Towards Culturally Relevant Pedagogy:

A Workshop on AAVE for U.S. Teachers

Micah Jenkins
LIN 6748.901: Contrastive Analysis
December 6, 2012

Introduction and Literature Review

The American educational system is failing its Black students. This statement is bold,
and it may even seem alarmist, but statistics seems to suggest that it is true. According to
Whitney (2005), only 56% black students manage to graduate from high school (p. 66). In the
Oakland school district, the birthplace of the Ebonics debate, the average grade point average of
Black students is a D+. Half of the student population is comprised of African Americans, but
African Americans hold 71% of the special education seats and account for 64% of those who
repeat a grade (Mordaunt, 2011, p. 81). Rickford (2005) found that only 14% of African
American students at a Philadelphia High School were able to read at above a basic level (p. 21)
and Obgu (2003) found that Black students from Ohios Shaker Heights community consistently
had lower grade point averages and proficiency test scores than their white counterparts, in
additional to lower college attendance rates.
Some of these failure rates may be attributed to linguistic difference: At least 80% of
African Americans in the US speak African American Vernacular English as their home dialect
(Mordaunt, 2011), and over 90% of African Americans use one or more aspects of the dialect
some of the time (Whitney, 2005). When these AAVE speakers enter into academic settings
and are unable to produce Standard American English (the vernacular of pedagogy) their grades
suffer. According to Hecht (2003), speakers of AAVE are often misdiagnosed with learning
disabilities and Wheeler (2004) and Rickford (2005) both assert that prejudices that instructors
hold toward AAVE and AAVE speakers can lead to reduced teacher expectations and reduced
student performance.
The current literature also suggests that dialectal difference alone does not explain
African Americans students inability to succeed within the school system; some of the failure

can be attributed to pragmatic differences between students who are speakers of AAVE and their
instructors. Obgu (2003) states that when Black students learn their home dialect (AAVE), they
dont just learn its structural rules, such as grammar, phonology and vocabulary; they also learn
the cultural rules for using the dialect (e.g., how to talk appropriately in different situations) (p.
43). Similarly, Hecht (2003) states that appropriateness is defined in terms of cultural
communities (p. 85).
Unfortunately for many students who are speakers of AAVE, the pragmatic norms that
signal appropriateness within their home community is often at odds with what is considered
appropriate in educational contexts. These differences create the potential for many
miscommunications to occur in the classroom. For example, when there are power differentials
between interlocutors, much like those that appear in the classroom, African American
conversational norms dictate that mutual talk time is allowed and that that the interlocutor with
less power be recognized and respected. African American conversational norms also dictate
that the interlocutor with more power allows for input from the less powerful interlocutor, and
that both interlocutors be friendly and direct (Hecht, 2003, p. 94). Souto-Manning (2009) also
notes this directness in AAVE and explained the ways in which her lack of knowledge about this
particular aspect of Black pragmatics resulted in the disenfranchisement of one of her students.
When her student, George, directly answered her rhetorical questions, she viewed his responses
as disrespectful and sent him to time out. It was not until much later that she realized that his
responses were not challenges to her authority; rather, they were merely enactments of the norms
of directness that are typical in Black speech communities.
Obgu (2003) asserts that cross-cultural misunderstandings also contributed to the
disproportionate discipline problems of black students (p. 139). According to Obgu (139),

Black and White speech communities joke differently; When White students joked with White
teachers in an Ohio high school, their jokes were identified as such. When Black students joked
with White teachers, however, the jokes were often identified as misbehaviors. Paboudjian
(2011) describes the Black communicative style as valuing verbosity and as making use of a
wide range of intonational patterns. This combination of fluctuating tone and volubility can raise
interactions to expressions of verbal artistry (p. 1922). Similarly, Spears (2007) describes
African American speaking styles as performative or stylistically dramatic (p. 104). Within
the Black speech community, these traits are given high value. Those who are outside of the
AAVE speech community, however, interpret these pragmatic differences as loud or rude
(Hecht, 2003), or as inappropriate and attention seeking (Spears, 2007). Within the context of
the classroom that has not established clear expectations for what speech behaviors are deemed
appropriate, it becomes easy to see how these characteristics of Black speech could be seen as
downright disruptive.
Hecht (2003) terms these communication breakdowns failure events, and they occur
when interactions do not run smoothly, or when they violate norms, expectations and
preferences, or are somehow inappropriate (p. 91). These failure events are only repaired
through the use of alignment, which are ways to achieve accommodation once a failure event
has been encountered (Hecht, 2003, p. 91).
Within the classroom context, this accommodation can be difficult to achieve because of
the cyclical nature of the failure event: Students lack the knowledge of the rules that govern the
usage of SAE. As a result, they lack the skills that will allow them to use SAE accurately and
appropriately in an academic setting. Teachers lack knowledge of AAVE, and, as a result, they

