By Nikki Caswell, East Carolina University, and Sarah Kelley

Linguistic Justice. Strike that. Now, Critical Language Awareness 

Within the last few years, writing centers have been a target of outside political maneuvers and strategy. Conservative think-tanks advise individuals to scour writing center websites for critical race theory, diversity, equity, and inclusion, or other social justice-like language. In response, higher education institutions have made writing centers scrub their webpages: erasing diversity language and/or statements. In Fall 2023, the University Writing Center at East Carolina University had their linguistic justice letter erased after a North Carolina education group posted a blog about “Woke English Teachers.” In Summer 2024, ECU flagged our writing center’s website as having language referencing diversity, equity, inclusion, and culture. While we’ve white-washed our website to be in compliance with the UNC system’s principled neutrality order and have removed our linguistic justice letter, our commitment to linguistic justice has not been squashed. 

When we drafted our linguistic justice letter, our goal was to invite faculty who teach writing into a space of reflection and action. As a call to action letter, we hoped to persuade teachers to move beyond simply grading based on standard edited English (see Johnson, Johnson, and Caswell, 2023 for more about the letter). When the letter was deleted from our website, we were stunned, hurt, and angry. We eventually got to a space where we could ask ourselves: “Why did we write the letter in the first place? What was our end goal? How can we achieve that goal in a different way?” Purple Ink was born out of our semester-long processing of the removal. 

We are sure the goal of the NC education group was to silence us out of fear of retribution. However, the opposite happened. We are even more committed to social justice work though that work looks different now (Spring 2025) as we play whack-a-mole to keep up with UNC System mandates and presidential executive orders working to eliminate anything in place to support minoritized bodies. Currently protected by academic freedom, Purple Ink is our answer.  Below, we share how we’ve used Purple Ink to maintain our commitment to linguistic justice and lessons we’ve learned running Purple Ink since Jan 20, 2025. 

White Mainstream English. Strike that. Now, Academic English

Purple Ink is an ally-based curriculum for faculty, similar to Safe Zone, that responds to calls for writing centers to engage racial and social justice more directly (Faison & Condon, 2022; Greenfield, 2019; Haltiwanger Morrison & Evans Garriott, 2023). We begin the workshop by giving participants background information on the different languages and dialects spoken in North Carolina. Census data suggests that over 1 million people speak a language other than English, and this doesn’t account for all of the other languages and regional dialects in the area, such as Black English, Native American languages, and Appalachian English (Migration Policy Institute, 2020; Wolfram & Readers, 2022; United States Census Bureau, n.d.). 

Next, workshop leaders share research on the correlation between creating a sense of belonging in the classroom and student retention. The ways that students communicate are deeply intertwined with their identities, so they need to know that their languages and dialects are valued in order to feel accepted and thrive academically (Johnson, 2020; Pedler et a., 2022). This section of Purple Ink includes stories from writing center consultants describing how they help students process their writing anxiety that is frequently prompted by negative comments from professors and strict assignment requirements. 

Drawing on research around linguistic justice, translingualism, and linguistics, we end by debunking common myths around writing instruction, such as the idea that students should code switch between “Standard American English” and their languages and dialects. We explain that code switching only reinforces the idea that White Mainstream English is good and other variations of English are bad by creating a false binary (Ashanti Young, 2009).

We also give concrete strategies that professors can implement to better support students and create inclusive classrooms. In this section of the workshop, we encourage professors to rethink how they approach grammar instruction. Workshop leaders emphasize that professors can talk about grammar with students, but they need to engage critically with the idea of “Standard English” (Baker-Bell, 2020; Olson, 2013). In other words, they need to explain that language is fluid, so it’s impossible to standardize, and there are different variations of English with their own grammar systems, all of which are valid (Lippi-Green, 2011). If professors cover grammar, they need to be clear about specific concepts they want students to pay attention to in their writing instead of assuming that they are self-explanatory. However, grammar should not be a gatekeeping mechanism that prevents students from succeeding in classes (Inoue, 2017). During this portion, we also ask professors to consider only commenting on grammar if there is something keeping them from understanding what students are trying to say. They should also use these instances as teachable moments to help students understand strategies for making edits moving forward.

Lastly, we talk with professors about how they can use trauma-informed pedagogy to promote linguistic justice. One of the defining factors of trauma-informed pedagogy is flexibility. Shevrin Venet (2021) states that more students can participate in learning when they have different ways to plug into materials and assignments. Applied to writing instruction, professors can offer options for students to demonstrate their proficiency, such as assignments where they can use their home languages and dialects. Additionally, professors need to focus on students’ assets if they want to be trauma-informed (Shevrin Venet, 2021). Variations in English should not be viewed as errors but rather different ways of making meaning.

Purple Ink ends with a discussion panel comprised of students representing different linguistic backgrounds, and they speak about their experiences navigating teachers’ expectations around White Mainstream English. Opportunities for discussion are built into the workshop, too, so attendees can chat with each other and share their own experiences with teaching and speaking their own languages and dialects.

