University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The influence of language and culture in the literacy development of speakers of African American English

(USC Thesis Other)

The influence of language and culture in the literacy development of speakers of African American English

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: THE INFLUENCE OF LANGUAGE AND CULTURE IN LEARNING 1

The Influence of Language and Culture in the Literacy Development of
Speakers of African American English

by

Topekia Lasundra Jones

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

August 2015

Copyright 2015 Topekia Lasundra Jones

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 2

Acknowledgements

I would like to acknowledge my Lord and Savior for allowing to me complete this work. For it
was only through His strength that this dissertation is finally complete. To my wonderful
husband, DeRon Jones and my children Christa, Jonathan and Jason, I want to thank you for
your unwavering support and encouragement helped to carry me through.

To my loving mother…you encouraged me to pursue a higher education and be the best I can be.
I started the doctorate program because of you, and I finished because of YOU. I will never
forget that, even in your last days, you looked me in the eyes and made me promise to finish this
race. I kept my promise…this is for you…my mother…my friend…my angel. Until we meet
again.

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 3

Table of Contents
List of Tables 5
List of Figures 6
Abstract 7
Chapter 1: Overview of Study 8
Background of the Problem 9
Historical Perspective of Language and Culture in Early America 9
Language Perceptions in School 11
Educational Discrepancies 12
Purpose of the Study 12
Research Questions 13
Importance of the Study 13
Chapter 2: Literature Review 15
Introduction 15
Language, Culture and Learning 15
African American Educational Experiences 19
African American Experiences in U.S. Schools 22
AAE Compared to General American English 25
Discourse and Student Learning 31
Strategies for Speakers of African American English 34
Conceptual Framework 39
Chapter 3: Methodology 41
Purpose of Study 41
Research Questions 41
Method of Study 42
Sample Population 42
Interviews 43
Observations 43
Documents 44
Data Collection and Analysis 44
Limitations of Study 46
Delimitations of Study 47
Ethics 47
Chapter 4: Results 49
Study Sample Selection and Demographic Information 50
Teacher Demographics 52
Knowledge of Language and Linguistics 53
Teacher Familiarity with African American English 55
Student Study Population for Observations 58
Research Findings 60
Research Question One 60
Interviews 60
Observations 61
AAE Students Level of Participation 66
Student Behaviors – Resistance/Oppositional 70
Research Question Two 73
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 4

Interviews 74
Observations 76
Order vs. Rich Discourse (third space) 76
Research Question Three 84
Interviews 85
General Teacher Feedback 85
Teacher Written Feedback 86
Observations 88
Culturally Responsive Instructional Strategies 88
Third Space Strategies 88
Summary 89
Chapter 5: Discussion of Findings 92
Findings and Interpretation 93
Research Question One 93
Research Question Two 94
Research Question Three 95
Limitations 96
Implications for Practice 98
Recommendations 98
Future Direction 100
Conclusion 100
References 102
Appendix A: Principal Interview Questions 109
Appendix B: Teacher Interview Protocol 110
Appendix C: Observation Protocol 113
Appendix D: Analysis of Classroom Observation Protocol 115
Appendix E: Writing Analysis Protocol 119

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 5

List of Tables

Table 1: Instrumentation and Data Collection 46

Table 2: Research Questions Correlation to Study Protocols 50

Table 3: Percentage of Students by Ethnicity 51

Table 4: Percentage of Socioeconomically Disadvantaged, English Learners
and Disabilities 51

Table 5: Teacher Demographics 53

Table 6: Language and Linguistic Coursework 55

Table 7: Familiarity with African American English 57

Table 8: Survey Sentences to Identify African American English 58

Table 9: Classroom Demographics and Seating Configuration of African American
Students 59

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 6

List of Figures
Figure 1. Theoretical Frameworks 40

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 7

Abstract
Speakers of African American English (AAE) often encounter unsupportive classroom
environments because teachers may not recognize the influence of language and culture on
literacy development, particularly for African American students. Bronfenbrenner’s Theory of
Human Development (Ecological Systems) describes the influence of immediate environmental
factors on healthy development. Two key environments are the child’s home and school. This
study examined student linguistic codes as a reflection of student identity. More specifically, the
study investigates the impact linguistic codes may have on students’ opportunity to learn, when
teachers demonstrate respect for linguistic variation within academic communities. The study
examined interactions between teachers and their students who are speakers of language varieties
differing from Standard Academic English (SAE) to identify ways these interactions might
support student achievement. Primary attention was directed toward ways in which teachers’
interactions with speakers of AAE influence students’ ability to acquire proficiency in
Standardized Academic English and gain access to the curriculum. Such a study is important in
order to identify effective and ineffective instructional practices influencing language minority
students’ participation in meaningful classroom discourse. The study used purposeful sampling
to select a school with 17 % African American student enrollment, which is increasingly rare in
Southern California schools, where African Americans represent 6 % of the student population.
Three teachers whose classrooms met or exceeded the school’s percent of African American
students were selected for the study. The unit of analysis was the classroom interaction between
teachers and African American students who are speakers of African American English. Data
were collected conducting interviews with selected teachers, conducting classroom observations
and examining writing samples produced by students in the observed classrooms.
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 8

CHAPTER 1: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this study is to examine the influence of language and culture in learning
and literacy development for speakers of African American English (AAE). In order to provide
a comprehensive perspective, historical information will be referenced regarding the early
experiences of African Americans in the United States that impact societal perceptions of
speakers of African American English. Many of the biases resulting from the nation’s history
with African Americans have permeated the educational system, and minority students have
become instructional casualties (Tileston, 2011) because many educators do not understand how
language and culture influences learning. Consequently, speakers of African American English
often encounter unsupportive classroom environments which limit their opportunity to
participate meaningfully in classroom discourses. The classroom environment is the place where
language and culture are the major means to construct knowledge and express ideas. Because
the focus of this study is to examine the influence of students’ home language and culture as they
interact with the school setting to influence students’ academic development, Bronfenbrenner’s
Ecology of Human Development Theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1994) will be referenced as the
primary conceptual framework.
Bronfenbrenner’s model of human development stresses the importance positive
relationships in the four key areas which constitute an immediate impact on a child’s healthy
development. Major influences in the microsystem are home, neighborhood, religious setting,
and school (Bronfenbrenner, 1994). The classroom setting therefore represents one key influence
within a child’s microsystem which can positively or negatively impact a child’s development
(Bronfenbrenner, 1994). The school setting for many African American students, however, is a
cultural and linguistic mismatch with the child’s home environment (Rupley, Nichols & Blair,
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 9

2008). This mismatch can be problematic for the child (Sousa, 2005). In many instances an
assumed correct way to speak and act in school is often met with student resistance. However,
teachers learning to understand and respect students’ language can be a vital step in building
strong relationship between teacher and students necessary for deep learning to occur (Tileston
& Darling, 2009). Overall, using students’ background to build an environment characterized by
open communication can be a vital tool useful in creating an environment that facilitates
learning.
Positive support from teachers is fundamental to the success of students (Perry & Delpit,
1998), and positive support begins with teachers’ attitudes and perceptions of students’ language,
culture and familial background (Perry & Delpit, 1998). It is therefore important for educators to
explore how their attitudes and perceptions of language differences can help or hinder
interactions with speakers of AAE. It is essential to understand that students learn according to
the norms of their culture (Sousa, 2005). The linguistic forms they bring to school are positive
reflections of their identity and community (Delpit, 2003) and they are assets for learning.
Without recognizing the language and culture connection to learning, school will continue to
perpetuate gaps in academic achievement (Sousa, 2005).
Background of the Problem
Historical Perspective of Language and Culture in Early America
A review of the history of Africans in America is essential to understanding the origins of
African American English still spoken in varying degrees by most African Americans. Africans
from various ethnicities and cultural backgrounds forcibly migrated to the United States by way
of the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade. During the period of enslavement, it is estimated forty to one
hundred million Africans were brought to America (Covey & Lockman, 1996). Their
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 10

enslavement was based on the color of their skin (Mitchell, 2008) which was the one external
similarity that obfuscated differences in African people; however, the population of forced
immigrants was often dissimilar in cultural practice, ethnicity and linguistic patterns (Mitchell,
2008; Covey & Lockman, 1996).
The one common experience among the heterogeneous captives in America was that
they lived in a strange place in which people communicated in a strange language vastly
different from their own. Over time, the enslaved who were arbitrarily chained together with no
consideration of differences were not only deprived of their identity, heritage and culture
(Mitchell, 2008), but they also became more susceptible to cultural domination (Covey &
Lockman, 1996). Consequently, first and second generation slaves were “deAfricanized”
(Mitchell, 2008, p. 79) by a systematic stripping away of characteristics making them inimitable.
However, features making them unique were not easily disregarded. Unlike a set of clothes, their
language and culture could not be easily altered (Hudley & Mallison, 2011).
Cultural differences are expressed through language; language is always changing, so
differences naturally arise (Hudley & Mallison, 2011). One of the most debated interpretations
of cultural differences in the United States could be the assumption of ignorance extended to
how African American people speak as compared to speakers of Standard American English
(Perry & Delpit, 1998). Different scholars have coined various terms to explain the unique
characteristics of the heritage language many African American children love and embrace
(Perry & Delpit, 1998). Each scholar recognizes unique characteristics of language familiar to
most African Americans, yet these characteristics are not well understood by the general
American public. According to Green (2002), African American English (AAE) is a variety that
has set phonological, morphological, syntactic, semantic and lexical patterns. Hence, speakers of
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 11

AAE understand the system of sounds, the structure of words, and how the meanings of words
are used to communicate.
Language Perceptions in School
Although the use of African American English (AAE) is not characteristic of all African
Americans, the majority of African American children use patterns of AAE in their speech when
entering school in the primary grades (Pearson, Conner & Jackson, 2013). However, lack of
knowledge related to African American culture may unwittingly filter into the perceptions of
teachers who often consider language differences as language deficits (Pearson, Conner &
Jackson, 2013), Lack of knowledge related to cultural communicative patterns results in
negative perceptions of the language and of its speakers (Hudley & Mallison, 2011). Often AAE
speakers are viewed as less intelligent. Instead of referring to the students as unintelligent and
indolent, they are labeled in more acceptable terms such as “disadvantaged” or “in need of
remediation” (Perry & Delpit, 1998).
Teachers’ perceptions play an integral role in shaping the school experiences of African
American students (McKown & Weinstein, 2008). When teachers have low expectations for
students, they consequently teach them less. In contrast, when teachers have high expectations,
students benefit from more quality instruction. Low teacher expectations based mainly on
students’ ethnicity negatively impact learning relationships between African American students
and their teachers. Students often infer and internalize the level of their teachers’ expectation,
and they frequently perform as students accordingly. Based on this information, it is
understandable that teacher expectations and perceptions about African American students’
language have been identified as contributing factors in the black-white achievement gap
(McKown & Weinstein, 2008).
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 12

Educational Discrepancies
Throughout American history, African Americans have faced barriers in education rooted
in structural inequalities based on skin color (Green, 2008). Some schools continue to be separate
and unequal in the access to quality education for African American students, despite the passage
of civil rights legislation (Tileston, 2011). The black-white achievement gap is observable
across a broad range of measures of school success, including grade point average, enrollments
in special education versus gifted programs, suspension rates, high school graduation rates and
college enrollments (Conner & Craig, 2006). The overrepresentation of African American
students in suspension rate data and special education classes is often a reflection of attitudes and
beliefs of adults about African American students within the educational setting (Sousa, 2005).
However, neither the disproportional representation of African American students in special
education nor their overrepresentation in school suspensions is not a true reflection of student
deficits. Instead, it is a demonstration of the predisposed ideas of those who have the authority
make life changing decisions about them (Tileston, 2011).
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to examine the influence of language and culture in teacher-
student interactions that promote learning and literacy development for speakers of African
American English (AAE). Preconceived biases have permeated the educational system and so-
called minority students have become instructional casualties (Tileston, 2011). Further, many
educators do not understand how language and culture influence learning. Consequently,
speakers of African American English often encounter hostile or unsupportive classroom
environments which limit their opportunity to participate in meaningful classroom discourses.
The intent of this study is to increase knowledge and appreciation of African American linguistic
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 13

patterns. Deeper understanding of the language many African American students speak can
assist educators to support speakers of AAE through building on their home language to help
them acquire proficiency in Standardized Academic language, so they might fully participate in
learning and classroom discourse.
Research Questions
Research questions are designed to help in examining the a) cultural and linguistic
uniqueness of AAE students, b) effective and ineffective practices impacting AAE students’
participation in classroom academic discourse c) knowledge and skills educators need to work
effectively with AAE students.
1).What are some of the ways African American students express AAE in the classroom
as their means of participating in classroom discourse?
2) How do the interactions between teachers and speakers of AAE demonstrate teachers’
attitudes and perceptions of speakers of AAE?
3).What strategies do teachers use that enable AAE students to acquire proficiency in
Standard Academic English?
Importance of the Study
Conducting a study on the instructional needs of African American students,
particularly speakers of AAE, is not a new concept. However, the knowledge gleaned from
academia, has not transformed instructional practices in most classroom settings (Green,
2002; Gutierrez, 1995). Educators still struggle with how to work effectively with students
that are culturally and linguistically different from themselves. This study will help educators
identify how teachers’ attitudes and perceptions can impact the educational experiences of
many AAE speaking students.
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 14

The intent of this study is to inform educational practitioners regarding instructional
strategies for interacting with speakers of AAE which might positively change the trajectory
of their lives. African American students need to acquire proficiency in Standardized
English to navigate the world of education and business, yet they, like all human beings, also
have the right to preserve their unique cultural heritage. African American students need to
be able to navigate through the world of education and business, while holding on to the
culture that is embedded within. With an education they will be able compete in the global
economy and be productive citizens. Without an education, they will have fewer
opportunities to build a strong future.