lack the ability to accommodate their speech and speech practices towards their students in order
to create academic input, and set classroom boundaries that are accessible to the students.
Ultimately, the instructor, as the most powerful interlocutor, has the responsibility to set
the standard for determining what will constitute effective communication within the classroom.
This standard should create a nurturing classroom environment that facilitates learning for all
students, regardless of their linguistic background. One of the ways in which this can be
accomplished is through using AAVE and the pragmatic norms of Black Speech communities as
learning tools in the classroom. There are a number of ways in which this can be done. Whitney
(2005) establishes a five step plan for integrating AAVE into classroom. The first and most
important step is for instructors to learn about AAVE. Only after they have recognized the
legitimacy of the language and its speakers can they begin to implement the other four steps,
which include incorporating multiculturalism into the classroom, creating an environment that
values both speaking and listening, and encouraging code-switching.
Similarly, Wheeler (2004) also advocates for the usage of code-switching in the
classroom and also pushes for the use of Contrastive Analysis to explain the differences between
AAVE and SAE. In Wheelers model of Contrastive Analysis, instead of correcting students
language usage, the instructor contrasted and compared, in SAE and AAVE, the different ways
of producing the same utterance. Expectations for what speech behaviors were appropriate
within the classroom where created through comparing and contrasting the differences, first,
between formal and informal clothes and next through comparing formal and informal types of
languages (p. 475.) Rickford (2005) also advocates for the usage of Contrastive Analysis and
produced evidence that the method can be very effective: Students in a writing class that

employed the use of Contrastive Analysis exhibited a 59% decrease in the usage of AAVE
features in their writing (p. 29).
Alim and Smitherman (2012) argue that AAVE in the classroom should be engaged
through what they term a critical linguistic approach to language education (p. 178). They too
advocate that students be made aware of sociolinguistic variation. They also advocate for
students to be allowed to engage with varieties of language through the use of ethnographic
materials such as surveys and interviews. The critical language approach also directly engages
learners in discussions about the ways in which racism and marginalization are enacted through
the use of language ideology.
All of these elements are addressed in LeMoine and Hollies (2007) comprehensive list
of the ways in which AAVE can be engaged in the classroom to benefit the speakers of the
dialect. The authors detail the ways in which the Academic English Mastery Program, which
was created by LeMoine as a part of a thesis paper, has been implemented in Los Angeles in
order to teach academic English to students with low proficiency in SAE. The AEMP program
focuses heavily on professional development, especially on those aspects that focus on linguistic
and cultural awareness and infusion of multiple language varieties into the classroom (LeMoine
and Hollie, 2007, pp. 45-46).
Context
In an attempt to create course development materials that are similarly suitable for teaching
instructors how to interact successfully in classrooms with speakers of AAVE, a workshop that
consists of three modules has been created. This workshop was created specifically for
instructors who teach in predominately African American contexts. The attendees will likely be
of mixed genders and age ranges. These teachers are all competent users of SAE and they are

attempting to teach this standard to their students. Unfortunately, despite all of their efforts at
correction, their students are having difficulties with changing their speech patterns to reflect the
norms of SAE. They continually use AAVE in their speech and writing, and their students often
exhibit behaviors, such as talking loudly and out of turn, that are inappropriate for a classroom
setting. They have all elected to take this workshop because literature suggests that a better
understanding of AAVE is required if they are to effectively teach their students how to use the
standard.

Description of Materials
The workshop is divided into three modules. The first of these modules is titled Understanding
African American Vernacular English, and it consists of three activities. The first of these
activities is called The Pitfalls of Interethnic Communication and it serves two purposes. First,
this activity acts as an icebreaker, encouraging the workshop attendees to begin communicating
with one another. Second, this activity serves to make participants aware of just how easy it is
for miscommunications to occur as interlocutors try to communicate inter-ethnically. In this
activity, the workshop attendees will be divided into pairs. One set of the scenarios from
Appendix 2 will be distributed to each pairing. The attendees should be told that the group
member with scenario A should initiate conversation and that the partner with scenario B
should respond. Additionally, attendees should be instructed to use the prompt to shape their
contribution to the conversation, but that they should not reveal the wording of their prompt to
their partner. This is because there are slight differences between scenarios A and B. Both
scenarios are about the same topic: for example, Scenario 2A/B centers around a parent who has
been asked to provide cupcakes for a bake sale. In prompt A the parent is upset about having