Purple Ink was launched during the Spring 2024 semester, and participants reported afterward that the background and strategies we covered gave them greater insight into their students’ feelings, as well as useful strategies for creating more inclusive classrooms. Some even asked for more strategies. However, we view Purple Ink as a starting point for discussion around linguistic justice with faculty members, and we work closely with our University Writing Program to offer additional resources and workshops on the topic.

Ally-Based. Strike that. Now, Pedagogical 

We are grateful for the support of some administrators at ECU who have been supportive of our work from the beginning and have helped us navigate the constantly-changing political landscape. We’ve never been told we can’t do Purple Ink. Rather, the sense we’ve gotten is that we need to be doing this work because we have the ability to do so. We share here some of the advice we’ve been given and some of the changes we’ve made leading up to our Purple Ink workshop later this month. We hope that other writing centers can use this advice to find ways to continue to engage linguistic justice work. 

Distraction is the name of the game. We can’t do the work of Purple Ink if we are busy fighting mandates or spun narratives. Therefore, we’ve been encouraged to think through our powerpoint slides from the lens of “what narrative will get spun if an image of this slide is taken out of context?” As we revised our slides, we removed certain words such as White Mainstream English and Racism to prevent conservative, alt-right attacks.  

Buzzwords words come and go. As writing center professionals, we are rhetoricians at heart. We can name and frame our work in such a way that allows us to maintain our values while also shielding ourselves from external forces. Of course we want to name our work as linguistic justice work, but it’s more important to us that we do the work. Shifting from an ally-based workshop to a pedagogical workshop doesn’t change the goal of Purple Ink. 

Don’t over comply. As an institution that’s part of the UNC System, we have to adhere to federal and state educational directives as well as system-level directives. Even though some executive orders are being blocked by the courts, the increasingly conservative UNC System State Board is using it as an opportunity to enforce changes anyways. We could see the writing on the wall that certain words were being banned, but locally we were advised to not over comply. Do not stop using words or end programs because you sense they will end soon. Wait until that directive happens. 

Academic freedom. All writing centers should have academic freedom to engage in research even if research is not a component of the director’s job. However, we don’t want to ignore the lived experiences of directors in precarious positions who don’t feel supported or able to engage anti-racist work. The ECU writing center has a tenured faculty member as a director which has provided us additional academic capital. If you don’t feel like you can do this work alone, collaborate. Reach out to faculty on campus or other writing center directors that can help navigate the research-academic freedom angle. 

Student-led. Students have always been the heart of the writing center. Each UNC system directive has been directed at faculty and staff. Students have maintained agency. Have open discussions with your student-staff about what is happening in your context and how they can use their voices. Provide students with the resources they need to organize workshops, discussions, and/or speakers. Even if we aren’t allowed to do it, students can. 

Writing centers have always had political power on university campuses, but we seem to be in a time-space where we can (and need to) harness that political power to advocate for more socially just and equitable learning opportunities on college campuses. How we do that though might look and sound different in 2025, but the work can still happen. If Purple Ink speaks to you, please reach out so that we can share our curriculum with you. We’d love to see Purple Ink expand. 

References

Ashanti Young, V. (2009). “Nah, we straight”: An argument against code-switching. JAC 29(½), 49–76.

Baker Bell, A. (2020). Linguistic justice: Black language, literacy, identity, and pedagogy. Routledge.

Faison, W., & Condon, F. (Eds.) (2022). Counterstories from the writing center. Utah State University Press.

Greenfield, L. (2019). Radical writing center praxis: A paradigm for ethical political engagement. Utah State University Press.

Haltiwanger Morrison, T., & Evans Garriott, D. (2023). Writing centers and racial justice: A guidebook for critical praxis. Utah State University Press.

Johnson, B., Johnson, R., & Caswell, N.I. (2023). From anti-Blackness professional development to pro-Blackness actions: Educating faculty on harmful writing practices.” In T. Halwinger Morrison & D. Garriott (Eds.), Writing centers and racial justice: A guidebook for critical praxis (pp.179–194 ). Utah State University Press.

Inoue, A. (2017, February 27). Is grammar racist? A response. Asao B. Inoue’s Infrequent Words.

Johnson, E. (2020, January 1). Students’ sense of belonging varies by identity, institution. Inside Higher Ed.

Lippi-Green, R. (2011). English with an accent: Language, ideology and discrimination in the United ​States (2nd ed). Routledge.​

Migration Policy Institute. (n.d.) North Carolina. Accessed January 10, 2024.​

Olson, B. (2013). Rethinking our work with multilingual writers: The ethics and responsibility of language teaching in the writing center. Praxis 10(20).

Pedler, M.L., Willis, R., & and Nieuwoudt, J.E. (2022). A sense of belonging at ​university: Student retention, motivation and enjoyment.” Journal of Further and Higher Education 46 (3), 397-408.​

Shevrin Venet, A. (2021). Equity-centered trauma-informed education: Transforming classrooms, shifting systems. W.W. Norton & Co. Inc.

United States Census Bureau. (n.d.) North Carolina. Accessed January 10, ​2024​.

Wolfram, W., & Reaser, J. (2014). Talkin’ tar heel: How our voices tell the story of North Carolina. University of North Carolina Press.​