Educators have discussions about students on a daily basis. In a past article, I discussed the notion of labeling students, and how labels may be helpful or harmful to students.
That article focused primarily on labeling students who speak a language other than English, and the consequences of those labels. Yet we use many other labels when we are discussing our students, sometimes with colleagues, and sometimes with the students themselves.
Semantics have a powerful impact; we have all had experiences that have either helped to build us up and feel wonderful or tear us down and feel awful. When we are discussing students, consider the words you use with your colleagues as well as with the students themselves.
Are the words you are using serving to build students up? Are our discussions framed in a positive format? Or are the words we used focused on deficits, are they inaccurate, or are they serving to tear students down? Are we defining students by their negative behaviors, for example, or their academic achievements, or lack thereof?
Consider, as a start, the adjectives and nouns we use to discuss students, and how those words can serve to define students.
For example, in the previous article, I shared the following examples of labels: Limited English Proficient (LEP), English Language Learner (ELL), English Learner (EL), English as a Second Language (ESL) Student, English as a New Language (ENL) Student, Emergent Bilingual, Students with Interrupted Formal Education (SIFE), Students with Limited or Interrupted Formal Education (SLIFE), and Long-Term English Learner (LTEL).
We should add bilingual students and multilingual students to this list, as they may provide more accuracy to the students we are discussing. When we use terms such as English learner, while accurate, we are limiting the description of the student in terms of language, and not acknowledging, reinforcing, or celebrating that the student is adding a language to their knowledge base and indeed becoming bilingual or multilingual.
We often hear the adjective “bilingual,” but this term does not capture the students that in fact speak multiple languages. Multilingual may be a more accurate term for students that already speak more than one language and are adding a third, fourth, or additional language.
Additionally, we use other terms to designate the proficiency level of students, including newcomer, beginning, intermediate, advanced, entering, emerging, expanding, bridging, etc. While these terms can be helpful as descriptors of the students’ current level of proficiency, consider how they are used, and if they provide information as intended, or if they serve as labels that lock students into a specific definition.
In other words, are we using these words as adjectives that describe a student’s current proficiency level, or has it become a noun, that essentially defines a student?
When it comes to other issues, such as academic levels, work ethic, socioeconomic status, disability, and other topics, the words that we choose to use with colleagues and with the students themselves can have a powerful impact as well. When we utilize some nouns as a way to describe a student, we sometimes inadvertently define a person by some attribute that may be temporary, or that may put them in a negative light.
For example, consider the term “homeless.” While this adjective may describe some of our students, are we using it as an adjective, or are we defining the student?
Some advocate using a noun such as “people” or “student(s)” before adding the adjective as a way to put the person before the adjective. For example, “a student experiencing homelessness” rather than “a homeless student.” “A student with special needs’ instead of “a special needs student,” “a student with autism” rather than “autistic,” or “students with disabilities” rather than “disabled.”
Behavioral and academic labels are also commonly used. For students that may have behavioral challenges, they may be labeled as “difficult” or “challenging,” as “struggling” or “low,” or as “Tier II” or “Tier III.” Again, these labels may provide us with some information about a student’s current situation, the terms may also be defining and provide us with a potentially negative perspective on the student.
Certain labels can connotate that the person being described is more a “thing” than a person. Dual language learner, English learner, disabled, beginner, struggler, TAG or GATE (talented and gifted or gifted and talented education), and other nouns may give us some information about a student but may also minimize a student into a simplified label that does not take into account the complexities of human beings.
We all came into education with a deep love and respect for students, and with a desire to support them in becoming the best people they can be, and to make a positive impact in the world. As we move forward in the school year and continue to do our best to meet the needs of each student in our schools, consider the language you are using to describe students.
It may not be necessary to completely change the language that we use; please just consider how the nouns and adjectives that you use when discussing students may impact the student and other people’s perspectives of the students we serve. Language is power!