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 15

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
The literature review will cover six main topics related to speakers of African
American English (AAE). The Language, Culture and Learning section will focus on
understanding the language, culture connection to learning. The second section, Educational
Discrepancies, will cover statistical data to demonstrate discrepancies in academics and
outcomes for students. The third section, African American Experiences in U.S. Schools,
briefly presents historical educational experiences of African Americans in the United States
and relates them to the experiences of today. The fourth section, African American English
Compared to General American English, will provide a comparison between the two
languages. This section will briefly explain the Ebonics debate and discuss implications for
education today. It will also refer to Bronfenbrenner’s ecology of human development which
emphasizes the role of family and community in shaping students’ culture and language. The
fifth section, Discourse and Student Learning, covers the importance of students’
participation in classroom discourse in learning and language acquisition. The last section,
Strategies for Speakers of African American English, provides classroom strategies which
support acquisition of standard codes.
Language, Culture and Learning
Understanding the role of language in society is a complex endeavor. The most
important principle to consider is that language plays a multi-faceted role in all cultures.
Language and culture are so interconnected that one cannot be referred to without
considering the other (Hudley & Mallison, 2011). Language influences the way people view
themselves and the world around them (Rupley, Nichols, & Blair 2008). Language is a
psychological tool, created by people under specific historical and cultural conditions that
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 16

embody the essence of the culture (Vygotsky, 1978). Language encompasses everything
about a person and the culture in which he or she is associated. Through the use of language,
people learn to develop relationships with their environment and control their behaviors both
physically and mentally (Vygotsky, 1978; Lantolf & Thorne, 2000; Freeman & Freeman,
2004).
Bronfenbrenner helps in understanding how important language and culture are to
development. He also clarifies the importance of school and home interaction. These two
concepts help to focus on the importance of schools acknowledging and building upon
students’ home language to facilitate their acquisition of proficiency in Standardized English
as their second language. The ecology system is composed of five systems supporting
human development (Bronfenbrenner, 1994). A child’s ecology is made of the social
relationships within his or her environment. In the microsystem, the home, neighborhood,
school, and church make up key four influential systems that have an immediate impact on
positive youth development (Bronfenbrenner, 1994). Learning and development are
encouraged through face-to-face interactions with adults in the environment (Vygotsky,
1978). Within this system, sociocultural theory can be applied. Through use of languages’
organized structures a child’s development takes place. The child learns to use cultural
influences to create new ones that allow him or her to regulate his or her behavior (Lantolf &
Thorne, 2000).
Through language, cultural differences are illuminated (Hudley & Mallison, 2011) as
people learn to communicate with the world around them (Vygotsky, 1978). Similarly,
language is related to experience because it is influenced by the thoughts and emotions
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 17

people associate with various encounters (Gee, 2001). Because people and situations are
always changing, natural differences in language are inevitable (Hudley & Mallison, 2011).
Politically, language can be used as an instrument of power and authority. According
to who is in power, the language of particular cultures can be perceived negatively, resulting
in adverse consequences for a particular group of people. Judging people’s language is often
a means to determine intelligence (Rickford, 1999). In the United States, speakers of
General American English (GAE) are perceived as more intelligent than speakers of
languages differing significantly from GAE, especially if the speakers of that language are
members of a subjugated group within the society (Pearson, Conner & Jackson 2013).
Although standardization is a socially constructed feature not supported by inherent
characteristics, General American English is considered the “right” way to communicate
(Hudley & Mallison, 2011).
Students do not come to school void of language and prior experiences. To the
contrary, a child comes to school equipped with the language Vygotsky refers to as “speech”
(Vygotsky, 1978). A child’s learning starts at home through observing, interacting and
questioning the adults in the environment (Vygotsky, 1978). So, students come to school
equipped with mastery of the language used at home (Rupley, Nichols, & Blair 2008). These
students have an understanding of speech sounds, grammatical structure and meaningful
vocabulary used in their home language. Students who come from linguistically and
culturally different backgrounds are sometimes faced with a mismatch between the language
used at home and the language used in the classroom (Rupley et al., 2008). When this
phenomenon occurs, students from non-standardized backgrounds may have a difficult time
acquiring their academic (Hudley & Mallison, 2011; Green, 2002) resulting in an inaccurate
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 18

evaluation of their content mastery (Rupley et al., 2008; Sousa, 2005; Gold & Richards,
2012).
Language is the main component of both culture and the educational process (Hudley
& Mallison, 2011). Through the use of language, people learn to communicate with the
world and within themselves (Vygotsky, 1978; Rupley et al., 2008). Language is the means
by which knowledge and potential converge. The information taught in school travels
through a communication process before students are able to process it internally and then
learn it (Rupley et al., 2008). Vygotsky’s approach to learning considers the discrepancy in a
student’s actual developmental level and their potential level (Vygotsky, 1978). The distance
between the two levels is known as the “Zone of Proximal Development” (Vygotsky, 1978).
In this zone, students are able to demonstrate a higher understanding of tasks through
communication and support from a more experienced person, usually an adult (Vygotsky,
1978). Once the student has internalized the developmental processes, the language learned
in these processes enables the child to use the language to carry out tasks independently
(Vygotsky, 1978). Hence, speech, which was once used for communication with others, is
now transformed into an internal mental function for the student (Vygotsky, 1978; Lantolf &
Thorne, 2000).
Vygotsky’s work stresses the importance of the convergence of speech and practical
activity as a way to acquire learning (Vygotsky, 1978). The use of speech is essential to
learning at more advanced levels. Hence, the use of language is instrumental to cognitive
development therefore, understanding language diversity is critical for educators to be able to
support learning for all students who bring different languages to the classroom (Hudley &
Mallison, 2011).
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 19

African American Educational Experiences
The black-white achievement gap continues to be one of the most discussed issues in
education, especially in light of the new accountability era. The achievement gap grew out of the
inequalities in America’s educational system (Cohen, White & Cohen, 2012) that commenced
during the years of slavery. During this time, African slaves were denied the opportunity to
acquire a formal education and it was unlawful for slaves to learn how read and write (Cohen et
al., 2012). As a result, approximately 90% of African slaves were illiterate (Cornelius, 1991)
and this systemic illiteracy of African slaves marked the beginning of a long-standing education
debt that continues to impact the achievement gap seen today (Ladson-Billings, 2006).
Since the first national report card in 1970, there has been a persistent gap in
academic achievement between African American students and their white counterparts
(Fantuzzo, LeBoeuf, Rouse, and Chen, 2012). African American students continue to score
lower on achievement tests than their Asian and white counterparts (McKown & Weinstein,
2008). The black-white achievement gap is an enduring problem, as measured by
standardized reading and mathematics performance documented on a national assessment
(Darensbourg and Blake, 2013). In 2009, on average, African American students scored 26
points lower on the standardized reading and mathematics assessment than their White
counterparts. Particularly, 16% of African American fourth grade students scored proficient
in reading and mathematics, compared to 42% of White students. Likewise, 16% of African
American eighth graders scored proficient in reading and mathematics, while 41% of White
eighth grade students scored proficient (Aud, Hussar, Planty, Snyder, Bianco, Fox & Drake,
2010).
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 20

Matthew, Kizzie, Rowley and Cortina (2010) conducted a study to examine the racial
and gender gap of African American students and White students from kindergarten to fifth
grade. The results, confirmed an achievement gap in literacy beginning in kindergarten that
continue through fifth grade. Furthermore, non-standard speakers score lower on
standardized tests that measure oral and mathematical ability (Hudley & Mallison, 2011).
However, the discrepancy in performance was not due to intellectual inability; instead, in
addition to possible economic and societal factors, students’ access to the language of the
curriculum in all content areas is a major factor in their opportunity to learn. (Hudley &
Mallison, 2011).
In addition to the discrepancy in reading achievement, the gap is measureable in a
broad range of areas including, grade-point average, suspension rates, enrollment in special
program, high school graduation, and college enrollment (Conner & Craig 2006). Hudley
and Mallison (2011) refer to the achievement gap as an opportunity gap. The term
opportunity gap shifts the focus from students and schools to the persistent society-wide
obstacles hindering the academic achievement of historically underprivileged students. It is
important to look at the black-white literacy gap from a historical perspective in order to
understand how past experiences have impacted African American literacy and education in
the United States today (Cohen, White & Cohen, 2012).
Anderson (2012) and his colleagues conducted an ethnographic study in which he
hypothesized that many Americans consider America a post-racial society in which all things
are equal. Based on the information gathered in the study, the evidence suggested that a
legacy of inequity still exists, especially for African American males during their formative
years. Although both male and female African American students, on average, have lower
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 21

academic outcomes than white students, it is particularly a concern for African American
males. (Matthew et al., 2010). Although, non-standardized speakers perform lower on
standardized assessments measuring mathematical and verbal abilities, the results are not a
reflection of low intelligence.
A great deal of statistical data demonstrates the perpetual gap in academic
achievement. However, Srin and Rogers-Sirn (2005) believe, despite the mounds of
comparative data, little is known about the complexity and cultural experiences impacting the
academics of African American students.
Sociolinguists have questioned if and how linguistic differences contribute to the
black-white achievement gap (Rickford, Sweetland & Rickford, 2004). Hudley and Mallison
(2011) believe the language students bring to the classroom has an impact on their academic
achievement. The mismatch between the home language and language used at school can
make it more difficult for speakers of African American English to recognize written forms
of words that do not coincide with their mental representations of the words. Thus,
dialectical differences can be associated with why some children have a harder time learning
to read than others (Byrnes & Wasik, 2009). A strong correlation exists between the density
of African American English and low achievement in literacy (Pearson, Conner & Jackson,
2013). A body of research makes the association between children’s oral language and
literacy development (Craig & Conner, 2006). Despite the associations made between home
language and academic achievement, according to many linguists, the use of African
American English is not a barrier to academic and social achievement (Pearson, Conner &
Jackson, 2013). However, use of the language must be taken into consideration when
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 22

educating its speakers. Of particular significance is the attitude or perception and
instructional practices that teachers have about African American English.
African American Experiences in U.S. Schools
The educational experiences of African American students are influenced by factors
beyond the classroom setting, as well as inside the classroom. Students bring unique cultural
experiences to school; these experiences are embedded in the language many of them speak
at home. African American students often speak differently from their teachers, thereby
complicating their educational experiences (Anderson, 2012). In order for speakers of
African American English to overcome stereotypical obstacles in education, it is important
for educational institutions to recognize the language they bring and appreciate its value as a
communicative tool embedded in their social identity (Delpit, 1998). Before teachers can
develop an appreciation for the language many African American students bring to the
classroom, teachers are encouraged to understand African American English and the role it
plays in teaching and learning.
In Bronfenbrenner’s second ecological system known as the mesosystem, two or more
of the microsystems interconnect to support the continued development of the child
(Bronfenbrenner, 1994). From an educational perspective, a positive connection between
home and school can benefit the child (Bronfenbrenner, 1994). However, when there is “dis-
ease” in one of the microsystems, it results in distress for the child. This is particularly noted
when the teacher and parent relationships are based on undermining the values of each
other’s role in the child’s development (Bronfenbrenner, 1994).
As early as forty years ago, scholars recognized that one of the challenges facing
African American students in the classroom is reflected in how teachers and students
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 23

communicate with each other (Dillard, 1972). The language many African American children
bring to school contrasts with normative academic language used in educational
environments. Students from non-standard language backgrounds may have challenges
acquiring the voice and style valued in school (Hudley & Mallison, 2011). Based on limited
knowledge related of linguistic understanding on the part of educators, speakers of African
American English (AAE) are assumed to speak a deficit language (Pearson, Conner &
Jackson, 2013). When teachers are unaware of the cultural and linguistic considerations
involved in teaching and learning, students of color are often inappropriately referred for
special education services (Irvine, 2012). African American students are disproportionately
referred to special education in the category of “soft” disabilities, such as mental retardation
(MR), emotional disturbance (ED), and learning disabled (LD) (Donovan & Cross, 2002).
Languages and dialects that differ from Standard American English (SAE) are sometimes
perceived as substandard which results in remediation (Gold & Richards, 2012: Reid and
Knight, 2006).
Teachers’ respond to the language students bring to the classroom; this was
identified as contributing factor to students’ inequitable opportunities to learn in the Ann
Arbor Case and continues to be a problem in education today. In 1979, the Ann Arbor Case
was initiated by a parent who felt the school failed to consider the language needs of her
child as part of his education, which directly impacted her son’s low achievement
(Smitherman, 1981, 2000). A Michigan federal judge agreed and acknowledged the role of
linguistics in learning, specifically for African American students who spoke African
American English (AAE) (Smitherman, 1981, 2000). The judge declared it was the
responsibility of the school system and teachers to use active strategies of inclusion to help
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 24

speakers of African American English (AAE). The Ann Arbor case ruling required Ebonics
to be recognized as the primary language of many African American children; therefore, it
should be taken into consideration when providing language arts instruction. The Michigan
judge determined the plaintiff’s children experienced difficulties in learning to read not
because of their home language, but because of the institutions’ response to the students’
language (Pearson, Conner & Jackson, 2013).
Teacher expectations have been identified as a contributing factor in the ethnic
achievement gap (McKown & Weinstein, 2008). Researchers report that teachers’
judgments about a student’s ability (McKown & Weinstein, 2008) indirectly contribute to the
ethnic differences in the students’ achievement. The way a teacher views a student’s family
and home language influences the teacher’s expectation and respect for the student’s culture.
Teachers may view speakers of Ebonics negatively and perceive students as lazy and as less
intelligent than other students (Perry & Delpit, 1998). Teachers’ attitudes shape their
expectations, and teacher’s expectations influence student performance (Rickford, 1997).
Differential treatment between perceived high and low achievers is evident (McKown &
Weinstein, 2008). For example, teachers tend to call on the students they consider “bright”
more often and they provided more positive feedback (Ferguson, 2003). Studies also
revealed that students from academically stereotyped backgrounds are susceptible to lower
teacher expectations and differential treatment (McKown & Weinstein, 2008).
Despite the historic ruling over forty years ago in the Ann Arbor case, the role of
language and learning for speakers of African American English continues to be an invisible
concern in most districts. There are misconceptions about AAE, largely because most people
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 25

do not understand the historical context in which it was formed, nor do they have the
linguistic knowledge to begin to understand the complexities of the language (Green, 2002).
African American English Compared to General American English
General American English sometimes referred to as Standard English, is the primary
dialect used in educational settings, both orally and in written material (Conner & Craig,
2006). It is the language of school society that affords its speakers certain privileges (Hudley
& Malison, 2011). One of the main privileges for Standard English speakers is everything is
generally written in their language (Hudley & Malison, 2011). As a result, they are able to
communicate with the mainstream society and do not have to contend with mockery and
disrespect in the mainstream media (Hudley & Malison, 2011). All in all, standardized
English speakers are generally not perceived as less intelligent than other members of society
(Hudley & Malison, 2011). Key researchers over multiple decades have spoken to the
benefits of mastering Standard English (Perry & Delpit, 1998; Hudley & Mallison, 2011).
They understand African American students must be explicitly taught Standard English in
order to achieve educational success. However the acquisition of Standard English should
not diminish the first language and culture of the students (Delpit, 1998; Rickford, 2010). In
fact, the first language is an asset in acquiring a second language.
In California in 1981, a statewide Standard English Proficiency program (SEP) was
initiated to address the language needs of speakers of African American English (Perry &
Delpit, 1998). The initiative acknowledged African American English, also referred to as
Black English, was systematic and rule-based language which could be used to help its
speakers learn to read and write Standard English (Perry, 1998).
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 26