the responsibility, but the partner with prompt B has a slightly different understanding: They
are convinced that the recipient of prompt A, regardless of claims to the contrary, is quite
thrilled about being chosen to provide the cupcakes.
Ten minutes will be devoted to the conversational portion of the first activity. There
are three scenarios in total: if a group completes the first scenario, they can be given a second.
After completing a scenario, the participants will be allowed to reveal the wording of their
prompt with their partner. After the ten minutes have passed, a group discussion, which will last
approximately 15 minutes, will be held. Pairs will be asked to share the nature of their scenario
with other attendees of the workshop. Next they will be asked about the nature of their
conversation. Most likely, the participants will indicate that they thought their partners
responses could be construed as incorrect, rude, or uncaring. At the very least, they might have
been confused by their partners contributions to the conversation.
Although the conversations that result from this activity are staged and probably will not
occur cross-culturally, they are representative of what can happen during cross-cultural
conversations according to Hecht (2003), Souto-Manning (2009) and Ogbu (2003): The
interlocutors often have different worldviews, or different understandings of conversational cues.
As a result, it becomes difficult to negotiate meaning. This activity also creates an opportunity to
introduce to the participants the idea that pragmatic and dialectal difference may be influencing
their interactions with their students. These differences may also influence their students
academic performance.
Once the workshop attendees have been shown how issues of pragmatic and dialectal
difference might be relevant in their classrooms, they will be shown what some of these
differences are through the second activity in module one. This second activity is 30 minutes

long and is titled Understanding the Pragmatic and Linguistic Difference (Appendix 3). It
consists of a PowerPoint presentation (which is accompanied by the hand-out found in Appendix
4) that explicitly explains what AAVE is and how it differs from SAE. These differences will be
explored in terms of pragmatics and grammar. The grammatical and pragmatic points that will
be presented have been drawn from various sources. Information regarding phonology and
grammar has been compiled from Morgan (2002) and Rahman (2008) who have both created
lists of the most salient aspects of AAVE. Information regarding pragmatics has also been
compiled from a number of sources, including Hecht (2003), Paboudjian (2011) and Spears
(2007). For a complete listing of the items that will be presented, see Appendices 3 and 4.
These grammatical and pragmatic aspects of AAVE are being explicitly presented and
explained, because, according to Alim & Silverman (2012) teachers are often unaware of Black
linguistic practices (p. 177). Furthermore, Mordaunt (2011) asserts that educators should be
made aware of these linguistic practices so that they can anticipate patterns of variation in their
students speech and writing (p.84). Finally, presenting these aspects of AAVE might serve to
validate the legitimacy of the dialect. Although AAVE is considered by linguists to be a
legitimate language, this fact is often obscured by the negative perceptions that speakers of other
varieties have towards it (Rahman, 2008), (Wheeler, 2004), (Whitney, 2005).
The final section of module one is a 15 minute discussion session that is to immediately follow
the lecture. The questions that guide the discussion are as follows:
1. Do your students use any of the features that were discussed?
2. In which contexts do they use these features?
3. In which contexts are the features of AAVE most heavily exhibited

4. Do you think their usage of the AAVE within the classroom context is
appropriate?
The purpose of these discussion questions, particularly the last one, is to gauge the workshop
participants current attitudes towards their students usage of AAVE within their classroom.
The discussion session will mark both the end of the first module and lead the attendees
into the first activity of the second module. This second module is called AAVE in practice.
It gives the workshop attendees the opportunity to test their recently acquired knowledge of
AAVE. It also serves as an empathy building exercise, forcing teachers to put their knowledge
of AAVE into use in much the same way that AAVE speakers have to use their knowledge of
SAE. This module will also give instructors the opportunity to revaluate their roles in ensuring
that their students learn the standard.
The first activity in the second module is a two-tiered task called To the Standard and
Back Again. The activity is informed by Spiecher and Bielanskis (2000) assertions that spoken
SAE and written SAE are quite different; as a result, being able to understand SAE when it is
spoken is quite different than being able to produce it. Similarly, students who are speakers of
AAVE may understand SAE when it is spoken, but they may not be able to produce it.
Ultimately, the attendees who complete this activity should learn that just because AAVE and
SAE are mutually intelligible, this does not mean that students who are speakers of AAVE
should be always be able to comprehend the meaning of the standard, or reproduce the standard
in writing without having been explicitly instructed on how to do so. As a result, when the
workshop attendees are later prompted, they should be more willing to empathize with their
students difficulties with acquiring and producing SAE in the classroom.

In order to complete this exercise, workshop attendees will be asked to complete two
timed worksheets. The first worksheet contains five sentences that are written in AAVE. The
sentences are ordered according to structural simplicity. Short sentences with simplistic forms,
such as Who that is? will come first. Longer sentences, with more complicated forms such as
I could have been done told you that will come last. To see this worksheet in its entirety, see
Appendix 5A. The instructions will ask the attendees to translate the sentences into SAE within
the seven minute time frame that will be allotted.
After the seven minutes, the attendees will be given another worksheet. This worksheet
will contain five sentences that are written in SAE. Just as in the first activity, short sentences
with simplistic forms such as He is tall will come first. Again, longer sentences with more
complicated forms such as Marshall and Lily have been dating for quite some time will appear
last. To see this worksheet in its entirety, see Appendix 5B. The attendees will also have seven
minutes to complete this worksheet. Considering that the attendees will have only just recently
learned the structures in AAVE that will enable them to translate the sentences, this activity
should be much more difficult for them to complete than the first.
Next, the attendees will check their answers against the answer key (see Appendix 5C),
which will be placed on the overhead camera. Approximately 10 -15 minutes will be spent
checking the responses and answering the questions that the attendees will have regarding why
some responses are correct and others incorrect.
Once the correct answers have been agreed upon, a 20 minute discussion will take place.
The discussion will be led through the use of the following questions:
1.

