Gee V. Delpit

Can a student learn discourses that are outside their normal discourse? Does that affect status and what does that mean? Can someone acquire another discourse enough to challenge other discourses and how does that effect us? These are some arguments that Gee and Delpit address in their articles. They're similar in view, and Delpit is responding to Gee, and I have to say that I agree with Delpit more. Can a student effectively learn a new discourse well though, when they aren't native to this discourse and use it for empowerment and status? Can they make the transformation? I'm sure they can. They problem is they need to be exposed to the secondary discourse. We don't get this being so descriptive in language that we ignore and allow for mistakes in all mediums of langauge, whether that be spoken or written. We need to decide as teachers that it means, where our beliefs lie, and where we draw the line. Will we not correct spoken language, but correct written language? Neither? Both? At what extent is this necessary?