the outcome she proposed at City College. Fully endorsing the notions captured in the outcome and believing wholeheartedly that City College should be an institution leading the pursuit to approach linguistic diversity with utmost care, Missy pondered over her hesitance. She questioned whether her department and institution were ready for such explicit stances on the oppressive nature of standardized English. And she suspected her version of the outcome, which focused more on honoring diversity and honing rhetorical sensibility, would be more welcome and still a worthy step in the right direction, albeit modest and, admittedly, not fully capturing what the field has long known about the oppressive role of standardized English.  \nWe believe that this discrepancy—what Missy felt was truly needed and just given her pedagogical position to explicitly combat standard language ideologies versus what she believed was feasible given the dominance of English monolingualism that persists at City College and across US higher education—is representative of the current state of composition studies when it comes to dealing with the politics of linguistic diversity. While we in composition studies may have grown more sensitive to and welcoming of cultural and linguistic differences in the classroom, we remain far from united in pursuits to combat explicitly in our pedagogies the politics of standardized English. We struggle to detach from the powers of standard language ideology, so deeply engrained within our discipline and p","cbCaim5H9REqslOR","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaim5H9REqslOR","pdf",183033,17,"English","# Composition Forum 38\n## Clarifying the Multiple Dimensions of Monolingualism\n## Abstract: Linguistic justice and monolingualist ideologies\n## Course outcomes and institutional readiness\n## Beyond inviting diversity: addressing harms and complicity","[{\"question\":\"What central goal does the article propose for linguistic justice in composition pedagogy?\",\"answer\":\"It calls for unified intention and action across the field to explicitly combat monolingualist ideologies that standardized English and institutional practices help uphold, even when educators have good intentions.\"},{\"question\":\"Why does the article argue that current composition approaches may fall short?\",\"answer\":\"It contends that focusing mainly on cultivating rhetorical sensibility and treating linguistic differences as resources can miss the material consequences of monolingualist ideology and the harms produced by linguistic hierarchies.\"},{\"question\":\"How does the article suggest shifting from classroom recognition to stronger intervention?\",\"answer\":\"It argues that inviting and honoring linguistic diversity is not sufficient on its own; research and teaching must more explicitly address how standardized languages historically suppressed varieties and oppressed their users, including educators’ own unchecked affinities for standardized English.\"}]","Composition Forum 38 - Clarifying the Multiple Dimensions of Monolingualism | PDF",1792087981,43]