In 1996 the Oakland School Board unanimously passed the Black Language/Ebonics
resolution in response to the high percentage of failing African American students in the
Oakland Unified School District (Perry, 1998). During this time, the Oakland Unified
School district was the only predominately African American School district in California,
with fifty-three percent of the students identified as African American. Although the African
American population was slightly more than half of the district population, they represented
80% of suspensions and 71% of special education students (Perry, 1998). Additionally, the
average grade point average was a D+. In response to the statistics, the Oakland Board of
Education responded by developing a plan to address the needs of the students in an effort to
increase academic performance. The Oakland Board of Education, like the parents in the Ann
Arbor Case, determined that the students’ language should be valued and used to help
African American children acquire fluency in the standard code (Perry, 1998). Despite the
intentions of the Board, the unanimous passage of the resolution was the beginning of the
Ebonics debate.
The Ebonics debate was fueled by uniformed judgments, misunderstanding and
misrepresentation of the goals of the Black Language/Ebonics Resolution. (Perry & Delpit,
1998). Instead of understanding the purpose of the resolution was to implement a program
that would address the teacher knowledge gap of how to use the linguistic patterns of African
American students to help them become proficient readers and writers, those who opposed
the resolution mistakenly claimed the resolution required teachers to teach Ebonics in lieu of
Standard English (Perry, 1998). Even influential African American public figures joined in
and declared Ebonics as bad English and or as slang. While the mainstream debated, the
needs of the students were left behind (Delpit, 1998). The Ebonics debate made evident that
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 27

there are misunderstanding about what Ebonics is and its validity. Many have questioned
whether it is a language.
The language familiar to many African Americans has been afforded many labels.
Green (2002) explains labels given to AAE often reflected the social climate at the time. For
example, during the decades when African Americans were referred to as Negroes, the
language was called Negro English or referred to as a Negro dialect. Some of the other
names include: Nonstandard Negro English, Negro English, American Negro Speech, Black
Communications, Black Dialect, Black Folk Speech, Black Street Speech, Black English,
Black English Vernacular, Black Vernacular English, Afro American English, African
American English, and African American Vernacular English (AAVE) (Green, 2002).
Despite the various names, all the titles refer to essentially the same system (Green, 2002).
The familiar label “Ebonics” was used to reference more than just African American
speakers in the United States. It was a label used to cover the variety of languages spoken by
Black people in the Caribbean as well (Green, 2002).
With the variety of names, also are derived various theories about the origin of the
language. Green (2002) explains the Ebonics debate centers around two primary views. On
one hand, people believe African American English began as a Creole language which was
spoken in the Sea Islands off the coast of South Carolina and Georgia (Green, 2002).
Rickford (1998) acknowledges the similarities between AAE and Creole and believes the two
languages share similar roots tracing back to West Africa. On the other hand, others theorize
patterns of AAE are found in other varieties of English (Perry & Delpit 1998; Pearson,
Conner & Jackson, 2013). Pearson, Conner and Jackson (2013) also recognize the influence
of European English cultural traditions. Perry and Delpit (1998) assert Ebonics was
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 28

developed, during the time of slavery, as a creative response to the extreme oppression.
Likewise, Pearson et al. (2013) agree African American English originated during the time of
American slavery. It is well documented Ebonics, in its various forms, is based in the
phonological, syntactical and grammatical structures of West African and Congolese
languages (Rickford, 1999).
The question of whether the variation is a language or a dialect is also debatable.
Perry and Delpit (1998) refer to Ebonics as a Black dialect or an African American language
system, but not a poor sister to Standard English. Conversely, Byrnes and Wasik (2009) state
African American English is a dialect. Smitherman (1981, 2000), disagrees and declares
Ebonics is not a dialect of English and there is no empirical evidence to prove English is the
base language.
Despite how the language variety is categorized, researchers agree the language is not
haphazard. They contend it is not an imperfect imitation of General American English
(Pearson et al., 2013). Instead, like General American English, it is rule-based and follows
orderly principles. African American English has similar and different elements in common
with General American English, such as systematic rules in the four major domains of
standard linguistic description (Pearson et al., 2013). The four domains are: (a) syntax – the
way words are put together to form phrases, (b) phonology –speech sounds in language and
rules that govern pronunciation, (c) semantics – the meaning of words and phrases in
language, and (d) pragmatics –the meaning of words in particular situations.
Within the four domains, African American English and Standard American English
share some of the same vowel and consonant sounds (Pearson et al., 2013: Green, 2002).
Despite the similarities, Green (2002) describes the unique characteristics of the language. In
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 29

the areas of lexicon and meaning, African American English uses certain words and phrases
that have specific meaning to its speakers. For example, the words, saddity, kitchen, pot
liquor, and get my praise on (Green, 2002) can be considered. Although these words, with
the exception of saddity, can be found in General English, the meanings behind the words are
not the same.
In reference to syntax, African American English uses words in sentences that can
change the meaning of the sentence (Green 2002; Pearson, Conner & Jackson, 2013). Green
(2002) and Pearson, Conner, and Jackson (2013) identify one of the syntactic properties as
negation. Negation is the use of multiple negators within a sentence. Green (2002) provides
the following example: I sure hope it don’t be no leak after they finish. In this sentence, the
negators are don’t and no. If the idea behind this same sentence was written in Standard
American English the sentence would read, I hope there won’t be a leak after they finish.
Green (2002) also identifies the existential it and dey as used in African American
English to explain something exists. Green (2002) provides the following examples of both
to explain there is coffee in the kitchen. Sample 1: It’s some coffee in the kitchen. Sample 2:
Dey some coffee in the kitchen. Both sentences express, if written in Standard American
English would read: There is some coffee in the kitchen.
Another characteristic of African American English, not discussed in earlier studies,
is the use of the preterit had (Green, 2002). This is the use of the word had in particular
surroundings that differ from the use in General American English. This use of had is
commonly used by younger people in a way that differs from the past perfect tense. Green
(2002) provides the following sentence to demonstrate how the pluperfect is used in to mark
the past before the past in General American English. Sentence: They had seen the movie by
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 30

the time the large group arrived. This sentence indicates they saw the movie prior to the
arrival of the large group.
Under the umbrella of syntactical structure, African American English uses certain
morphosyntactic patterns (Green, 2002). For example, the suffix of a word does not
automatically change the meaning of the word or the part of speech (Green, 2002). Instead
the suffix serves another purpose in the sentence such as marking of tense or genitive
relation. In AAE, the possessive –‘s does not have to be present to show possession. Instead,
the ownership relationship is determined by the order of the words. For example in the
sentence, That’s the church responsibility. The word church precedes the word
responsibility; thus showing ownership (Green, 2002).
In the area of phonology, African American English is characterized by the different
ways words are pronounced. First, the most common characteristic is the consonant sound
reduction on final sounds (Green 2002; Pearson et al., 2013). For example, the word test
would be pronounced as tes’. Likewise, the word mind would be pronounced as min’
(Pearson, et al., 2013). Secondly, for SAE or words in which the sound th occurs, in AAE,
the sounds t/d and f/v are used instead (Green, 2002). Additional sound variations are made
in words in which a vowel sound appears after the letters r and l and in words that end in –
ing (Green, 2002). Words with –ing are generally pronounced with just the /n/ sound.
Another phonological pattern of AAE is the pronunciation of /skr/ in words that are spelled
str. (Green, 2002). For example, the word street is pronounced as /skrit/. Likewise, the word
straight would be pronounced as /skret/ (Green, 2002). The phonological explanations noted
above, does not include all of the variations. The study of AAE phonology is complex and is
beyond the scope of this paper.
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 31

One of the last unique characteristics to be included in this literature review of
African American English is evident in speech events and interactions (Green, 2002). The
way in which speakers of AAE interact and communicate demonstrates communicative
competence for the particular environment (Green, 2002). The call and response interaction
in church services is a way to let the speaker know that the words are understood and that
agreed with (Green, 2002). Green (2002) refers to speech events as, signifying, playing the
dozens, rapping, marking, loud-talking, woofing, and toast. All of the events to a non AAE
speaker may be considered offensive (Green, 2002). However, in AAE the ability to
appropriately use the conversational tactics is a demonstration of communicative competence
in AAE. Understanding the characteristic of AAE can positively impact what happens in a
classroom setting. Gutierrez (1995) explains the importance of discourse in student learning.
Gutierrez (1995) believes people must be literate in their community discourse, before
discovering their own.
Discourse and Student Learning
Understanding the role of language and culture, in literacy development, is
instrumental in addressing the academic concerns of speakers of non-standardized English.
Language learning is influenced by social context; therefore looking at language
development through a sociocultural lens is necessary (Ochs, 1998; Gee, 2001). Because
language is more than just an articulation of words; it is the means by which the child,
through the development of social mores and language use, becomes a skilled member of the
community (Gutierrez, 1995). A child’s understanding and development of language are
culturally and socially influenced by the community (Ochs, 1988). The child’s family and
community relationships are well established before he or she enters the school setting.
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 32

Through varied experiences within the community, the child becomes skilled in how to use
language in their particular setting. Also, through the use of speech, the child learns to
master his or her surroundings, as well as his or her behavior. The child does not come to
school as an empty slate in need of cultural identity and acceptance. To the contrary, a child
comes to school with prior experiences, and it is the school’s responsibility to build upon
what the child knows in order to connect and expand learning.
Social relationships and communication are key components in establishing a
learning environment that supports analytical thinking (Gutierrez, 1995). In order for the
child to learn, he or she taps into their prior knowledge in order to make connections to what
the teacher is teaching (Gutierrez, 1995). Speech allows the student to analyze what he or
she knows and reflect on how to connect the new information to his or her prior
understanding. The success of this process is dependent on the social relationships and the
communication in which the teacher establishes in the classroom setting (Gutierrez, 1995).
Through use of their familial language, development of communicative competence will
manifest (Hymes, 1972) in the classroom. Their communicative competence helps students
articulate what they know, while appropriately participating in the classroom environment.
Also, communication with the teacher becomes a source of academic English, so the students
will make progress in learning academic English as well. Creating reciprocal relationships is
encouraged in Bronfenbrenner’s ecology of human development. In order for a child to
develop intellectually, emotionally, socially, and morally, the child needs to continually
participate in complex reciprocal activities with a person in which the child have established
a mutual bond of respect (Bronfenbrenner, 1994).
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 33

The idea of communicative competence stresses the importance of a bi-directional
relationship between student and teacher (Cazden, 1998; Gutierrez & Larson, 1994; Mehan,
1979). Cazden, (1998) references the Vygotskian idea that in order for student learning to be
internalized, the student and teacher must have the same point of reference before they share
meaning. This is the transformative space where the student’s potential and development is
expanded (Gutierrez, 2008). It is important that teachers understand the relationship between
the development of discourse, the framework of the classroom, and cultural expectations
within the classroom activities used to foster academic competence (Gutierrez, 1995).
Because Standard English is generally the exclusive privileged language used in
classroom discourse, language variations considered sub-standard, are also frequently not
permissible. Consequently, non-standardized speakers are often excluded from participating
in the discourse of the classroom. Discourse is the means through which students have the
opportunity to use their words to express their values and come to understand the perspective
of others (Gee, 1995). Discourse is a phenomenon that can be developed within the school
setting. Children come to school having experienced a primary discourse that provides a
sense of self and establishes their culturally sensitive vernacular (Gee, 1995). Discourse
encompasses the way in which a child speaks, writes, listens, and writes (Gee, 1995); as well
as how he or she interacts, feels and thinks (Gutierrez, 1995).
Learning through discourse requires the teacher to understand that classroom
competence is bi-directional (Gutierrez, 1995) relationship that involves the teacher and the
student. Gutierrez (2008) refers to this transformative space as “third space.” The theory of
Third Space views learning holistically and addresses the needs of learners both vertically
and horizontally (Gutierrez, 2008). In third space, both teacher and student authentically
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 34

interact formally and informally, while respecting the cultural characteristics and experiences
that makes each person unique (Gutierrez, 2008). Discourse is a symbol of the classroom
culture (Gutierrez, 1995). Continued opportunities to engage in classroom discourse
provides student with the opportunity to explore the various characteristics them unique
persons. As previously stated, when the teacher disregards the cultural influence in literacy
development, access to meaningful discourse is significantly reduced (Gutierrez, 1995).
Despite a preponderance of cross disciplinary literature on literacy development, most
teachers impart procedural knowledge of how to use the language of the classroom, instead
of facilitating learning through discourse (Gutierrez, 1995). This causes classroom
instruction, in the context of today’s linguistically and culturally diverse environment, to be
centered on remediation (Ogbu, 1982) instead of learning through discourse (Gutierrez,
1995). Gee (1995), agrees that grammar does not develop learning; use of the language does.
When students are not afforded the opportunity to participate in authentic learning from
which they develop social and communicative knowledge needed to participate, the students
learning is lessened (Wilkinson, 1982).
Strategies for Speakers of African American Vernacular English
A wide variety of instructional strategies have been identified as effective ways to
increase academic achievement for speakers of African American English. For the purpose of
this study, the researcher will discuss strategies and implications associated with the three
research questions outlined in chapter one. The first research involves the concept of
participation and student discourse. The second question involves examining class climate,
evidence of teacher perceptions, and teacher-student interactions. The last research question
explicitly relates to strategies teachers use to help AAE students acquire proficiency in the
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 35