Which section was the most difficult for you to complete?

2. Why do you think this section was difficult to complete?

3. What would have made them easier to complete?

4. Do you think these worksheets were in any way representative of the type of work
your students are assigned to complete?
5. What are the similarities? What are the differences?
6. Where your attempts at producing AAVE similar to your students attempts at
producing SAE?
7. Considering the difficulty that you just had with completing these activities; how
much of a role should teachers play in removing these types of difficulties from in
front of their students?
All of these questions are quite plainly of a leading nature. This is because they are intended to
reiterate the point that explicit instruction on the differences in SAE and AAVE is a necessity in
classes where students are required to code-switch in order to achieve the goals and objectives of
the course. As a result, as stated by Alim and Silverman (2012), teachers should realize that they
cannot simply stamp out AAVE in their quest to teach their students the standard; instead, they
should use it to create a stronger foundation for the acquisition of forms.

At the end of the

worksheet activities and after the discussion, there should only be one possible conclusion for the
attendees to draw: That, ultimately, they have a huge responsibility to help their students
overcome the difficulties that can arise when they attempt to interact within the norms of both a
different dialect and culture. Once they begin to accept that this responsibility, it will make them
more open the idea of exploring culturally relevant pedagogies. This will create a smooth
transition to the third and final module of the lesson plan, which centers on ways to create
culturally responsive pedagogy.

In order to operationalize the term culturally responsive pedagogy, this third and final
module of the workshop, which is titled Towards CRP, makes use of the comprehensive
parameters of CRP as described by both LeMoine and Hollie (2007) and the Los Angeles
Unified School District. Ideally, CRP should reaffirm that culture, teaching and learning are
interconnected and that there is a direct link between student achievement and the extent to
which teaching employs the cultural referents of the students (LUSD, p. 3). Additionally,
pedagogies that are based in CRP should have the ability to be adjusted in order to teach to the
needs and experiences of students by using their cultural knowledge, prior experiences, frames of
reference and performance styles to make learning encounters more relevant and effective for
them (LUSD, p. 3)
The first activity in this module is called AAVE in Pedagogy, and it operationalizes the
concept of CRP by ensuring that instructors are aware of the ways in which lesson plans can be
adapted in order to take advantage of the strengths that students home dialects have to offer.
Ways in which AAVE can be scaffolding to teach SAE structures will be presented. These ideas
for scaffolding will be presented through the use of videos (for links to videos, see Appendix 6).
The first video is titled CLAS - Culture and Language Academy of Success. It depicts
a school whose entire curriculum is based around the concepts of embedding students culture in
the classroom in order to ensure academic success. Additionally, the video touches on ways
which culture is incorporated, such as through reading, speaking and writing skills, as well as
through artistic performance.
The next video is titled A Game of Jeopardy and specifically depicts how contrastive
analysis can be used to teach students how to code-switch between AAVE and SAE in a class
that is designed around LeMoines (2007) Academic English Mastery Program.

It will take approximately 15 minutes for the attendees to complete the videos. After they
watch the videos, they will be aware of some of the ways in which AAVE can be used in the
classroom. In the next activity 20 minute long activity, Small Group Work, the attendees will
use that knowledge to create their own culturally responsive lesson plans. First, the attendees
will be divided into groups of four or five. Each group will be given a prompt and asked to build
a lesson plan around it. Both of these prompts have been informed by readings on pedagogy as
well as reading on pragmatic and linguistic aspects of AAVE. For example, the first prompt
reads:
According to Alim and Smitherman (2012) African-American youths engage in a
linguistic practice known as battling that highlights verbal creativity. The object of
battling is to outsmart your opponent through linguistic wit and creativity in order to
leave them dumbfounded and speechless (p.177). Often, teachers break up these
battles because they view them as disruptive. Your group, however, has decided to use
these battles to create a teachable moment. As a group, create a culturally responsive
lesson plan that engages this aspect of the Black speech community in the classroom.

