Get Rid of the SAT

Reading “Should Writers Use They Own English?” by Vershawn Ashanti Young begins to make me question the process in which many of us were admitted to this institution. Sometime during the course of our high school careers, many of us have taken the SAT or ACT with writing. In order to achieve a perfect score on the writing section of the essay portion of the test, the rubric (of the SAT) states that you must “Show a strong command of the conventions of standard written English.” Many of us practiced to write the same form of English that Fish defends in Young’s article to get into this very institution. Now that we are here, we must learn that it is acceptable to not write in the “professional” dialect of English that Fish supports? Yes, we must.

I think that it is in the utmost importance that we start socially accepting writing in other dialects. Writing at heart is simply another form of communication. Why should it matter if a person doesn’t have astounding vocabulary as long as they can get their point across to the audience? It is important to continuously question, challenge, and reform the processes and systems used in this country, such as the college admissions process. When I was writing my college applications, one the things I was constantly worried about was “do I sound smart?”. By worrying about how a person may sound through their vocabulary, you end up ignoring the actual content of the piece. These standards set by society need to change. Sounding “smart” shouldn’t be persuasive to society; however, being direct, succinct, and straight forward should be.

Changing the form of English praised professional and academic aspects of society are much more difficult than simply constantly questioning whether we are being critical of the lexicons of others. In order for a person to assert change on society, they must place themselves in an enough high position in an institution that holds power and influence (such as the government). People are more willing to listen to the President than any bystander right? However, people aren’t going to elect anyone that doesn’t sound “educated” (most of the time). As a result, it seems counterintuitive that you learn the “proper” and widely accepted form of English to get in a position of power and then advocate to other people to not learn that form of English. The “proper” form of English is what contributed to getting that politician into a position of power in the first place. I’m simply using the government as an example, but this concept of “formal” English placing people in a position of power is evident in almost every business or organization.

When Young said, “Black English don’t make it own self oppressed”, you begin to ponder about how racism may be institutionalized in every aspect of this country. He elaborates that it’s the attitude towards other people’s dialects that make other forms of English seem inferior to the “sophisticated” form. This statement in itself is somewhat a call to action. Young points the problem out for us, so let’s change our perceptions of the diverse accents and forms of English the United States has. In order to do this, we all must actively criticize ourselves and evaluate ourselves when communicating with others. This way we can elect officials that support these ideals and advocate for change more effectively on a louder and more powerful platform.

Code-meshing is a technique which combines different colloquialisms to try to embrace the diversity of the world. By making code-meshing (the combining of two different dialects) the new status quo, the preconceptions towards speaking in different dialect are essentially removed. This is a much more sensible way to replace the “proper” form of English that society holds on a pedestal. Young mentions that code meshing would help people be more rhetorically effective. I agree with Young because they don’t have to worry about following the rules of a “different language”. Rather than learning the rules and forms of a specific form of English deemed professionally acceptable, we should strive to learn how to communicate in and understand different colloquialism. Ultimately, this benefits us as writers because we can effectively deliver our ideas as writers to a wider range of audiences. Professor Dissinger further elaborated on how even Kamala Harris uses code-meshing to appeal to her audiences all across the country. She uses code-meshing to allow people understand her speech better and see part of themselves represented in the government.