I used to think linguistic equity in schools was mostly about access—providing the proper support to help emergent bilingual students get to a stage they need to be at. However, based on our previous readings and discussions, it appears that the concepts of fluency and language learning in schools are often rooted in able-bodied and white norms. So much of what we call 'standard' is what has been historically institutionalized, and what gets erased in the process are the rich, complex ways people behave (especially immigrant, disabled, and racialized communities).
When I first encountered the term Crip Linguistics, I wasn't sure what to make of it. My instinct was to link it narrowly to disability studies and ableism, but reading Henner and Robinson changed my assumptions about what counts as 'legitimate' communication. They argue that notions of fluency, correctedness, and appropriateness are not neutral. Reading this made me think back to the two videos we watched in Week 2, one by Taylor Mali and the other by Melissa Lozada-Oliva. The way that Mali was critiquing how people speak 'these days' with their 'um's and 'like's creates a narrow path on what is deemed correct when speaking. Language should not be limiting in any way. We often say that everyone is special in their own way and that individuality adds value. If that's speaking to individuals as a whole, why is language not a part of that 'uniqueness'? I was delighted at the notion that Henner and Robinson put forward about reframing language use to value difference, interruption, variation, and other non-normative forms of communication.
Baker-Bells' paper made this even more apparent. 'Black English' is not just devalued, but students are expected to code-switch to survive in a system that treats their own linguistic traditions as illegitimate. Teachers would often say the switch is 'preparation for the real world'. But what does that say about the world we are currently in? Apparently, we live in a world that demands students to strip away pieces of themselves to be deemed intelligible. A world where 'support' actually means 'assimilation'. True linguistic justice means recognizing the linguistics of Black English as foundational, just like the 'standard' English that is taught right now. If schools start acknowledging these, the hope would be that it would be the new norm in society as a whole.
As the CUNY Initiative materials emphasize, 'safe and welcoming' environments in schools aren't just physical/legal protection (although these are very important, too). If students are praised for conforming to standardized English, then the classroom becomes another site of exclusion, no matter how many posters about diversity hang on the walls. In the videos, I realized how small acts, like a teacher using literature to connect with immigrant students or a counselor ensuring an undocumented student's access to college pathways, can transform these rigid norms.
But these examples also highlight the fragility of progress when it depends on individual educators rather than systemic change. Immigration law, curricular policies, and classroom practices all converge to shape the trajectories of emergent bilinguals—and at each level, deficit ideologies can be reinforced or resisted. Moving beyond compliance, classroom communities should include consistent affirmation of students' identities.
All these students' ways of language learning are not detours on the path to 'proper' English. They are already full and legitimate forms of knowledge that should transform how we imagine language education in schools.