The groups will have 20 minutes to create a lesson plan based on the prompts they are given.
After 20 minutes have elapsed, the remaining minutes of the workshop will be spent with each
group sharing their lesson plans with the other attendees. If time permits, the attendees and the
workshop leader will be able to ask questions, or provide feedback to their peers.
If taken as a whole, this workshop will equip teachers with the tools to help end the
achievement gap for African-American students who are speakers of AAVE. By gaining
knowledge of the pragmatic and linguistic attributes of the dialect, workshop attendees will gain

a better understanding of the variety and will be able to recognize its validity, both as a language
and as a classroom tool. Additionally this workshop will give attendees the tools needed to
empathize with their students who are attempting to acquire SAE in an academic setting. This
empathy will make workshop participants more open to applying the tenets of culturally
responsive teaching techniques which make use of AAVE in the classroom. Finally, this
workshop will give the participants the ability to create and enact these lessons in their own
classrooms. This use of practical and applicable teaching methodologies will hopefully give
Black students the tools they need in order to succeed within the American school system.

References
Alim, H. S., & Smitherman, G. (2012) Articulate While Black: Barack Obama, Language and
Race in the US. New York: Oxford University Press.

LeMoine, N., & Hollie, S. (2007). Developing Academic English for Standard English learners.
In H.S. Alim & J. Baugh (Eds.), Talkin Black talk: Language, education and social
change (pp. 43-73). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Los Angeles Unified School District. A Strategies, Reference, and Resource Manual for
Eliminating the Achievement Gap: Implementing Culturally Relevant and Responsive
Instruction. Retrieved from:
http://www.highlineschools.org/equity/Documents/Culturally%20Relevant%20Instructio
n_Los%20Angeles%20Unified%20School%20District%20Action%20Plan%20Manual.p
df
Mordaunt, O.G. (2011). Bidialectalism in the classroom: The case of African American
English. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 24(1), 77-87.

Ogbu, J.U. (2003). Black American Students in an Affluent Suburb: A study of Academic
Disengagement. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Paboudjian, C. (2011). Sociocultural influences and prosodic variations. Journal of

Pragmatics, 43, 1912-1928.

Rahman, J. (2008). Middle-class African Americans: Reactions and attitudes toward African
American English. American Speech, 83(2), 141-176.

Rickford, R.R. (2005). Using the vernacular to teach the standard. In J.D. Ramirez, T.G. Wiley,
G. de Klerk, E. Lee, & W.E. Wright (Eds.), Ebonics: The urban education debate (pp.
18-40). Frankfurt Lodge, UK: Cromwell Press Ltd.

Souto-Manning, M. Acting out and talking black: Negotiating discourses in American early
educational settings. Early Child Development and Care, 179(8), 1083-1094.

Spears, A.K. (2007). African American communicative practices: Improvisation, semantic

license, and augmentation. In H.S. Alim & J. Baugh (Eds.), Talkin Black talk: Language,
education and social change (pp. 100-114). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Speicher, B.L., & Bielanski, J.R. (2000). Critical thoughts on teaching standard English.
Curriculum Inquiry, 30(2), 147-169.

Wheeler, R.S., & Swords, R. (2004). Codeswitching: Tools of language and culture transform
the dialectally diverse classroom. Language Arts, 81(6), 470-480.

Whitney, J. (2005). Five easy pieces: Steps toward integrating AAVE in the classroom. The
English Journal, 94(5), 64-69.

Appendix 1-Lesson Plans

AAVE in the Pedagogical Context

Module 1: Understanding African American Vernacular English

Number of Participants: 20-25
Other: Participants are of mixed gender and ages. Participants have a range of pedagogical experience.
Assumptions
about what attendees already
know

Objectives

Attendees are accurate users and producers of SAE

Attendees may already be aware that some linguistic differences between themselves and their students
Have a fair amount of pedagogical knowledge; are aware of classroom procedures, can create lesson plans,
etc.
Attendees will:
Be able to recognize that difficulties that arise as a result of cross-cultural communication.
Be able to recognize the pragmatics aspects of Black Speech Communities
Be able to recognize the systematic patterns in the Grammar of AAVE
Recognize parallel structures in SAE and AAVE

Materials

Appendix 2: The Pitfalls of Interethnic communication

Appendix 3: Understanding Pragmatic and Linguistic Difference
Computer with powerpoint capabilities

Activity overview
Warm-up: 25
Procedure

minutes

What T does

Attendees will be directed T. will group attendees into pairs and

to group themselves into
read the instructions for Appendix 2.
pairs in order to complete T. will facilitate discussion after the
the first activity: Appendix
completion of the Appendix 2.
2, which will show
attendees how crosscultural interactions go
awry.

What Attendees Do
Attendees will complete one or
some of the scenarios while in pairs
and engage in discussions about the
nature of their conversations.

Main task:
15 minutes

Discussion
15- 20
minutes

Appendix 3 will be
T. will deliver the information
presented, attendees will
presented in Appendix 3
be made aware of
differences between AAVE
and SAE
The discussion questions
T will facilitate discussion by asking
at the end of Appendix 3
questions found at the end of
will be addressed
Appendix 3.

