What does Troyna and Williams claim about language labeling?

• A. Middle class language is valued as the standard; working class language is seen as inadequate.
• B. All forms of language are equally valued.
• C. Teachers largely ignore language differences.
• D. Working class language is seen as superior.

Answer: (A)

Language labeling in education serves to mark what counts as legitimate speech. Troyna and Williams argue that middle-class language is valued as the standard while working-class language is treated as inadequate. This isn’t a neutral judgment about different speech styles; it reflects and reinforces power and class relations within schools. When teachers privilege the language of the more affluent, students who speak differently are placed at a disadvantage in assessment, feedback, and expectations, which can shape their self-perception and future opportunities. The idea challenges the notion that all forms of language are equally valued and highlights how labeling contributes to unequal educational outcomes. The other options don’t fit because they imply equal valuation, indifference to differences, or a reversal of the power dynamics, none of which align with Troyna and Williams’ analysis.