This article explores the indexicality (the ideological process that links language and identity) of “standard” edited American English and the ideologies (specifically, standard language ideology and Whiteness) that work to create and justify common patterns that associate privileged White students with written standardness and that disassociate underrepresented—especially African American—students from “standard” edited American English. Drawing on interviews with composition instructors about their readings of anonymous student texts, the author argues that indexicality and standardness are mutually informative: The non/standard features of student texts operate as indexicals for student-author identities just as perceived student-author identities influence the reading of a text as non/standard. Ultimately, this article offers inroads to challenging destructive and enduring indexical patterns that offer unearned privilege to some students at the expense of others and, in the process, perpetuate race- and class-based privilege.AQ Note that APA style capitalizes Black and White.
BaughJ. (2000). Racial identification by speech. American Speech, 75, 362-364.
2.
BizzellP. (1982). Cognition, convention, and certainty: What we need to know about writing. PRE/TEXT, 3, 213-243.
3.
BizzellP. (2002). The intellectual works of “mixed” forms of academic discourses. In ShroederC.FoxH.BizzellP. (Eds.), Alt dis: Alternative discourses and the academy (pp. 1-10). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
4.
BucholtzM.HallK. (2005). Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach. Discourse Studies, 7, 585-614.
5.
CanagarajahA. S. (2002). Critical academic writing and multilingual students. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
6.
Conference on College Composition and Communication. (1974). Students’ right to their own language [Position statement]. Urbana, IL: Author.
7.
CourtsP. L. (1997). Multicultural literacies: Dialect, discourse, and diversity. New York: Lang.
8.
DelpitL. (1996). Other people’s children: Cultural conflicts in the classroom. New York: New Press.
9.
DelpitL. (2002). The skin that we speak: Thoughts on language and culture in the classroom. New York: New Press.
10.
DelpitL. (2004). What should teachers do about Ebonics? In Santa AnaO. (Ed.), Tongue-tied: The lives of multilingual children in public education (pp. 242-249). New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
11.
FoxH. (2002). Being an ally. In ShroederC.FoxH.BizzellP. (Eds.), Alt dis: Alternative discourses and the academy (pp. 57-67). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
12.
GeeJ. P. (1992). What is literacy? In MitchellC.WeilerK. (Eds.), Rewriting literacy: Culture and the discourse of the other (pp. 3-11). New York: Begin & Garvey.
13.
GeeJ. P. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourse. London: Taylor & Francis.
14.
HartiganJ. (2003). Who are these White people? “Rednecks,” “hillbillies,” and “white trash” as marked racial subjects. In DoaneA. W.Bonilla-SilvaE. (Eds.), White out (pp. 95-112). London: Routledge.
15.
HatchJ. A.HillC. A.HayesJ. R. (1993). When the messenger is the message: Readers’ impressions of writers’ personalities. Written Communication, 10, 569-598.
16.
IvanicR. (1998). Writing and identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
17.
MarshallC.RossmanG. B. (2006). Designing qualitative research (4th ed.). London: Sage.
18.
MatsudaP. K. (2006). The myth of linguistic homogeneity in U.S. college composition. College English, 68, 637-651.
19.
MatsudaP. K.TardyC. M. (2007). Voice in academic writing: The rhetorical construction of author identity in blind manuscript review. English for Specific Purposes, 26, 235-249.
20.
McArthurT. (1992). The Oxford companion to the English language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21.
McCartheyS. J.MojeE. B. (2002). Identity matters. Reading Research Quarterly, 37, 228-238.
22.
McIntyreA. (1997). Making meaning of Whiteness: Exploring racial identity with White teachers. Albany: State University of New York Press.
23.
McLarenP. (2000). Whiteness is . . . the struggle for postcolonial hybridity. In KincheloeJ. L. (Ed.), White reign: Deploying Whiteness in America (pp. 63-76). Cambridge: Macmillian.
24.
MiddletonJ. I. (2009) Post-civil-rights Whiteness and diversity: When are we going to stop talking about race?CCCC Blog.21, May2009.
25.
MilroyL. (1999) Standard English and language ideology in Britain and the United States. In BexT.WattsR. J. (Eds.), Standard English: The widening debate (pp. 173-206). London: Routledge.
26.
MossB. J.WaltersK. (1993). Rethinking diversity: Axes of difference in the writing classroom. In GlennC.GoldthwaiteM. A.ConnorsR., The St. Martin’s guide to teaching writing (pp. 438-461). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
27.
MossB. J.WaltersK. (1993). Rethinking diversity: Axes of difference in the writing classroom. In OdellL. (Ed.), Theory and practice in the teaching of writing: Rethinking the discipline (pp. 132-185). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
28.
NakayamaT. K.KrizekR. L. (1995). Whiteness: A strategic rhetoric. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 1, 291-309.
29.
RubinD. L. (1995). Introduction: Composing social identity. In RubinD. L. (Ed.), Composing social identity in written language (pp. 1-30). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
30.
SilversteinM. (1996). Monoglot “standard” in America: Standardization and metaphors of linguistic hegemony. In BrenneisD.MacaulayR. H. S. (Eds.), The matrix of language: Contemporary linguistic anthropology (pp. 284-305). Oxford: Westview.
31.
SmithJ. (1997). Students’ goals, gatekeeping, and some questions of ethics. College English, 59, 299-320.
32.
SmithermanG. (2006). Word from the mother: Language and African Americans. New York: Routledge.
33.
TardyC. M.MatsudaP. K. (2009). The construction of author voice by editorial board members. Written Communication, 26, 32-52.
34.
WorthamS. (2001). Language ideology and educational research. Linguistics and Education, 12, 253-259.