Standard Academic English (SAE). All three questions will be approached from a
multicultural perspective, which involves culturally responsive pedagogy (Ladson and
Billings, 1994).
Culturally responsive pedagogy approaches teaching and learning from a cultural
perspective which involves incorporating cultural references in student learning. Educators
are encouraged to approach learning in a way that respects diversity (Hudley & Mallison,
2011). Respecting a student’s culture is key to the student’s academic development (Ware,
2006). Traditionally, in subtractive models of language learning, AAE speakers are
persuaded to master Standard Academic English at the expense of abandoning their culture
(Ball, 1995) language. Although it is beneficial for AAE speakers to master the standard
code (Ware, 2006), they are expected to do so at the risk of sacrificing characteristics of their
culture that make them unique. Instead of relying on the subtractive model, teachers are
encouraged to use additive language learning models in which teachers can help students
develop academic English by bridging the gap between the linguistic patterns used at home
and language of the classroom (Ball, 1995). This approach requires acknowledgement and
use of the home language as a valuable tool to promote learning and to acquire a second
language. The Additive Language Learning Model can be connected to Bronfenbrenner’s
Ecology of Human Development. This learning model recognizes that students participate in
various school and non-school discourse communities which have unique norms and
specialized vocabulary (Ball, 1995). Therefore, the learning model works to help students
navigate various discourses while maintaining communicative competence in both (Ball,
1995). Bronfenbrenner identifies the interconnection of the microsystems as a necessity in
healthy development of students (Bronfenbrenner, 1994).
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 36

Participation in classroom discourse has been identified as an effective instructional
practice (Gutierrez, 1995). Students need ongoing opportunities to engage in meaningful
discourse which includes both speaking and writing (Gutierrez, 1995). In this environment,
teachers need to maintain high expectations for students and know when to incorporate
support strategies (Gutierrez, 1995). Also, students should be encouraged to use their
linguistic and social knowledge to assist in the development of discourse competence in
schooling related experiences (Gutierrez, 1994). It is important for teachers to be aware of
cultural characteristics such as the speech events and rules of interaction (Green, 2002) the
AAE speaking students may exhibit while engaging in meaningful discourse.
In order for teachers to implement effective instructional strategies in language
development, they must first understand how language works (Freeman & Freeman, 2004).
An understanding of how students develop language will assist teachers in making sound
curricular decisions that promote student achievement. It is important for teachers to foster a
positive attitude toward language diversity and understand the communicative styles of the
students in the classroom (Hudley & Mallison, 2011). This understanding is important
because sometimes well-intentioned teachers use ineffective strategies as their method of
helping students learn. For example, if an AAE speaking students are attempting to
participate in a lesson either through speaking or reading and the teacher constantly
overcorrects mispronunciations, the student becomes inhibited and disengaged (Green,
2002).
Teaching the language conventions of Standard Academic English to AAE speakers
requires explicit instruction, not correction, especially when the student is attempting to
participate in the classroom discourse (Hudley & Mallison, 2011). Teachers need to
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 37

explicitly teach the rules, norms, and patterns of Standard American English and help
students identify the similarities and differences between AAE (Hudley & Mallison, 2011;
Labov, 1995). Routine and frequent exposure is important to the engagement students
require to engage in challenging meaningful activities that build language capacity (Byrnes &
Wasik, 2009).
In reading development, the teacher needs to understand the difference between
mistakes in reading versus differences in pronunciation (Labov, 1995; Green, 2002).
Teachers can assist students by focusing on final pronunciation of words that might be
confusing to AAE speakers, such as final cluster sounds (Labov, 1995). Additionally,
teachers need to encourage AAE speakers to use full forms of words, instead of using
contractions in order to eliminate confusion (Labov, 1995).
In writing, it becomes critical for teachers to understand the culturally related features
apparent in the writing pieces of AAE speakers (Ball, 1995). The culturally related features
frequently occurring in the writing of AAE speakers include uses of the verbal – s, plural –s,
possessive –s, consonant cluster –ed, and forms of the verb be which differ from Standard
Academic English (Ball, 1995). Additionally, teachers might focus their attention toward
understanding the stylistic strategies AAE speakers may incorporate in certain writing pieces
(Ball, 1995).
African American English speakers often incorporate culturally-based elements
within their writing (Ball, 1994). This particular writing style is closely associated with the
rules of interaction in AAE (Green, 2002). When students incorporate stylistic strategies in
their writing, it is important that teachers are able to identify the style, instead of assuming
the writing is poor (Ball, 1995). One writing style incorporates repetition in words or phrases
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 38

to create a pattern. Secondly, the writer may attempt to establish a rapport with the reader
through the use of inclusive words such as we’ve. Thirdly, the writer may use orally based
patterns to organize ideas and incorporate interactive dialogue, with the reader, by using
phrases as “you know what I mean?” Fourthly, the writer may incorporate common idioms
used in the African American community, as a way of inferring a mutual understanding
based on similar cultural experiences. Finally, instead on using transition words to link
topics, the writer may use personal anecdotes to transition between ideas (Ball, 1994).
Understanding the stylistic components that some AAE speakers may incorporate in their
writing will help teachers encourage creativity, as well as provide instructional support as
needed (Ball, 1994). In the instance an AAE writer’s work product needs to be corrected, it
is suggested the teacher only focuses on one or two language patterns at a time (Hudley &
Mallison, 2011) instead over overwhelming the student with too many things to correct.
In order to enhance writing performance in a language acquisition classroom, the
teacher might seek to maintain focus on the message contained in the writing piece more than
the structure (Freeman & Freeman, 2004). Writing structure develops as students understand
the conventions involved in effectively communicating what they want to say in a systematic
way those others will understand (Freeman & Freeman, 2004). The use of peer reviews, in
which students share written drafts is an effective tool for helping speakers of African
American English and other language varieties to learn to communicate in Standard
Academic English. It is important for teachers to understand that making “errors” part of
language acquisition; therefore, they must remain focused on the message the student is
trying to convey while they are providing explicit instruction to foster students’ acquisition
of Standard Academic English (Freeman & Freeman, 2004).
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 39

Conceptual Framework
The topics covered in the literature review demonstrate how language, culture and
learning are interconnected, particularly for speakers of African American English. The three
theories used for the conceptual framework are Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model of
Human Development (Bronfenbrenner, 1994), Sociocultural Theory (Vygotsky, 1978), and
Third Space (Gutierrez, 2008). The interconnectedness of the various frameworks is
illustrated in an interconnecting Venn-diagram. Below, Figure 1serves to reflect how each
theory works together, positively impacting learning for speakers of African American
English. According to Bronfenbrenner (1994), it is important for students to have healthy
relationships within four key elements in the environment directly influencing their lives.
Within the educational setting, each child develops by participating and learning from others
in the environment. When adults in the environment, usually the teacher, understands and
respects the language and culture students bring to school, discourse strategies may be
implemented to allow the student to be comfortable with who they are. They are also
afforded with the possibility of expressing their thoughts without the fear of ridicule. The
teacher understands learning happens in the third space (Gutierrez, 1995).

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 40

Figure 1: Theoretical Framework

Figure 1. An illustration of how theories interconnect forming an overarching
conceptual framework for the study.

Bronfenbrenner's
Ecology of Human
Development
Sociocultural
Theory of Learning
Third
Space
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 41

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

Purpose of Study
The purpose of this study is to examine the influence of language and culture in learning
and literacy development for speakers of African American English (AAE). Through findings
compiled from this study, it is possible for teachers to gain increased knowledge and
appreciation for the role of language in promoting student learning, particularly literacy. This
study provided findings to assist teachers adopting more informed perceptions which may lead to
more effective instructional choices. Instructional choices which are aligned with African
American English speakers could support these students as they grapple with academic concepts
to make meaningful connections to the core curriculum through greater participation in
classroom discourses and engagement with the curriculum.
Research Questions
The research questions were designed to help understand the: (a) the cultural and
linguistic uniqueness of AAE students, (b) effective and ineffective practices that impact AAE
students’ participation in classroom academic discourse (c) knowledge and skills educators need
to work effectively with AAE students.
1. What are some of the ways African American students express AAE in the classroom
as their means of participating in classroom discourse?
2. How do the interactions between teachers and speakers of AAE demonstrate teachers’
attitudes and perceptions of speakers of AAE?
3. What strategies do teachers use that enable AAE students to acquire proficiency in
Standard Academic English?

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 42

Method of Study
For this study qualitative methods were used to collect data. The researcher is interested
in understanding how teachers and students engage one another in the classroom setting
(Merriam, 2009) in relation to language, culture and learning. The use of interviews and
observations allowed the researcher to ascertain teachers’ pedagogical knowledge and whether it
is reflected in their everyday instructional practices. For the purpose of triangulation (McEwan
and McEwan, 2003), the researcher reviewed various student writing samples containing teacher
feedback
Sample and Population
Purposeful sampling was used in order to understand and gain information (Merriam,
2009) from a representative group of middle school teachers. The study was conducted at a
middle school in a Southern California school district. Before selecting the participating school,
the researcher developed criteria which would yield the best results (Merriam, 2009). The
criterion were: a) the school had to have a minimum of 15% African American students, b) the
school principal was able to confirm African American English was prominent among students
(see Appendix A Principal Interview Questions) and c) the school received recognition from
external evaluations for improved performance on standardized test within the last five years.
Despite challenges, Washington Middle School had sustained academic growth over the last five
years and has been designated as a California Middle School to Watch.
After developing the criteria, the researcher selected Washington Middle School for the
study. Although the district has a large Hispanic population, Washington Middle school has the
highest percentage (17 %) of African American students in the district
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 43

The African American students are bussed to school from the same apartment complex, so the
language and culture from their environment continues in the school setting. This circumstance
gives particular meaning to Bronfenbrenner’s notions of the ecological systems at work in
students’ lives.
After obtaining permission from the principal to conduct the study, the researcher met
with the principal to discuss the criteria for selecting teachers to participate. The participation
criteria included: (a) teaching experiences of five years or more, (b) CLAD or BCLAD
certification authorizing the teacher to provide instruction to second language learners, (c)
teaching credential in language arts and or social studies, and (d) use of effective instructional
strategies as measured by summative assessment data. From the pool of teachers meeting these
criteria, three teachers were selected by the principal to participate in the study. After the
selection, the researcher met with the perspective participants to solicit their participation,
explain the study, answer clarifying questions and schedule individual interviews.
Interviews
The interviews were conducted prior to classroom observations in order to allow the
participants to become familiar with the researcher and provide the opportunity to ask clarifying
questions about the process. Two interviews were held in the teachers’ classroom after school.
The third interview was conducted in a conference room in the main office. Before the interview
started, the researcher asked permission to record the interview (Weiss, 1994). The researcher
explained recording the interview would allow the researcher to capture the full conversation
without having to interpret participants’ responses based on written notes only. Semi-structured
questions from LeMoine’s Survey Instrument (2003) were adopted for interview questions (see
Appendix B). Probing questions were used to clarify and gather more information as needed.
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 44

After each interview, the researcher scheduled two dates to observe the participants in their
classroom setting (McEwan & McEwan, 2003; Merriam, 2009). Classroom observations were a
means to observe both the teacher and the target (AAE) students as they interacted in the
classroom. A semi-structured protocol was used to record teachers’ and students’ actions and
reactions simultaneously (see Appendix C). Observations allowed the researcher to investigate
whether the teachers’ knowledge and instructional practices were aligned; observations allowed
the researcher to note non-verbal actions demonstrated by both the teachers and students. The
observation protocol included a blank chart used by the researcher to draw the placement of
artifacts and identify where the AAE students are seated in relation to the teacher and their peers.
Noting physical relationships can provide information about the classroom climate and culture.
Overall, the observations allowed for descriptive details (Merriam, 2009) to be included the final
analysis.
Documents
In order to triangulate the data, the researcher collected student writing samples from
teachers which included written feedback. Comments provided insight into the teacher’s
response to the students’ use of AAE, as noted in students’ writing. The researcher noted
whether the teachers’ feedback supported student proficiency in academic English.
Data Collection and Analysis
Data collection and analysis is an ongoing process which occurred throughout the study
(Merriam, 2009). Before implementing data analysis, the researcher reviewed research questions
to ensure interpretation was consistently aligned with the purpose of the study. Pertinent
information was organized in different folders to separate interviews, observations, and
documents. For analysis of the interviews, the researcher first transcribed the recordings to assist
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 45

in reviewing the interview notes. Each interview was coded using the open-coding method to
look for possible themes. After all interviews were transcribed and coded, the researcher looked
for common themes among the three interviews and coded accordingly. Analysis for the
observation protocol followed the same method of analysis used for the interviews, with the
exception of transcription; the coding process was used directly on the observation protocols
using the same color codes as the interview process. Document analysis required the researcher
to solicit student writing samples which included teacher feedback. The students’ names were
deleted by the teachers and the papers were assigned a number for appropriate referencing and
participant privacy. Analysis of collected data included: (a) looking for characteristics of AAE
used in student writing and (b) teacher responses and/or correction of the student work. The
researcher attempted to collect a minimum of two samples from each observed class. Lastly, in
order to promote validity and reliability (Merriam, 2009), as shown in Table 1 below, data was
triangulated.

