I am not a racist -- just because I teach proper grammar

Claremont students misinformed at the  Center for Writing

and Public Discourse (CWPD) a

I first started teaching English grammar and literature in August 1975, more than 50 years ago.

Ironically, today I am still communicating the rudiments of the English language to students, albeit in a very different technological environment than I used five decades ago.

Thus, I was utterly shocked when I read a headline on the LinkedIn website earlier this year that said this:

“Correcting Grammar is Not Racist.”

What are they saying?

The piece was written by Greta Long in May, and she was writing for “The Claremont Independent.” Here is how she introduces the topic,

This spring, we were hired by Claremont McKenna’s Center for Writing and Public Discourse (CWPD) and underwent a weeks-long onboarding process to prepare for our time as Writing Consultants. We expected to spend each of our eight meetings learning about writing in different genres and various approaches to assisting students. We certainly did not expect to be taught that correcting grammar is an inherently racist practice.

Greta Long, “Correcting Grammar is Not Racist,” The Claremont Independent, May 11, 2025

In reality, these people are complaining about people who are doing exactly what I am doing 50 years after I started teaching English.

Seriously.

Claremont’s attempt at appearing “cool”

What is shocking is that an organization that purports to teach and improve writing and public discourse could throw such nonsense at these young professionals. In fact, in the mission statement on their website, they present themselves in this way,

The Center for Writing and Public Discourse (CWPD) at Claremont McKenna College (CMC) supports the school’s mission to “prepare students for thoughtful and productive lives and responsible leadership in business, government, and the professions” by fostering excellence in written and oral communication.

“Our Mission,” Claremont McKenna College, 2025

I subsequently learned that while Claremont receives high grades in the US rankings, it is also somewhat controversial.

Now I know why.

That is a story for another time.

“Standard American English” (SAE)

Ms. Long explained what the issue is and why the approach of Claremont and others is wrong,

After our first meeting, we were assigned a research paper that detailed the ways that providing writing feedback can be racist – and the ways that writing consultants fail to effectively act as anti-racist advocates. 

The article is centered around the racist nature of language itself, specifically “Standard American English” (SAE). SAE is considered a formal and professional writing dialect, and is typically used in academic writing. However, according to the article, SAE is not just a particular register of writing, but also “represents the erasure of students’ other linguistic tools and languages.” As consultants, we were urged by our superiors to not correct student’s grammar or issues that may arise from dialectal differences and departures from SAE without request. We were expected to adhere to the belief that all dialects should be considered part of academic writing, and that to consider otherwise is to partake in racist ideology. The paper made it seem as though there was nothing we could do to be deemed an effective “anti-racist writing consultant.”

This idea, however, represents a flawed understanding of academic writing. Even students who grew up learning SAE and whose first language is English often do not write their academic papers in the same way that they speak.

The same is true for everyone. SAE is considered a standard for a reason – it does not “erase” any form of spoken language, but instead standardizes use of language to an academic setting. This does not invalidate different dialects, but instead calls students to a shared academic standard. The CWPD-assigned article insinuates that students will feel as though they are being discriminated against if their paper goes through grammatical correction. Implying that students of different racial backgrounds are unwilling, or unable, to meet academic writing standards is insulting and diminishes their capacity to engage in professional, scholarly work.

Greta Long, The Claremont Independent, May 11, 2025

Younse, Yinz, Y’all, Ain’t

In reality, what we and others who teach students to write English in an academic manner attempt to do is show them how to communicate in a clear, comprehensive, professional way. It sets standards so that people can aspire to communicate effectively at the higher standards of academics.

Now, I realize that we often speak in a colloquial way, using slang. Nothing is wrong with that style of communication with friends, but it is not a classy way of speaking.

Growing up in Western Pa., the pronoun "you," when used in a plural sense, may be "younse" or "yinz" — not sure how to spell it. I also spent a few weeks in the Deep South where that plural you is "y’all." Obviously, this is not language that should be used in an academic setting, whether from first grade to Ph.D. courses.

However, how is that racist on our part?

I have written in the past about being raised in a community in which there were no black or Latino members, no one of black or brown skin. I made a friends with a young black from Johnstown in a camp and he became my best friend — for a week. However, that willingness to recognize blacks as equals remained with me throughout my life.

So, calling me a racist hurts.

However, Ms. Long explained how offended she was by this instruction from Claremont,

One suggestion that the article gives consultants is to “not rank or judge writing as ‘correct’ or ‘incorrect’ and try to provide multiple perspectives when giving feedback.” It references theories of “code-meshing,” in which, “writers are encouraged to use non-standard Englishes and other languages in conjunction with SAE in academic writing.” This theory opposes “code-switching,” where students adhere to SAE in academic and written discourse, regardless of the dialect they use outside of school. According to the article, this practice of “code-switching” can be seen as a linguistic form of “separate but equal.” Rather than simply correcting students’ grammar, consultants are encouraged to create a new style of writing to protect student’s feelings and prevent discrimination. 

Not only that, but the comparison drawn between grammar correction and Jim Crow laws  trivializes the racism and discrimination that civil rights activists fought to dismantle. Academic writing is not racist in the way that segregated train cars or schools are. By striking a false equivalency between academic writing standards and segregation era laws, the article diminishes the substantive work done by civil rights activists.

Greta Long, May 2025

In short ...

This actually appears to me to be some reverse racism. This makes blacks appear to be of lower intelligence than the rest of the world. They cannot learn to write properly, Claremont says. So, demean everyone who works hard to speak and write in an up-class, academic manner is racist.

I am appalled. I have never been called a racist — until now.