Attendees will achieve the

objectives related to acquiring
knowledge about AAVE and SAE

Attendees will further their

knowledge of and re-evaluate their
opinions on AAVE by participating in
discussions regarding the nature of
AAVE use in their classroom.

AAVE in the Pedagogical Context

Module 2: AAVE in Practice

Number of Participants: 20-25
Other: Participants are of mixed gender and ages. Participants have a range of pedagogical experience.

Assumptions
about what attendees already
know

Objectives

Materials

Attendees are accurate users and producers of SAE

Attendees will be aware of the fact that there are pragmatic and linguistic differences between themselves
and their students
Attendees will be familiar with some of the pragmatic and linguistic differences between themselves
Have a fair amount of pedagogical knowledge; are aware of classroom procedures, can create lesson plans,
etc.
Attendees will:
Be able to recognize that the current positioning of AAVE in their classrooms may need to be
evaluated
Be able to empathize with the learning experiences of their students
Recognize the importance of explicit contrastive instruction when teaching SAE
Appendices 5A, 5B, and 5C: To the Standard and Back Again worksheets with key
Computer with overhead capabilities
Discussion questions

Activity overview
Activity 1:
Procedure
7minutes

What T does

Attendees will be directed T. will explain the instructions for

to complete the worksheet appendix 5A.
found under appendix 5A T. will watch the time to ensure that
within a 7 minute
the 7 minute time limit is not
timespan.
surpassed.

What Attendees Do
Attendees will complete the
worksheet within the allotted
amount of time

Activity 2:
7 minutes

Activity 3:
Checking
Answers (15
minutes) and
Discussion
questions:
15- 20
minutes

Attendees will be directed T. will explain the instructions for

to complete the worksheet appendix 5b.
found under appendix 5B
within a 7 minute
timespan.
T. will place the key on the overhead
The instructor and the
and explain what the correct answers
attendees will correct the
answers of Appendices 5A are fielding any questions that the
attendees might have. The T. will next
and 5B using the key. Next
facilitate the discussion of the activity
a discussion will be held
through the use of the discussion
about the nature of
questions.
completing the workseets.

Attendees will complete the

worksheet within the allotted
amount of time

Attendees will further their

knowledge of AAVE by participating
checking their answers to the
worksheets.
Attendees will engage in a
discussion that will result in their
recognition of AAVE as an
appropriate tool for use in the
classroom.

AAVE in the pedagogical Context

Module 3: Towards CRP
Number of Participants: 20-25
Other: Participants are of mixed gender and ages. Participants have a range of pedagogical experience
Assumptions
about what Ss already have
seen/know

Attendees are accurate users and producers of SAE

Attendees are aware of the linguistic differences between themselves and their students
Have a fair amount of pedagogical knowledge; are aware of classroom procedures, can create lesson plans,
etc.

Objectives

Material

Attendees will become aware of the different methodologies associated with Culturally Responsive
Pedagogy
Attendees will be able to create Culturally Responsive Lesson plans
Appendix 6- Links for videos
Appendix 7- Prompts for Small group work
Computer with capability to play youtube and flash videos

Activity overview
Activity 1:
Time:
Approximately
15 minutes to
watchvideos
Procedure

Activity 2:
Time: 20
minutes

In the activity AAVE in

Pedagogy attendees will
watch two videos that will
show them how CRP has
been operationalized
Students will use the
prompts provided in
Appendix 7 to create
lesson plans.

What T does

What Attendees Do

T will describe the setting of the

video and explain that each depicts
version of CRP in action
Instructor will cue the videos

T. will break the attendees up into

groups of 4 to five and hand out
the prompts after explaining the
task.
T. will facilitate the creation of
lesson plans by addressing any
questions, offering advice, etc.
T. call upon each group and ask

Wrap up:

Students will present their

Attendees will watch the videos,

and will be made aware of the
methods of operationalizing
CRP, such as contrastive
analysis, codeswitching, etc.
Attendees will divide into
groups of 4 or 5 to create lesson
plans that are Culturally
responsive. They will use the
information learned over the
course of the workshop as
inspiration.
Attendees will present their

Time: 25
minutes

lesson plans to the other

attendees. If time
permits, feedback will be
given and discussion will
be allowed.

them to share their lesson plans.

T will offer feedback and facilitate
discussion if time allows.

lessons plans with their groups.

Attendees will also ask
questions about other lesson
plans and provide feeback if
time allows.