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 46

Table 1
Instrumentation and Data Collection
Research Questions Interview
Protocol
Observation
Protocol
Documentation

RQ1- What are the ways African American
students express AAE in the classroom as
their means of participating in classroom
discourse?

Questions
18,19,20,24,25

X

X
RQ2 – How do the interactions between
teachers and speakers of AAE demonstrate
teachers’ attitudes and perceptions of speakers
of AAE?

Questions
18,20,21,22,24

X X
RQ3- What strategies do teachers use that
enable AAE students to acquire proficiency in
Standard Academic English?
Questions
25,26
X X

Limitations of Study
The information gathered in this case study is subject to various limitations. Two major
threats to validity are researcher bias and “reactivity”, which is the effect of the researcher on the
participants (Maxwell, 2013). The researcher acknowledges there may be some implicit biases
because the study focuses on speakers of African American English, and the researcher is
familiar with the language and culture of African Americans. One way of addressing this bias
was through the design of the observation protocol (Appendix C). The semi-structured protocol
is open-ended which allowed the researcher to: be present in the environment, describe what
teacher and students are doing, and subsequently reflect on the observation.
The second potential threat to validity is reactivity (Maxwell, 2013). The researcher
recognizes her presence in the environment can potentially alter the actions of participants. The
researcher is employed as a principal within the same district; therefore, participants may alter
their practices. The researcher attempted to address this potential threat during the introduction
stage of the study. The researcher will explain the ethical issues involved and assure the
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 47

participants that the information gathered will not be shared with anyone that is not a part of the
study, such as the site principal.
Triangulation is usually viewed as a reliable method fortifying the validity of a study;
however, it can also be subjected to researcher bias (Maxwell, 2013). Throughout this process
the researcher will be mindful of the potential validity threats when triangulating the information
gathered from the interviews, observations, and documents.
Delimitations of Study
First, the study will only be conducted at one predetermined school site; hence, the
information gathered may only reflect the experiences of that particular school. Secondly, the
allotted time frame for the study is not conducive to intensive long-term involvement which will
allow the researcher to conduct repeated observations and interviews (Maxwell, 2013).
Although the researcher will gather data, the rich data collected through long-term involvement
will be limited (Maxwell, 2013). In addition to the limitation of the study, the researcher will
attempt to minimize the threats to internal validity by acknowledging the researcher’s potential
biases (Maxwell, 2013).
Ethics
This case study was conducted ethically in order to increase validity and reliability
(Merriam, 2009). At the beginning of the study, the researcher will execute the following tasks:
(a) explain the purpose of the study and the methods used, (b) establish informed consent, and (c)
ensure participant confidentiality. The researcher will also maintain professional integrity and
ensure methodological competence throughout the duration of the study. In order to ensure the
study is conducted ethically, Merriam (2009) suggests utilizing the following strategies: (a)
triangulation, (b) researcher’s position or reflexivity, and (c) rich descriptions.
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 48

The researcher used multiple sources of data to confirm emerging themes. Various types
of data were collected throughout the study to help understand the overall experiences. The use
self-reflection was used throughout the process to make the researcher mindful of potential
biases and assumptions. During the lesson observations, the researcher used rich descriptions to
contextualize data, so readers are able to understand the context of the observation and determine
if the findings can be transferable (Merriam, 2009).

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 49

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS

The purpose of this study was to examine the influence of language and culture in
learning and literacy development for speakers of African American English (AAE). Further, it
examined the influence of teachers’ interactions, particularly with speakers of AAE, on students’
ability to acquire proficiency in Standard Academic English. Before presenting research results,
the researcher provided key background knowledge to assist in understanding teacher
participants and the student participants. The background information included: a) study sample
selection and school demographics b) teacher demographics, c) teachers’ knowledge of AAE, d)
teachers’ familiarity with AAE and e) student population observations. All of the background
information was presented in detail to provide an understanding the context in which findings are
grounded. This chapter will present the study’s findings according to the three research
questions:
1) What are some ways African American students express AAE in the classroom as their
means of participating in classroom discourse?
2) How do the interactions between teachers and speakers of AAE demonstrate teachers’
attitudes and perceptions of speakers of AAE?
3) What strategies do teachers use that enable AAE students to acquire proficiency in
Standard Academic English?
Each research question was addressed based on data obtained through interviews, classroom
observations, and documentation. The interview and observation protocols were designed to
provide information and evidence which aligns with the research questions (RQ). The matrix in
Table 2 illustrates which interview questions address specific research questions. The matrix
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 50

also shows how the observations provide data for all three research questions. The document
analysis specifically answers RQ2 and RQ3.
Table 2
Research Questions Correlations to Study Protocols
Research Questions

RQ1- What are some ways African American
students express AAE in the classroom as their
means of participating in classroom discourse?

Interviews
Questions

18,19,20,24,25
Observations

X
Documents

X
RQ2- How do the interactions between teachers
and speakers of AAE demonstrate teachers’
attitudes and perceptions of speakers of AAE?

Questions
18,20,21,22,24

X

X
RQ3- What strategies do teachers use that enable
AAE students to acquire proficiency in Standard
Academic English?
Question
25,26

X

X

Study Sample Selection and Demographic Information
Purposeful sampling was used to gain insight (Merriam, 2009) from a representative
group of middle school teachers who have experience in teaching African American students.
The researcher developed three criteria to select a school which would yield the richest body of
data (Merriam, 2009). First, the school needed to have at least 15% of African American students
enrolled. Secondly, the principal needed to affirm that AAE is frequently spoken by the African
American students. This could be verified through the principal’s responses on the interview
questions and the principal’s ability to distinguish AAE sentences from Standard American
English (SAE) and/or slang. Lastly, the school needed to have received recognition from
external evaluations for improved performance on standardized tests within the last five years.
Washington School met all three criteria and was selected to participate in the study.
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 51

Washington School is located in an urban school district in Southern California. It is
comprised of students in grades four through eight. The elementary enrollment, grades four and
five, is approximately 215 students. The middle school enrollment, grades six through eight, is
approximately, 583 students. The total enrollment for Washington is 797 students. Table 3
shows student enrollment by subgroup is: (a) Black or African American (16.3%), (b) Hispanic
or Latino (76.7%), (c) Filipino (2%), (d) White (1.9%), (e) Asian (1.5%), (f) American Indian
(.1%), (g) Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (.3%), (h) two or more races (1.1%). Eighty-eight
percent (88%) of the students are considered socioeconomically disadvantaged. As illustrated in
Table 4, the English Learner population is 28.5%, and 12% of students are classified as students
with disabilities (CDE, 2015).
Table 3
Percentage of Students by Ethnicity
African
American
Hispanic
Latino
Filipino White Asian American
Indian
Native Hawaiian
Pacific Islander
Two or
more Races
16.3% 76.7% 2% 1.9% 1.5% .1% .3% 1.1%

Table 4
Percentage Socioeconomically Disadvantaged, English Learners, and Disabilities
Socioeconomically
Disadvantaged
English Learners Students with Disabilities
88% 28.5% 12%

It is important to note the principal is an African American male who considers himself a
speaker of AAE. Table 6 illustrates the principal’s answers during the initial interview. He was
asked to review sentences and identify the ones considered AAE. He correctly identified two of
the three sentences. He selected the following: (a) Don’t nobody never wanna talk to her, and
(b) My momma be at home doing her work. Correctly identifying two of the three sentences
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 52

suggests the principal of Washington School understands the concept of negation and forms of
“be” as characteristic structures of AAE. In addition to distinguishing the AAE sentences, he was
able to describe instances in which AAE is used by speakers of AAE during the instructional
day. He provided various examples which included daily informal conversations with students,
conversations when students are called to the office, and written statements students provide
during discipline investigations.
Teacher Demographics
Table 5 shows the principal researcher identified three teacher participants who met the
following criteria: (a) teaching experience of five or more years, (b) CLAD or BCLAD
certification authorizing the teacher to provide instruction to second language learners, (c)
teaching credential in language arts or social studies, and (d) use of effective instructional
strategies as measured by summative assessment data.
T1 is a white female with 19 years of teaching experience. She is CLAD certified and
earned a Master degree in Reading/Language Arts. In addition to teaching at Washington
School, she works as an adjunct professor in the California State University system teaching
second language acquisition and English as a second language in content area classes. T2 is a
white-Native American female with 18 years of teaching experience. She is CLAD certified and
possesses a Master degree in Educational Administration. T3 is a white female with 20 years of
teaching experience. She is also CLAD certified and holds a Master degree in Educational
Administration. She also has a Montessori credential, which allows her to teach language
acquisition to pre-school and kindergarten students.

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 53

Table 5
Teacher Demographics

Participants

Gender

Ethnicity
Teaching
Experience

Highest Education
T1 Female White 19 Masters in Reading/Language Arts
Masters in Educational Administration
Masters in Educational Administration
T2 Female White-Indian 18
T3 Female White 20

Knowledge of Language and Linguistics
The interview protocol contained a section on the teachers’ knowledge of language and
linguistics. It was important to include this background information in analyzing the
implications of the study. Since, teachers’ knowledge and experience influence their daily
practices. Table Six shows teachers were asked the following questions during their interviews:
 Have you taken any courses in language development?
 Can you rate your knowledge of linguistics?
 Have you participated in any trainings or staff development related to African American
speakers of AAE?
 Have you taken any courses/seminars related to black history and or culture?
For the first question regarding the coursework in language development, T1 and T3 confirmed
they have taken courses in language development. T1 stated, “In addition to knowledge through
coursework, she also serves as an adjunct professor in the California State system teaching
second language acquisition, and English as a second language in content area classes.” T3
identified her coursework as, “the classes related to the CLAD certification.” T2 could not
remember if she took any courses in language development.
When asked to rate their knowledge of linguistics on a scale of 1 to 10, one being the
lowest and ten the highest, T1 rated her knowledge as a four. She clarified, “I would say about a
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 54

four because I am limited to the knowledge of phonics. I took linguistics courses, but not full
linguistics…more about phonics…as well as semantics, but I wouldn’t call myself an expert.”
T2 rated her knowledge as a six or seven. She stated, “Probably six or seven. I don’t know that
much, but I understand some of it through language arts stuff.” T2 rated herself higher than T1,
despite not remembering if she took any formal coursework in language development. T3 rated
her linguistic knowledge level as a six. She did not make any additional comments.
When asked if they have participated in any in-service trainings or staff developments
related to African American speakers of AAE, T1 and T2 said they have participated in either a
training or professional development. T1 attended a three day seminar in Las Vegas a few years
ago. In reference to the seminar she described, “We started looking at culture and understanding
the culture of students who come from poverty and we ended up doing breakout sessions for
linguistics.” Initially, T2 said that she had not participated in any trainings; however, during the
interview she was asked to return to that question and change her answer to yes. She added, “I
did take actually a CTA (California Teachers Association) thing. There was a lady who spoke
highly on it. It was very interesting. She was the keynote speaker.” T3 answered no to the
question. She stated, “I have never been offered training. I took one class during my teaching
certificate at Dominguez. I’ve always wondered why it has not been a mandatory training and
why it has not been addressed.”
When asked if they have taken any courses or seminars related to Black history and or
culture, T1 and T2 responded no. T3 acknowledged, “Yes, only in…way back in college there
was a course offered, but I think it was under the guise of…it also kind of just covered African
studies…probably more folkloric studies. All three teachers have been in education for eighteen
or more years, and collectively they have participated in fewer than four days of official training
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 55

related to African American students and/or characteristics of AAE. Despite Washington School
having the highest concentrated number of African American students in the district, the teachers
have had little training in how to meet the needs of that demographic group effectively.
Table 6
Language and Linguistic Coursework

Participants

CLAD
Language
Development
Coursework
Knowledge of
Linguistics
AAE
In-Service
Training
Courses and/or
Seminars in Black
History/Culture
T1 Yes Yes

4 3 days None
T2 Yes Not Sure 6-7 1 Hour None
T3 Yes Yes 6 None Yes Undergraduate

