Sitting in a classroom or reviewing a reading full of academic jargon can feel like everybody’s up in the clouds communicating in code while I’m down on the ground, staring blankly. Words whizz by like “late-stage capitalist, cis-hetero-patriarchy, marginalizing, neoliberal, post-democratic, imperialism,” and wow, those are some words. I have questions, like are they really talking to me? Because I don’t have the slightest clue what’s going on. I can’t see past all the “Fifty-dollar SAT words,” as Gambian-Canadian content creator Khadija Mbowe calls them. Yet I do want to know what is going on. Is there not a way this goes where most people can participate? That’s what we want in humanities classes, right? To speak to and about people. Could we bring it all back down to Earth? 

There are two main arguments for accessible language, or language that suits people of all abilities and life contexts. First, language should serve people and not the other way around. Dense language that keeps out people isn’t serving us. It leaves out people who are new to the humanities, those for whom English is not their first language, and people with learning disabilities. Disability rights activist Imani Barbarin addresses this in an October TikTok: “If your goal is advocacy, it makes sense to [have] materials that are good for everybody.” 

Second, relating things to what students observe, use, or experience in their own lives is empowering. When we originally made a zine (small magazine) on this topic, Sarah Shank observed that when all the information we get in school is presented up in academic outer space, it’s much harder for students to bring it back down for discussion. And if you didn’t understand in the first place, you might as well check out – it feels better than fighting frustrated tears. Hardly anyone in these situations gets to think critically, whereas classrooms that use fifty-dollar words sparingly and seek instead to find the substance behind the topics are notably more engaging and comfortable. 

The goal of humanities courses is to keep talking. As in, share what you learned with a vast array of people in class and outside of it. Language is for talking to each other not over each other. Mbowe, paraphrasing a paper by James Sledd says “the main purpose of language is to communicate… to speak and be understood, yet we’ve used it as a way to separate ourselves and to stroke our own egos by saying: ‘I speak better than you, therefore I AM better than you.’”

The other reason for speaking and learning without overly complicated language relates to gatekeeping intelligence. What does intelligence mean, and who gets to have it? When using fifty-dollar words is the bar, what does speaking from real experience amount to in class? In this context, Third Year Psychology and Peacebuilding Major Merry Yirga says, “I have felt like my experiences weren’t valid enough if they weren’t explained in a complex, academic way.” Even in cases where she didn’t have a word like “cultural hegemony,” and instead wanted to just use the word “racism” she felt inferior. This reflects the effects of academic elitism (or, higher in status being associated with an exclusive class of people). Video essayist Shanspeare asks, 

“What happens when we make language elite? …when we model it on high society, on the wealthy, on the predominately white? The simple answer to that would be that language becomes inaccessible to everyone who isn’t an elite…It becomes easy to spot those who do not fit into this sphere; and thus, it becomes easier to discriminate against them.” 

Using more accessible language is one way EMU can get some distance from these unwelcome consequences.

I am not saying to never use these words. I love language and a lot of those fifty-dollar words too. Still, reflecting on this topic has changed how I read, explain, speak in class, and find resources to share. 

So, for educators: Define! Provide context, together as a class or with readily accessible infographics (tips from Matt Tibbles, Peacebuilding Instructor) and try to avoid long strings of complex words/theories.

For students:

• Release the pressure to play by the rules of academic speech. Share from your unique point of view. 
• Too-dense readings have no reflection on your worth, your intelligence, or your place in the humanities. 
• If you’re comfortable participating in complex language, I completely understand. It can feel exciting, like “I get it, let me jump in too.” Could you define along the way or maybe replace with simpler terms? Be mindful of where you once were and the many who are still there. 
• Using simpler terms means you actually are grasping the material way better. Feel assured when you are coming from a more approachable place!
• It is completely okay to pause, go back, and ask for the definition of a word. I guarantee, other students will be quietly thanking you.