Appendix 2
Activity 1: The Pitfalls of Interethnic Communication
Directions: Cut out the prompts for each scenario and tape or paste them onto
cardstock. Next, divide the attendees into groups of two and give one scenario to
each group member. Notify the attendees that the group member with scenario
A should initiate the conversation. Additionally, instruct the attendees to follow
the prompt, but to not share the wording with their partner.
Scenario 1A
With your Conversation Partner, use the following imaginary scenario to engage in a
conversation:
Youve just lost your dog! Distraught, you go to your friend and tell her/him how managed to
lose the dog and how upset you are now. Try to convince your friend to help you find your dog.
Scenario 1B
With your Conversation Partner, use the following imaginary scenario to engage in a
conversation:
Your fiend has just come to you with a sad story about how she/he just lost her/his dog. You
know just how much she/he hates her /his dog and that she/ he is probably quite happy about
this turn of events. React to his/her story enthusiastically and encouragingly! Be sure to back
channel (asking for clarifications, using interjections, etc.) in a manner that conveys just how
happy you are for her to be rid of that dog!

Scenario 2A
With your Conversation Partner, use the following imaginary scenario to engage in a
conversation:
Your son has just walked in from school and announced that you have been volunteered to
bake 7 dozen cupcakes for a bake sale tomorrow. You feel very inconvenienced by this turn of
events! Before you can get down to baking, you need to vent! Now youre calling your friend
on the telephone to express just how angry and frustrated this situation makes you.

Appendix 3: PowerPoint Slides

Slide 1

______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
__

Slide 2

Copula Absence
Limited use of the be verb
He tall

Use of Habitual be
Used to show actions that have been done with
regularity
He be at the store

______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
__

Slide 3

Stressed BIN
Used to mark actions that have begun in the past
and have not been completed.
She BIN married

Absence of -s in the third person

Double Negation

He run fast

Cant nobody make none

______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
__

Slide 4

Existential it
Used to replace there
Its a fly in my soup.

Say used to introduce quotations

They used instead of the possessive their

He say, she was being crazy

Thats they food

______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
__

Slide 5

Thr- pronounced as th-

Reduction in final consonant clusters

Through/thew
Cold/ col
Walking/walkin

Deletion of the r sound when it follows vowels

th sound pronounced as d

Mother/motha
This/dis
The/da

______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
__

Slide 6

Marked increases in intonational variation

Considered more verbose
Stylistically dramatic/performative
Values directness
Described by non group members as
confrontational or loud

______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
__

Slide 7

Do your students use any of the features that

were discussed?
In which contexts do they use these features?
In which contexts are the features of AAVE
most heavily exhibited
Do you think their usage of the AAVE within
the classroom context is appropriate?

______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
__

Appendix 4
Handout for Understanding Pragmatic and Linguistic Difference
Grammatical Features of AAVE
Copula Absence
o Limited use of the be verb
o He tall

Use of Habitual be
o Used to show actions that have been done with regularity
o He be at the store

Stressed BIN
o Used to mark actions that have begun in the past and have not been completed.
o She BIN married

Absence of -s in the third person

o He run fast

Double Negation
o Cant nobody make none

Existential it
o Used to replace there
o Its a fly in my soup.

Say used to introduce quotations

o He say, she was being crazy

They used instead of the possessive their

o Thats they food

Phonological Features of AAVE

Thr- pronounced as tho Through/thew

Reduction in final consonant clusters

o Cold/ col

o Walking/walkin

Deletion of the r sound when it follows vowels

o Mother/motha

th sound pronounced as d
o This/dis
o The/da

Pragmatic Features of AAVE

Marked increases in intonational variation
Considered more verbose
Stylistically dramatic/performative
Values directness
Described by non group members as confrontational or loud

Appendix 5A
To the Standard and Back Again
Translate the following sentences from AAVE into SAE:
1. Who that is?

2.

She BIN gone.

3.

I aint got no more left.

4.

Cant nobody write as good as he do!

5.

The way they be talking make it hard to understand them.

Appendix 5B
To the Standard and Back Again
Translate the following sentences from SAE to AAVE:
1. He is tall.
2.

I dont want any.

3.

He said hey to Mike.

4.

We often go to their mothers house.

5.

Marshall and Lily have been dating for quite some time.

Appendix 5C: Key

To the Standard and Back Again
Translate the following sentences from AAVE into SAE:
1. Who that is?
Who is that?
2.

She BIN gone.

She has been gone for quite some time (and she still is).

3.

I aint got no more left.

I dont have anymore left.

4.

Cant nobody write as good as he do!

Nobody can write as well as he does!

5.

The way they be talking make it hard to understand them.

The way they talk makes it hard to understand them.

Translate the following sentences from SAE to AAVE:

6. He is tall.
He tall.
7. I dont want any.
8.
9.

I dont want none.

He said hey to Mike.
He say hey to Mike.
We often go to their mothers house.
We be going to they mother house.

