In recent years, CEGEP administrations have adopted various forms of so-called inclusive writing, where the use of full doublets (students), doublets truncated by midpoints (students), is increasing. generalizing formulations (student clientele), unusual expressions (student people), not to mention, in extreme cases, certain neologisms (iel, toustes, those, etc.).
Writing that raises professional issues
This so-called inclusive writing raises many problems in our eyes, in particular because it confuses grammatical gender and sex and because it bans the use of the undifferentiated masculine (acting as neuter).
First of all, its imposition encroaches on freedom of education in the college network. This is defined as “the right of any person to exercise freely and without doctrinal, ideological or moral constraint, such as institutional censorship, an activity by which he contributes to the accomplishment of the mission of an educational establishment » (Act on academic freedom in academia). Even if this law does not apply to CEGEPs, our unions and our administrations recognize this freedom, which is enshrined in our collective agreements and constitutes a major component of our professional autonomy.
However, by advocating the use of this new writing, college administrations impose on teachers an ideological conception of French and indirectly force them to support certain presuppositions about the French language which are those of the inclusivists. These presuppositions are far from unanimous among linguists and other language specialists.
This constraint is exercised even more directly against non-teaching staff, since these employees (administrative agents, support employees, educational advisors, etc.) are obliged to use this writing, whatever their beliefs. personal in this regard. In addition to causing division and self-censorship, this new way of writing, which involves all kinds of stylistic contortions in order to avoid genre agreements, creates increased difficulty in certain tasks, as well as a loss of efficiency.
Educational problems as well
This so-called inclusive writing also raises educational questions, because it conflicts with the way in which grammar was learned by young people in primary and secondary school, as well as with the way in which it is taught and evaluated in our schools. classes.
Furthermore, inclusive writing, by playing with the grammatical norm, at least indirectly sends the message that it would be purely subjective and personal, and that it would come from the desire or a priori of each person. This can only undermine our efforts to make our students aware of the importance of respecting it, in addition to opening the door to contesting the rules that govern the evaluation of the language in their work.
Furthermore, inclusive writing is in fact exclusionary and harms certain categories of students (non-speaking students, students with learning difficulties, suffering from a disability, etc.). It is therefore counterproductive, while CEGEPs intend to be more and more inclusive and offer the best chances of success to students who experience difficulties related to dyslexia or dysorthography, to expose them to these truncated spellings which present for them insurmountable obstacles, including that of marking an unusual difference between what is written (international students) and what must be spoken (international students? international students? international students and international students?).
Request for moratorium
For these reasons, we, who teach and work in the college network, ask ourselves a lot of questions about the practice of so-called inclusive writing by our school administrators.
We also have doubts as to the legitimate nature of this redefinition of French grammar, syntax and spelling by administrators who have neither the expertise nor the authority necessary to manage and even less to impose such a reform.
We therefore ask our administrations for a moratorium on the use of this so-called inclusive writing until a substantive, open, calm and informed debate has taken place and has not made it possible to reach a broad consensus, both among CEGEP staff and the general population, on this controversial subject.
* Also signed this letter: Philippe Amyot, literature teacher; Raphaël Arteau McNeil, philosophy teacher; Guillaume Bard, philosophy teacher; Julie Baribeau, professor of philosophy; Réjean Bergeron, former philosophy teacher; Louis Bilodeau, teacher; Pierre Blais, communications teacher; Nicolas Bourdon, French teacher; Stéphane Chalifour, professor of human sciences; Mathieu Chalifour-Ouellet, professor of philosophy; Julia Chamard-Bergeron, professor of literature; Ludovic Chevalier, philosophy teacher; Annie-Ève Collin, philosophy teacher; Diane Cotnoir, teacher of French and letters; Karine Damarsing, professor of philosophy; Pascal Deschênes, French teacher; Amélie Desruisseaux-Talbot, literature teacher; Ian de Valicourt, philosophy teacher; Sylvie Dion, French and literature teacher; David Dorais, teacher; François Dugré, former philosophy teacher; Jérôme Élie, literature teacher, retired; Georges-Rémy Fortin, philosophy teacher; Jean-François Garon, philosophy teacher; France Giroux, former philosophy professor; Julie Guyot, history teacher; Stéphane Kelly, professor of sociology; Richard Lacombe, communications teacher; Yannick Lacroix, philosophy teacher; Louis Lafrance, professor of psychology; Carmen Lepage, French teacher, retired; Dominique Lepage, professor of philosophy; Yan Maclure, history teacher; Nicolas Masino, teacher; Sébastien Melançon, teacher of French and letters; Jacques Méthot, retired teacher; Louis-Philippe Paulet, professor of administrative techniques; Julie Potvin, literature teacher; Anick Poulin, philosophy teacher; Alexandre Provencher-Gravel, teacher; Félix-Olivier Riendeau, professor; Caroline Rivest, teacher; Mathieu Robitaille, teacher; Élaine Rochefort, professor of literature; Christian Sabourin, retired geography professor; Benoit Séguin, French teacher; Luc Séguin, professor of philosophy; Justin Tremblay, French and literature teacher; Nicolas Tremblay, French teacher; Samuel Trudeau, history professor; Etienne Turgeon Pelletier, teacher; Thomas Vachon, teacher; Jean-François Vallée, literature teacher; Aïcha Van Dun, literature professor; Marc-André Vaudreuil, professor of philosophy.