AAL vs. English

I received a journal from the National Association for the Education of Young Children the other day. Its about teaching literacy and different socioeconomic backgrounds.

Before I begin, I should tell you that I've only made it a quarter of the way through, so maybe it will make more sense the further I get into it. However, my understanding so far has me frustrated.

According to this publication, public schools are teaching children one on level, and since a typical group of children in the classroom come from different cultures and income levels many of the teachings going on are not including all children. My experience supports this, however, the following is what I disagree with::::

The discussion between the children and the language they speak. Suburban children speak english, urban white children speak english, urban african american children speak African American Language (AAL). They give examples of AAL vs. English in the journal and i disagree with it being a language. An example they give is when talking about Jesus being God's son, it was phrased "He really son" which is being called AAL and He really is God's son would be English.

There was a case study on a girl who spoke AAL but was taught proper English in the classroom, once it was mastered (by the end of first grade) they had her read a book that was written in AAL. As the child began to read they noted she had trouble reading it since she knew it was not proper English. As she read she would stop to make corrections of how it should be written. After the story she was asked if she liked the book. Her reply was that it was okay but it needed to be corrected a lot.

Okay, finally here's my issue. If you're going to label slang and improper use of pronouns and verbs a new language AAL, then why teach them to 'correct' themselves when learning English. If a little suburban child were to say "baby crying" it would be labeled as a developmental difference among her peers, however, if an urban child says "baby crying" they are labeled as an AAL speaker and the language would not be corrected.

I grew up in the city, I learned how to use proper English from the start and I think it has helped me become a great reader/writer, I did fairly well in Comp classes at Owens :)  If urban children are not being taught proper English because we are labeling the slang they learn in homes as a language, this could explain how public schools have so many children who are falling behind by the first grade. I think whether they are spanish speaking, AAL speaking or just haven't learned how to use verbs, pronouns or sentence structures correctly, they need to be taught from the beginning how to speak and write in proper English.

I understand that all children are different, and they should be taught at their levels, I am all for this, however, I think that to provide all children with the best education they need to be taught what is right as early as possible instead of excusing it for the first six years of their life and then telling them what they've learned is all wrong.

It further states that AAL was derived from the times of slavery, my only concern with this, is that means suburban children are born knowing this language as they begin to speak it until it is corrected.

There is a huge difference between the graduation rates in the suburbs compared to those in urban areas, I cannot help but feel that the gap would be closed if the idea of AAL were either omitted or treated differently. What if it was acceptable to let us city kids talk slang, but also teach us the use of proper English, its been proven that young childrens minds are like sponges and can learn different languages at once, if slang is going to be treated as a language, why not teach English along with it? Why avoid teaching them English until the middle of first grade?