10. Marshall and Lily have been dating for quite some time.
Marshall and Lily BIN dating.

Appendix 6
Video links and Transcripts
CLAS - Culture and Language Academy of Success.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=W3AbBFzIokg#!
A Game of Jeopary (Do You Speak American)
http://www.pbs.org/speak/transcripts/3.html
A Game of Jeopary Transcript:
http://www.pbs.org/speak/education/training/seminar/academic.html#

NARRATOR:
THE LA SCHOOL SYSTEM KNOWS ITS MINORITY STUDENTS WILL NEED TO BE, IN
EFFECT, BILINGUAL. PS 100 IN WATTS IS ONE OF 60 SCHOOLS USING AN
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM CALLED ACADEMIC ENGLISH MASTERY.
DANIEL RUSSELL:
I need all groups to pay attention. Cloyd, I need your focus now. And Gerardo.
NARRATOR:
DANIEL RUSSELL USES A GAME OF JEOPARDY TO TEACH HIS GRADE FIVE CLASS
HOW TO TRANSLATE THEIR HOME LANGUAGE, INTO MAINSTREAM AMERICAN.
DANIEL RUSSELL:
O.K. Here we go. My grandpa cook dinner every night.
STUDENTS:
Reference is singular Cooks My granpa cooks dinner every night
DANIEL RUSSELL:
Which feature is not mainstream American English?
MAISO:
Third person singular.
DANIEL RUSSELL:

Yes. And Maiso. How do you code switch it into Mainstream American English?
MAISO:
My grandpa cooks dinner every night.
STUDENT:
They got it.
DANIEL RUSSELL:
You just got 500 more points.
DANIEL RUSSELL:
He funny. O.K. Ariel Barone. Whats the answer?
STUDENT:
He is funny.
DANIEL RUSSELL:
He is funny. Excellent translation! Here we go. We dont have nothin to do. O.K. Quiet please.
STUDENT:
We dont have nothinG to do.
DANIEL RUSSELL:
Oh, Im sorry. That is not accent translation into mainstream American English. So youre at
minus four hundred. So let me roll and see which team will have an opportunity to get it. I might
roll you guys again. One!
STUDENTS:
Anything, anything, anything
STUDENT:
We dont have anything to do.
DANIEL RUSSELL:

Excellent translation!
NOMA LEMOINE:
I think perhaps the biggest misunderstanding is the idea that we are somehow teaching African
American language --- teaching Ebonics if you will --- We don't need to teach African American
language
ROBERT:
They don't need to teach it cause they come speaking
NOMA LEMOINE:
They already know it.
ROBERT:
Yeah, yeah
NOMA LEMOINE:
Our task is to help move them towards mastery of the language at school in its oral and written
form, but to do that in a way where they are not devalued, or where they feel eh denigrated in
any way by virtue of their cultural and linguistic differences.
NOMA LEMOINE:
Because when you begin to devalue youngsters, and make them feel that who they are doesn't
count, then we've turned them off from education.
DANIEL RUSSELL:
Last night we bake cookies.
STUDENT:
No, no its past tense, past tense
DANIEL RUSSELL:
Are you ready? Number one. What language is it in?
STUDENT:
AAL

DANIEL RUSSELL:
It is in African American Language. Number two. What linguistic feature is in AAL?
STUDENT:
Past tense marker e.d.
DANIEL RUSSELL:
Past tense marker e.d. Thats two. And how do you code switch it to main stream American
English?
STUDENT:
Last night we baked cookies.
DANIEL RUSSELL:
You got 500 more points.
STUDENTS:
Yes!
DANIEL RUSSELL:
Is it too easy, or I just taught you well this year?
STUDENTS:
[CHEERS] Too easy! NARRATION STUDENTS IN THE PROGRAM SHOW SIGNIFICANT
GAINS IN WRITTEN ENGLISH. THOSE BEHIND IT BELIEVE THAT UNLESS MORE
TEACHERS TREAT HOME LANGUAGE AS SYMPATHETICALLY, THEYLL
CONDEMN MORE GENERATIONS TO SCHOOL FAILURE. LANGUAGE REMAINS A
FORMIDABLE FRONTIER IN THE LEGACY OF SLAVERY.

Appendix 7
Small Group Work prompts
Prompt 1:
According to Alim and Smitherman (2012) African-American youths engage in a
linguistic practice known as battling that highlights verbal creativity. The object of
battling is to outsmart your opponent through linguistic wit and creativity in order to
leave them dumbfounded and speechless (p.177). Often, teachers break up these
battles because they view them as disruptive. Your group, however, has decided to use
these battles to create a teachable moment. As a group, create a culturally responsive
lesson plan that engages this aspect of the Black speech community in the classroom.

Prompt 2:
While browsing through the aisles of your local book store, you stumble upon a book
childrens book titled Sweet Clara and the Freedom Quilt. A quick peek inside reveals
that the author has incorporated both AAVE and SAE in the characters speech in order
to create a narrative. You decide that you want to buy the book and share it with your
class, which is mostly comprised of AAVE speakers. However, you want to do more
than simply read the book to them; you want to engage their culture and language in a
manner that will also help them build their skills in the production of AAVE. As a group,
use the book to create a culturally responsive lesson plan that engages the linguistics
aspects of AAVE as well as the historical content that is a part of the story.