Teachers Familiarity with African American English
Table 7 indicates interview questions asked to determine the teachers’ level of
familiarity with AAE. The following questions were asked:
 What is your definition of African American English/ Ebonics?
 On a scale of 1-10 to what extent are you familiar with AAE?
 To what degree do you understand someone speaking AAE?
 Are you a speaker of AAE?
 Can you identify which of the following sentences are considered AAE/Ebonics?
Each teacher had a different definition of African American English/Ebonics. Some were
closer to evidence-based definitions than others. For instance, T1 gave a definition close to those
found in the research literature. T1 defined AAE as “…a dialectical and cultural difference that
deviates from what is considered to be academic English.” It is of note that she is also the
teacher with the strongest exposure to formal definitions of AAE. She also referred to it as “…a
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 56

sub-category of American English.” Similarly Pearson, Conner and Jackson (2013) refer to AAE
as a non-mainstream variety of English spoken in most regions in the United States. T2 defined
AAE as an informal home language spoken between family and friends. Smitherman (1981,
2002), acknowledges the connection between the language and culture connecting African
American people around the world. T3 described AAE as “…a derivative of Caribbean, Cajun
background because I notice similarities between dialects in the south and double
negatives…I’ve tried to connect it to Cajun and southern dialects”. This definition closely aligns
with different perspectives in the literature regarding the origins of the AAE. Pollock and
Meredith (2001), describe characteristics of AAE as similar to other dialects, including Southern
White Vernacular English. Additionally, Rickford (1998) believes AAE has similar roots to
Creole. Overall, the variation in the teachers’ definitions is reflective of different theories in the
literature.
Additionally, teachers were asked to rate their familiarity with AAE. Teachers responded
to the question based on their perceived fluency in AAE. T1 and T2 gave themselves an eight
based on their fluency. T1 added, “I am probably not fluent, so I will give myself an eight.” T3
rated herself a seven. When asked if they understand someone speaking AAE, all three teachers
said that they “always” understand someone who is speaking AAE. All three teachers, who are
white, expressed high levels of fluency in AAE, despite not having extensive training on its
characteristics.
When asked if they are speakers of AAE, T2 laughed and determined she is not a speaker
of AAE. T1and T3 considered themselves speakers of AAE. T1 rationalized, “I can be,
depending on the discourse and the audience. That’s the academic way of saying…who I’m
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 57

talking to and what I’m talking about.” This is also the teacher with the most training and who
teaches second language acquisition courses.
Sometimes…if a student will say, “Where she be at? What she be doing? Why she be
saying that?” then I’ll say…’Okay, can we switch to academic English in the classroom.’
“What chu mean?” ‘Well…I’m just saying in a job situation you might need to adjust and
speak this way.’ So I can go back and forth. Like sometimes it’s, “Yo, Ms. (T1)Whad up?”
I’ll say. ‘No you need to say…Good afternoon Mrs. (T1).’ “Why?” ‘Well when I see Dr.
François I don’t say…Yo, Whad up dog…or when I see Mrs. Nunley I don’t say, Yo Lisa,
check it. So all of a sudden when I do that especially if I say…Tupac that’s one of my
favorite…Tupac –Inglewood. They’ll say “What? I didn’t know you know how to talk like
that…” “I say yah, this is just me in the classroom…because I’m speaking like I am at a
job, but you might see me at my house and I might be speaking completely different.’
“What? What you talking about?” Well I say, ‘that’s because there’s a difference, I have a
professional voice, I have just a hangout voice, an emotionally controlled …I have a whole
bunch of voices.”

T3 considered herself a speaker of AAE. The narrative above is an example of T3
speaking to African American students. At the beginning of the narrative T3 gave examples
of AAE students using the word “be” as consistent with AAE. However as she continued, the
narrative fused into a mixture of AAE and slang. As she spoke her intonation and speaking
style mirrored what a speaker of AAE might sound like.

Table 7
Familiarity with African American English

Participants Level of Familiarity Degree of
Understanding
Speaker of AAE
T1 8 Always Yes
T2 8 Always No
T3 7 Always Yes

In order to determine the teachers’ ability to distinguish between AAE, Standard
American English (SAE) and slang. Table 8 reflects the list of eight sentences containing various
sentences written in AAE, SAE and slang). Each participant was instructed to first read the
sentences to themselves; identify one or more sentences representative of AAE. All three
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 58

teachers correctly identified sentence five (My momma be at home doing her work.) as an AAE
sentence. Sentence five illustrates the aspectual “be” used to describe repeated action (Pearson,
Conner & Jackson, 2013). T1 and T3 selected sentence three (Don’t nobody never wanna talk to
her.) This sentence includes the double negative, nobody never, which is characteristic of AAE.
T3 was the only one to choose sentence seven (She walk to school with her friend sister every
day.) This AAE sentence reflects two elements of AAE. It is missing the Standardized English
inflection on the verb “walk” and it does not reflect the possessive “s” to show whose sister the
sentence is referring to. T2 incorrectly identified sentence two (That car is straight up dope.) as
an AAE sentence.
Table 8
Survey Sentences to Identify AAE sentences

Sentence

Type of
Sentence

Type of AAE Sentence
1. Where did you put my shoes? SAE NA
2. That car is straight up dope. Slang NA
3. Don’t nobody never want to talk to her? AAE Negation
4. We were just chilling in the hood. Slang NA
5. My momma be at home doing her work. AAE Aspectual “be”
6. I never did like school very much. SAE NA
7. She walk to school with her friend sister every
day.
AAE Missing inflection on the verb
Possessive‘s
8. I don’t have to do anything you tell me to do. SAE NA

Student Study Population for Observations
For this study, each teacher agreed to participate in at least one classroom observation.
After the first round of observations concluded, the researcher asked participants to partake in an
additional observation to ensure the data collected reflected their instructional practices. All
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 59

participants agreed. Table 6 shows each teacher identified classes in which African American
students were enrolled, particularly speakers of AAE. T1 chose her first period language arts
class with 24% of the students identified as African American and her fourth period class with
50% African American students. T2 chose her fifth period language arts class with 19% African
American students and her fourth period with 7% African American students. T3 opted to use
the same sixth period class for each observation because it was the class with 24% African
American students. The student sample size consisted of African American students in five
English Language Arts (ELA) classes. There were three classes of eighth grade students and two
classes of sixth graders, with a combined enrollment of one hundred forty-three. Additionally,
Table 9 shows of the one hundred forty-three students, 22% are classified as African American.
All of the African American students, from the five classes, reside in the same community and
are bussed to school daily.
Table 9
Classroom Demographics and Seating Configuration of African American Students

Participants

Grade

Period

Content

Total
Students

AA Students

Seating Arrangement

T1

8

2

ELA

41

(10) = 24%
AA students seated
throughout the class

T1

8

4

ELA

14

(7) = 50%
All students seated in
square configuration

T2

6

5

ELA

21

(4) = 19%
AA students seated
throughout the class

T2

6

4

ELA

27

(2) = 7%
AA students seated
throughout the class

T3

8

6

ELA

40

(9) = 24%
AA students seated
throughout the class

T3

Same Class Observed Twice

Totals

143

(32) = 22%

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 60

The observation protocol contained a section to record classroom configuration and
seating arrangement of African American students. In T1’s period two class, there were 10
tables of 4-6 students per table. The African American students were seated throughout the
classroom. However, in the fourth period class, the chairs were rearranged in a square
formation, in which all students sat around the perimeter. Generally, the African American
students sat in pairs, just as the other students in the class. T2’s fifth period class consisted of six
tables, with four to six students per table. The African American students were seated at
different tables throughout the classroom. T2’s fourth period class only had two African
American students, one of whom was absent on the day of the observation. T3’s sixth period
class consisted of six table groups. Each table consisted of four to six students per table.
Generally, African American student were seated at each table. Two of the tables included at
least two African American students. Overall, the inclusive seating arrangement allowed for all
students to participate in the learning activities.
Research Findings
Research Question 1

What are some ways African American students express AAE in the classroom as their means of
participating in classroom discourse?

Interviews
Based on the information gathered in the interviews, all three teachers considered African
American students to be active participants in the classroom. Teachers reported the frequency of
participation was not different from other students in their classes. However, the difference
teachers described was based on how African American students participated. T1 described her
students’ level of participation in the following manner.
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 61

We do a lot of table talk in our classes and it’s interesting because I have some classes
that have a large percentage of African American students and those classes tend to
(pause) have more voluminous conversations. There is a lot of jumping in over one
another in the conversation. Um…I think that is probably the one thing I notice the
most. There is a lot of jumping. They have many things to say.

T2 explained many of her students participate in class and she could not necessarily
differentiate African American students from other students because in her classes, all the
students behave the same way. She explained, quite a few students holler out, and she reminds
them they have to wait and raise their hands. T3 noted the African American students often
jump into the conversation or raise their hands and begin waving their hands when they want to
say something. She observed there is a lot of parallel talking, especially when they are
passionate about the topic of discussion.
Observations
How is language used in the classroom?
Teacher One. African American students used AAE in the classroom as a means of
participating in classroom discourse. There was evidence of AAE in both informal and formal
conversations. During the first observation, students were directed to pick a poem they would
use for the assignment. T1 asked all students to stand and walk to the side of the class labeled
with the poem they selected. The class divided into four groups. One group consisted of four
African American males and three Latino males. T1 directed the groups to discuss their thoughts
before they returned to their desks to work independently.
T1 walked around to each group as they discussed. When she got to the group with the
four African American males, she jokingly said, “Anytime the four of you get together and do
this (she made a motion of covering her mouth) I’m concerned.” Both T1 and the students started
laughing. As she walked away she reminded them to discuss the sensory details of the poem.
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 62

The researcher was seated close to the group, but could not hear every comment. However,
AAE was used in their formal discussion of the lesson and their off-topic discussion of coaches
in sports.
The second observation of T1’s fourth period class demonstrated how African American
students use AAE in the classroom as their means of participating in discourse. The use of AAE
was prevalent throughout the majority of the class discussion. The assignment required students
to work in pairs to discuss and present their opinions to the class. T1 gave each pair a name of a
character from the book. The pairs were given the task to determine if their character would be
considered good, bad or both. T1 explained groups needed to use evidence from the text to
justify their position in front of the class and based on group discussion, information would be
added to the class tree map.
It was challenging to separate the students’ use of SAE language from their interactions;
so the researcher has included both to assist with understanding the use of AAE within the
context of the lesson. Abbreviations are included to help identify the various students. Numbers
after the abbreviations were assigned by the researcher to each student during the observation.
Numbering is consistent throughout findings to maintain consistency.
The first pair of students to present were an African American male (AAM) and a Latino
(LM). When they got up AAM2 said, “Well, explain yourself.” The pair presented their
character as good and bad. Members of the classroom did not agree. There was a combination
of students hollering out and students raising their hands. T1 reminded the group to be respectful
and listen to each other speak. Another AAM said in reference to the character, “His intensions
was good, but he did something bad.” An oral debate began about the character’s intentions.
AAM2 became highly animated about proving his point. He stood up and said, “If he didn’t
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 63

murder him, he would be umm…good. When Derek slap him, he ran back to the park…” When
the other students tried to debate the point AAM2 cut them off by yelling and injecting a verbal
noise as the other student tried to speak. Note use of verb was instead of SAE which calls for the
verb were to demonstrate s-v agreement.
After the first group presented T1 asked, “Anyone want to go up?” AAM2 yelled,
“Us...we do!” The two AAMs presented their character as both good and bad. Immediately other
students wanted to speak; so they raised their hands. AAM2 picked a student whom had his hand
raised. When there was confusion about the student’s turn to speak, AAM2 said, “I pick at him.”
instead of I picked him. This was perhaps a phonetics matter. The dialogue in the class was full
of rich insights isolated from students’ personal experience as a reference point for making
inferences. Verbal exchanges were so intense that T1 had to remind the students to take turns
speaking. AAM3 started to make a counter point about the character’s actions. He spoke using
Standard American English (SAE). As he spoke, another AAM4 said to him, “Why you talk like
that?” An African American Female (AAF) defended AAM3 by replying, “That’s how he talks.”
Brief laugher ensued and AAM3 continued his point.
After the presentation, instead of returning to his seat, AAM2 sat near the front of the
room close to the presenters. As the discussion intensified, AAM1 moved to the front of the
class and sat in the teacher’s chair to be in close proximity to the heart of the discussion. T1,
who was seated on the perimeter of the square, did not say anything to AAM1 about moving
seats or about sitting in her chair. Instead, she let the conversations continue. Students were
engaged in an ongoing debate about the character’s traits. All of their comments were based on
evidence from the book. Requiring students to use text-based evidence as support was usually
the only factor which forced the students to agree.
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 64

A team of LMs presented their character as good. They clearly explained their evidence,
so AAM2 said, “I have no contradictions.” In response to that statement T1 said, “That’s a good
word…contradictions.” When the next group presented, AAF and AAM3, AAM5 asked, “Hold
up, why you think he’s bad?” AAM3 responded, “We have little evidence that he is bad and
good.” Again the same AAM4 from earlier group said, “You talk like that?” The same AAF
came to his defense again and said, “Yea, he really talk like that.” In the last group, two AAFs,
when explaining how they classified their character, one said, “I pick both. Dem done something
good and something bad. So I pick both.”
The AAE speakers demonstrated a variety of elements of AAE throughout the class
discussion, such as the type of speech sounds and pronunciation (Pearson, Conner & Jackson,
2013). Even when AAE students used SAE in the words they spoke, the way some of the words
were pronounced was characteristic of an AAE speaker. The researcher noted a few words in
which the speakers left off the ending sound to show past tense. For example a student used the
word slap instead of slapped. In another instance, a student said, “I pick at him.” Instead of
saying, I picked him. The AAF who defended the young man who spoke SAE, leaves off the “s”
on the verb talk which does not conform to subject-verb agreement rules in SAE. Deviations
form SAE’s rules for verb inflections appear to be features of AAE frequently used by African
American students in this class. The researcher noted there was a noticeable difference in the
way one AAM student spoke during the lesson, as opposed to how he speaks at other times.
When the AAM used SAE in the discussion, another AAM questioned how he was speaking.
The AAM using SAE may have been demonstrating his acquisition of SAE, as well as AAE.

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 65

Teacher Two. Based on the two observations of T2’s classes, the researcher found
minimal evidence of AAE used in the classroom by the African American students. Whether all
the students in this class are proficient in their use of SAE or whether the structured nature of the
classroom discourse are the reasons remain unclear. The pattern of communication was typically
teacher asking a question with students responding in short responses.
Teacher Three. The researcher conducted two observations of T3’s period six class on
two different days. There was evidence of African American students using AAE in the
classroom as part of communicating with T3 and other students. During the interview T3
mentioned how she tries to correct students when they say something that is not SAE. The
researcher noted two examples of T3 correcting an African American female (AAF) student on
two different occasions. During the first observation, T3 asked students to take out their books at
the beginning of the lesson. When T3 scanned the room she noticed the AAF did not have her
book. T3 asked her, “Where is your book?” AAF responded, “I don’t got my book.” T3
corrected her by saying, “I’m sorry Mrs. (T3), I don’t have my supplies.” AAF repeated the
sentence and T3 said, “I talked to you about this yesterday.” T3 gave her another book. Don’t
got is frequently heard in AAE in place of the verb have to indicate possession.
Another instance occurring during the second observation concerned the same student.
She asked T3, “You got some tissue?” T3 corrected her by saying, “Do you have some tissue?”
AAF repeated the statement and T3 gave her the tissue. This particular kind of public language
correction could have caused a problem between the AAF and a Latina in the class. Later in the
lesson, the researcher witnessed a Latina, seated across from the AAF, mock the student by
saying, “You got some tissue?” The Latina laughed with a smirk on her face. The AAF looked
at her intensely and did not respond, after which, the Latina stopped laughing and remained quiet
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 66

for a few minutes. Although AAF restated the sentence, the Latina used the student’s original
sentence to ridicule the way the AAF spoke. As a result, the researcher questioned the classroom
culture and pondered what elements embedded within the environment would make language
mimicking permissible. Perhaps, over correction in front of other students bred disrespect for
speakers of AAE and their language inside the classroom. On the other hand, the researcher must
note T3 did not hear the comment made by the Latina.
Although use of AAE did not occur within general context of the lesson, AAF used her
home language to communicate with T3. The researcher wondered if T3’s language corrections
were counterproductive to her intent. According to Green (2002), sometimes well-intentioned
teachers use ineffective strategies as their method of helping students. However, ineffective
strategies can lead to inhibited and disengaged students. As demonstrated in the
Roadville/Trackton Study (Wells, 1998), researchers found caregivers who controlled and
corrected young children as they developed English, inhibited development of the language.
Additionally, those that were overcorrected did not use more error-free language. Instead, their
language did not develop as well, and they did not academically progress at the same rate as
other students.
AAE Students Level of Participation
Teacher One. In T1’s fourth period class, the level of participation of AAE speakers
increased as students participated in classroom discourse. The manner in which African
American students participated closely aligned to the interactions T1 described during the
interview. Students were very passionate about the topic, and they hollered out and interjected
their thinking into the classroom discourse. Often this engagement occurred without students
raising their hands for permission to speak. As Gutierrez confirms, loud-talking is used as a
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 67

conversational tactic (Gutierrez, 1995). To a non-AAE speaker, the interactions may be
considered offensive (Green, 2002), but student participation demonstrates a communicative
competence for that particular group and environment (Green, 2002). Students actively engaged
in discourse to construct knowledge (analysis of a character in a story). In this case, the teacher
merely facilitated the discourse. It appeared her goal was to develop students’ ability to conduct
text-based analysis rather than emphasizing SAE usage. In this “third space” students developed
the skill of using evidence to make inferences and developed their “voice” to articulate
individual perspectives. More importantly, T1 added to their repertoire (Gutiérrez, 2008) of
oratorical skills.
Teacher Two. There was minimal evidence of African American students expressing
AAE in T1’s classroom as a means of participating in classroom discourse. The way in which
T2 structured the lesson was consistent with what she said during the interview. T2 stated there
was not a significant difference in the way African American students participated in relation to
the other students. The researcher noted the same occurrence during the observation.
T2 used a highly structured system to promote what she considers equity in student
engagement in the class. For instance, at the end of group discussion, T2 pulled sticks, with
individual names written on each one, to call on students to share. Various students were called
to share; they all complied. There was one instance when an African American male yelled out
his answer. As T2 was soliciting examples from students of activities that would be considered
“unethical”, The African American male, interjected, “I have something for unethical.” T2
sarcastically laughed and said, “I bet you do.” Both T2 and the student laughed.
When the table groups were assigned to work together, the researcher looked around at
the African American students at each table to observe how they participated in the lesson.
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 68

Based on the researcher’s observations, the students worked at their desks and participated in the
groups accordingly.
Based on a modest level of student engagement, the researcher questioned effectiveness
of the equity system. The goal of the system was ensure all students had an equal respond.
However, this system seems counterproductive to encouraging true discourse. Perhaps African
American students require a familiar linguistic tool to express ideas and connections throughout
the lesson; not just when they are called on by the teacher. In fact, this structured interaction is
contrary to the Third Space concept (Gutierrez, 1995). In Third Space, both teacher and student
have the opportunity to negotiate formal and informal interactions which invite the potential for
authentic learning.
Teacher Three. There was evidence of some African American students trying to
participate in the lesson. However, these were not recognized by T3. It is important to
acknowledge T3 selected some African American students to read and/or share answers.
Nevertheless, it became of interest to the researcher when T3 did not choose certain African
American students. During the interview, T3 described methods used by African American
students when they try to participate in the lesson by means such as jumping in conversations
and/or waving their hands in the air. Despite T3’s knowledge of how the students demonstrate
their eagerness to participate, T3 did not select students exhibiting those behaviors. It appeared
avoidance of these students was the teacher’s means of disciplining them in an effort to prevent
waving hands and jumping into conversations. However, an unintended effect perhaps restricts
students’ engagement and higher order thinking.
During the second observation, students were learning how to write an argumentative
essay using logical reasons. At the beginning of the lesson, T3 drew a tree map on the board and
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 69

asked for student responses to help complete the map. One AAF raised her hand to add a
comment; T3 did not acknowledge her. AAF kept her hand up for a moment and eventually
switched to the other hand. She started calling T3’s name, with her hand still in the air; still she
was not acknowledgement. A moment later, T3 said to the class, “You need to raise your hand, if
you need help.” T3’s rule of raising a hand to speak was not followed because when certain
students raised their hands, they were not always called on to speak.
As the lesson progressed, T3 asked students to talk to their table partners about how a
mother can be helpful. Students talked within their groups. When AAF raised her hand to say
something, T3 did not acknowledge her. AAF put her hand down. Additionally two African
American males (AAMs) raised their hands to make a comment. T3 did not acknowledge them.
Instead, she told the class to talk to their table partners. AAF raised her hand again. T3
acknowledged her. AAF1’s comment to T3 was not clear to the researcher.
At the end of the lesson, AAF1 raised her hand to answer the T3’s question. She was not
acknowledged; so she kept her hand in the air. Eventually she started saying, “Me…Me…” at
first T3 did not call on her. Instead, she called on other students in the class, who were African
American and Latino. AAF continued to hold her hand up and eventually T3 acknowledged her.
AAF made a comment, but it is unknown to the researcher whether the student’s response was
wrong, irrelevant, or even correct because T3 did not respond. If it was an incorrect response, T3
did not explain what was wrong with AAF’s answer, nor assist her in constructing a more
accurate or acceptable response. Instead she was dismissive regarding AAF’s input and did not
provide additional feedback on the quality of the students’ response (Kuykendall, 1992). The
researcher noticed despite not being selected, AAF continued her attempts at participation in the
lesson. Ferguson (2003) believes teachers generally call on students perceived as smart more
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 70

often than calling on students are perceived as less intelligent. Even when correcting students’
responses of bright students, teachers give fuller feedback to support these students.
Overall, classroom discussion fell short of discourse characteristic of Third Space
interaction where knowledge can be constructed and contested within a safe academic
environment. Because students were not given the opportunity to participate in legitimate
learning activities, the students may have learned very little from the lesson (Wilkinson, 1982).
Student Behaviors – Resistance/Oppositional
Teacher One. During the first observation of T1’s class, some African American
students appeared reluctant to participate in discourse. Nevertheless, T1was skilled in handling
potential defiance while keeping students focused on the lesson. For instance, when T1 noticed a
couple of the African American students off task, she walked over and spoke to them. While
working with one student, she noticed that an AAM was not completing the assignment. From
across the room she said, “AAM, when I get over there, I better see some text-based evidence”.
The student smiled and began working. A few minutes later, T1 walked over to the student to
check his paper. As T1 read the paper, she positively nodded and said, “Can I make a
suggestion?” She proceeded to explain how the student needed to add more sensory details to his
paragraph.
In another instance, T1 noticed an AAF was talking, but not engaged in the lesson. T1
said, “When I get there, I better see some progress.” The student huffed, but continued to work.
T1 walked over to the student to read her paper as well.
Later in the lesson, T1 noticed the class was having problems with devising a constructed
response, so she stopped the lesson to model the concept. She called on students to respond to a
question. An AAF was seated at one of the back tables with four other students. T1 called on
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 71

her to answer and the student did not respond. T1 warned, “I’ll come back to you.” T1
proceeded with questioning other students. Eventually, she called on her again. Again the
student did not respond. T1 directed the class to continue working as she walked over to the
student and asked what was going on. The student mumbled a response and the teacher said,
“Let’s read it together.” Both the teacher and student chorally read what the student wrote.
As the lesson continued T1walked around the classroom, reviewed students’ work and
high-fived the students whom were on target. This included both African American students and
other students in the class. At the end of class, T2 told two African American males to stay
behind because she needed to speak with them. She asked what time should she expect them at
lunch to finish a previous writing assignment. They both laughed a little, so T1 said she would
have someone pick them up from the period before lunch. T1 and both students smiled and they
said okay. As they walked out the door T1 said, “Have a nice day.”
This teacher initiates interaction with students and does not allow students to drop out of
learning.
Teacher Two. Based on the two observations, minimal overtly resistant behaviors were
evident in T2’s classes. At the end of the first observation, T2 asked students, “According to the
article, why can eating meat be unethical? Three students were called on to respond. As the last
student spoke, T2 noticed an AAM drawing on his paper. T2 directed him to stop.
Simultaneously an AAF began drinking a bottle of Gatorade, and it seemed as if she was not
listening to the discussion. However, when T2 asked a question, the AAF was able to respond.
With three minutes remaining in the period, T2 announced, “Let’s start cleaning up.” T2 noticed
an AAF wandering around the class, so she assigned the student the job of picking up all the
students’ journals. The student proceeded to pick up the journals as directed.
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 72

Teacher Three. There was evidence of overtly resistant behaviors in T3’s class.
However, the behaviors were not isolated to students of African descent. One AAF did not bring
her book and supplies; she wore her hood in class, despite the classroom rule. During the
lesson, a second African American female (AAF2) yelled to another African American female
(AAF3), “Give me my pencil!” T2 told AAF2, “AAF2, I told you don’t be distracted by her.”
AAF2 replied, “God!” as she turned her head to look at the book. The lesson continued, T3
walked around the class while students spoke. T3 called on four students to answer questions
which they could not answer. T3 told all the students they would have to stay after school for an
additional four minutes because four consecutive students could not answer her question.
With ten minutes left in the period, T3 called on AAM3 to read. As he read, the same
African American girls whom previously argued over the pencil, began arguing over something
else. T3 said, “I’m fed up with the situation, I’m not going to help.” T3 put her hands in the air
and walked away from both students. The bickering ended. The bell rang for dismissal. T3
reminded students that they owe her an additional four minutes. She turned off the lights and
said, “When it’s time to get our work done, we need to get it done on time.” After four minutes,
T3 dismissed the class by tables.
The researcher noticed T3’s frustration level by the end of the period. It was as if she
blamed the students for the ineffectiveness of the lesson. Reflection on her role as teacher to help
the students through the lesson (Cushman, 1991) instead of punishing students for answers
deemed incorrect may have been a more appropriate approach as students appeared somewhat
confused by T3’s questions. Additionally, the AAF’s argument encouraged the researcher to
question the tone of decency maintained within the classroom (Kuykendall, 1992). There was
little evidence a tone of decency was established in the classroom, especially when T3 put her
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 73

hands in the air to signify giving up on the students. The students in T1’s class put their energy
into the rich discourse about the book they read. Students in T3’s classroom seem to be putting
their energy into diversions.
Research Question Two
How do the interactions between teachers and speakers of AAE demonstrate teachers’
attitudes and perceptions of speakers of AAE?

Before observations began, the researcher noted basic similarities in the classroom
environments. Also, positive posters were displayed in all three classes. In T1’s class there was
evidence the classroom inspired achievement and excitement. There were positive slogans
posted that fostered values, inspired students, and promoted persistence. Posters such as,
NEVER SETTLE FOR LESS THAN YOUR BEST and THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
ORDINARY AND EXTRAORDINARY, IS THAT LITTLE EXTRA were prominently
displayed by the writing wall. In the front of the room, there was a display of books reflecting
contributions and accomplishments of African American people. The display reflected an
appreciation for the cultural and linguistic diversity of students.
The room environment of T2’s class was similar to T1’s class in two areas. One, the
classroom writing wall contained a writing piece for every student. Two, there were positive
words and slogans posted throughout the classroom encouraging students to appreciate diversity.
A poster by the window read, “Embrace the world with your own genuine style.” Another
prominently displayed poster read, “Stand up for what is right, even if you are standing alone.”
Similar to the other two teachers, T3’s classroom writing wall displayed students’ work and
motivational posters. One poster read, “Goal: The great thing in this world is not so much where
we are, but in what direction we are moving.”

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 74

Interviews
When teachers were asked in interviews to describe how AAE students typically
participate in classroom discourse, all three teachers noted the students were active participants.
When asked to elaborate on how they felt about AA student participation there were variations.
T1 explained African American students had voluminous conversations, and they had a lot to
talk about. When asked how she felt about it, she stated:

I don’t mind that because I think I have been acculturated to my environment in a lot
of respects in that I understand my demographics and there are certain times that I
allow it to happen because that is the best way to get a group fired up to have a
conversation and there are other times when you make sure that everyone is
participating so you are using the talking chips and so on and so forth.

T1’s comment reflects the use of a third space strategy, in which the teacher assists
student in merge their first space of home and community, with the second space, of school
(Gutierrez, 1995). T2 understands learning happens vertically and horizontally (Gutierrez, 1995).
Furthermore, T1 realizes students need the opportunity to actively engage in the learning
environment.
T2 explained she does not like the students hollering out because it does not provide the
opportunity for other students to participate. She made reference to one African American male
when she said, “The hollering out is the worst part only because I want other kids in the class to
have time. The kid I’m thinking about who hollers out is very intelligent and he normally has
the right answer; everybody is like…we don’t have to think anymore because he just told us.”
Conversely, she also observed hollering out was not unique to African American students.
Instead, it was part of the climate of the classroom and most students participated in the same
way.
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 75

As a result, the researcher wondered if student hollering out was a way of receiving
recognition. Gee (2001) explains, the yelling of correct answers may be a student’s way of
wanting to be recognized as intelligent. This student may believe he will appear smart to other
students by yelling out the correct answer. In either case, the student is looking for recognition.
It was not clear from the teacher’s explanation whether she was interested in why that particular
student continued to yell out answers.
Teacher Three.T3 described her students’ participation as jumping over and parallel
talking. She explained she did not have a problem with the students talking, as long as
communication was positive. She referred to a time, in the previous year, when the joking
between the African American students became negative resulting in ongoing altercations
between students. T3 stated:
… I love the participation. They [African American students] always have the best
discussions or have some of the best insights right away. They get it really fast, but if
you have your English Language Development (ELD) students that didn’t catch the
three or four times, and they didn’t get it, then you can see your African American
students have to be stopped and slowed down and it gets repeated. Then you lose
them because they’re like…she’s going through this process again. So, then I get a
little shut down and have to bring them back into the discussion.

From a sociocultural perspective, T3’s response demonstrates how African American
students interact and use discourse reflective of their culture. Their discussions reflect a
continuous renegotiation and reinterpretation of their understanding as they participate in
discussions (Gutierrez, 1995). When they have to slow down or stop, engagement is
compromised. According to T3’s comment, she understands what is happening with the AAE
speakers; however, she may not be skilled at meeting the needs of both demographic groups.

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 76

Observations: Order vs. Rich Discourse (third space)

Teacher One. During the lesson observations, there was evidence of T1 interactions
with speakers of AAE throughout the lesson. Both observations are included in this section to
provide insight into T1’s style of engagement with students and particularly African
American students throughout the lesson. Both of T1’s observations included elements of
order and rich discourse.
T1’s observation began with her greeting students at the door. After greeting the class,
and reviewing the objective, students divided into four groups. One group contained four
African American males and three Latinos. T1 directed the groups to discuss the poem they
selected. T1 walked around to each group as they discussed. When she got to the group
composed of four African American males, she jokingly said, “Anytime the four of you get
together and do this (she made a motion of covering her mouth) I’m concerned.” Both T1 and the
students laughed. As she walked away she reminded them to discuss the sensory details of the
poem.
T1 constantly walked around to check all students’ work and provided oral feedback.
When she noticed a couple of African American students were off task, she walked over and
spoke to them. While working with one student, she noticed that an AAM was not doing his
work. From across the room she said, “AAM, when I get over there, I better see some text-based
evidence.” The student smiled and began working. A few minutes later, T1 walked over to the
student to check his paper. As T1 read his paper, she positively nodded and said, “Can I make a
suggestion?” She proceeded to explain how he needed to add more sensory details to his
paragraph. In another instance, T1 noticed that an African American female (AAF1) was talking
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 77

to another student. T1 said, “When I get there, I better see some progress.” The student huffed,
but continued to work. T1 walked over to the student to read her paper as well.
Later in the lesson, T1 noticed that the class was having problems with devising a
constructed response, so she stopped the lesson to model the concept. She called on AAF1 to
answer and the student did not respond. T1 warned, “I’ll come back to you.” T1 proceeded with
questioning other students. Eventually, she called on her again. Again the student did not
respond. T1 directed the class to continue working as she walked over to the student and asked
what was going on. The student mumbled a response and T1 said, “Let’s read it together.” Both
the teacher and student chorally read the student’s paper.
At the end of the lesson, T1 reminded students she will be available during lunch if they
need any additional assistance. She told two African American males to stay behind because she
needed to speak with them. She asked what time should she expect them at lunch to finish a
previous writing assignment. They both laughed a little, so T1 said, “she will have someone pick
them up from the period before they go to lunch.” T1 and both students smiled and they said
okay. As they walked out the door T1 said, “Have a nice day!”
Throughout this observation, there was evidence the teacher and students trusted each
other in the classroom. T1 used close proximity to monitor students’ progress (Kuykendall,
1992). T1’s physical proximity ranged from supportive/helpful to disciplinary (Kuykendall,
1992), when students were off task. T1 used praise and affirmations in communicating students’
achievement of the lesson objective. This was evident in the way she high-fived students after
reading their papers. Overall, there was a tone of decency (Cushman, 1991) in the classroom as
evidenced by the interaction between T1 and the two African American males she spoke to after
class. Both parties spoke to each other respectfully (Kuykendall, 1992) despite the young men
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 78

being in trouble for not completing a previous writing assignment. T1’s interaction with the
students was similar to that of a “warm demander” (Ware, 2006, p.432). It appeared the young
men knew that T1 was not going to lower her standards, and she was willing to help them (Ware,
2006) complete the assignment. T1 told them she expected them to come and finish their work,
yet she did not blame them for their deficiencies. Instead, she used her role, as the teacher, to
provide the support needed to help them accomplish the writing task (Cushman, 1991). The most
notable characteristic of her interaction with African American students was her refusal to allow
the African American students to become disengaged. It was evident their participation was
more important than mere control of their behavior. She coaxed them to remain engaged as
valued participants in the classroom activities and discourses.
The second observation reflected how T1 was able to guide students in rich discourse.
Students were encouraged to express their values and come to understand the perspective of
others (Gee, 1995). For the lesson, students worked in pairs to discuss and present their opinions
to the class. Before presentations, T1 reminded the class how to have a respectable discussion.
T1 also reminded them, if they wanted to interject a comment, they could not shout out. This
reminder helped to set the tone of decency (Kuykendall, 1992) in which everyone was expected
to communicate respectfully. She also provided verbal scaffolds for students during the
discussion process.
The first pair to present was an AAM and a Latino (LM). Members of the classroom did
not agree with them, so there was a combination of students hollering out and raising their hands.
T1 reminded the group to be respectful and listen to each other speak. T1 reminded AAM2 of
how to respect the opinions of others and not to cut people off when they want to add to the
conversation.
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 79

When AAM3 wanted to explain his perspective, T1 maintained an open dialogue with
him which consisted of more than yes or no responses (Kuykendall, 1992). For the most part,
discourse between T1 and AAE speakers extended for more than two speech turns. AAM3 was
able to articulate his perspective, and T1 did not try to dismiss his insight as faulty
understanding. The reciprocal dialogue between T1 and AAM3 reflected a mutual bond of
respect (Kuykendall, 1992).
Student presentations were intense as students discussed their perspectives. T1 allowed
two African American students to move their seats during the discussion. One student even sat
in T1’s chair in the front of the room to establish close proximity to the heart of the discussion.
T1, who was seated on the perimeter of the square, did not say anything to AAM1 about moving
seats or about sitting in her chair. Instead, she let the discussion continue.
Overall, T1 demonstrated an understanding that the relationship between the teacher and
student is bi-directional (Gutierrez, 1995) and establishing a relationship with students helps
propel students to the “Third Space” where learning occurs. The level of discourse during the
lesson allowed the students to engage information and hold extensive discussions. This could
have not been accomplished if T1 were not knowledgeable of the cultural characteristics of AAE
speakers’ communicative competence (Hudley & Mallison, 2011). Furthermore, T1’s was
comfortable with the organized chaos present in the lesson.
T1 served as a facilitator of this discussion by constantly interjecting open-ended
questions to assist students analyze various perspectives. T1 understood students needed to use
their language to articulate what they knew while participating in the classroom environment.
She provided the opportunity for them to use their words to express their analysis of the literature
and come to understand the perspective of others (Gee, 1995).
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 80

The AAE speakers demonstrated a variety of elements of AAE throughout the class
discussion. However, T1 did not focus on correcting the students’ grammar. Instead of turning
the discussion into a grammar lesson, students were allotted the freedom to take intellectual risks
in sharing their opinions and expressing their thoughts. Based on Gutierrez (1995), one can
ascertain language development is partly the result of the skills and ideas students develop
through social interactions. Therefore, utilizing this particular instructional strategy will assist
speakers of AAE develop SAE.
Teacher Two. Both lesson observations were based on a direct teaching model which
limited opportunities for students to engage in discourse. It appeared T2 was more
comfortable with having an orderly lesson, than allowing students the opportunity to engage
in activities promoting discourse. Although students were provided the opportunity to work in
collaborative groups, the assignments did not lend themselves to students working in third
space.
At the beginning of the lesson students worked in table groups. T2 walked over to an
African American Female (AAF1) and said something to her. The student did not give an oral
response to T2. Instead, AAF1 turned to her group and continued working on the tree map. T2
attempted to solicit responses from students for the class map. AAM2 exclaimed, “I have
something for unethical!” T2 sarcastically laughed and said, “I bet you do.” AAM2 laughed and
added the words gang bangers to the chart.
T2 selected students to read aloud to the class. AAM3 was called to read the first section
aloud; he complied. At the close of the lesson, T2 noticed that AAM3 was drawing on his paper.
T2 directed him to stop. Simultaneously, AAF1 started drinking a bottle of Gatorade and it
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 81

seemed as if she was not listening to the discussion. However, when T2 asked a question, AAF1
was able to respond.
T2 directed students to continue with the next section and write their response on an
index card as their ticket out the door at the end of the period. AAM3 wrote his information and
started waving his card in the air for T2 to come to his desk and read it. T2 walked over and read
the card silently. She pointed to a line on the card and asked him to elaborate more on the idea
he was trying to explain. T2 walked to AAM1’s desk to read his card. T2 read silently and made
a few suggestions. She ended the conversation by saying, “Everything else is good.” AAM2
called T2 to his table to read his response. Again T2 read silently and articulated, “That’s
perfect, but this needs to have a little something…add a quote.” AAM2 responded, “I’ll put it at
the bottom.” In these actions T2’s practice of moving close to students to guide them resembled
a similar practice observed in T1’s teaching.
With three minutes remaining in the period, T2 announced, “Let’s start cleaning up.” T2
noticed that AAF1 started wandering around the class, so she assigned AAF1 the job of picking
up all the students’ journals. T2 walked around to collect a card from every student. When the
bell rang, students were dismissed by tables.
T2’s second observation was conducted in her third period class, which consisted of two
African American students. One the day of the observation, one of the African American
students was absent. However, the researcher did observe the other student (AAF). The
researcher did not notice any interactions between T2 and the student.
Particularly in the first observation, T2 interacted with students and provided feedback
accordingly. However, the nature of the assignments did not provide students opportunity to
engage in meaningful discourse. The first lesson, which dealt with the concept of ethics, could
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 82

have allowed students the prospective of an in depth discussion. Although students were
provided an opportunity to discuss in their groups, the primary goal of the assignment was to
generate examples for the class chart.
Teacher Three. Based on the two observations, T3 seemed to be conflicted between
order and facilitating rich discourse. Both observations are included to illustrate how T3
interacted with African American students throughout the lessons. At the beginning of each
observation, T3 stood at the door and greeted each student as they entered the classroom. T3
attempted to help students acquire proficiency in SAE by “correcting” student speech in front
of the class. The correction follows because T3 interprets the use of home language as a
linguistic mistake. When AAF1 stated, “I don’t got my book.” T3 corrected the student’s
grammar by saying, “I’m sorry Mrs. (T3), I don’t have my supplies.” AAF1 repeated the
sentence. T3 said, “I talked to you about this yesterday.” T3 reached for another book and
gave it to AAF1.
T3 reacted in frustration at the ongoing dispute between AA2 and AA3 over a pencil. T3
told AAF2, “AAF2, I told you don’t be distracted by her.” AAF2 replied, “God!” as she turned
her head to look at the book. T3 continued the lesson. The teacher seemed ill equipped to help
students acquire the skills for handling their conflict.
For the second part of the lesson, T3 explained they were going to read an excerpt from
President Obama’s speech, which was given the night before. AAF1 was chosen to pass out the
papers to the class. AAF1 was also called to read the first section. She read very low; so the
researcher could not hear how she pronounced the words or if she read them correctly. The
manner in which T3 allowed the students to read turned the cold oral read in to a missed
opportunity for students to practice ahead and polish their fluency in SAE pronunciation. Pre-
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 83

planning with an emphasis on fluency could have prevented the lifeless reading that took place.
Eventually an AAM4 raised his hand to answer a question regarding the content of the reading.
He said, “We will go to the world scared and stuff or we will (inaudible)…” T3 responded,
“Yeah” and moved on to another student without any extension to the student’s response.
As the lesson continued, T3 called on AAM5 to answer; he responded. T3 called on four
students to answer questions, and they could not answer. T3 told the all the students they would
have to stay after school for an additional four minutes because four consecutive students could
not answer her question.
When two AAFs started arguing T3 exclaimed, “I’m fed up with the situation! I’m not
going to help.” T3 put her hands in the air and walked away from both students. When the bell
rang for dismissal, T3 reminded students they owed her an additional four minutes. She turned
off the lights and said, “When it’s time to get our work done, we need to get it done on time.”
After four minutes, T3 dismissed the class by tables.
For T3’s second observation of the same class, students were learning how to write an
argumentative essay using quality reasons. An AAF1, the same student from the previous
observation, raised her hand to add a comment. T3 did not acknowledge her. AAF1 kept her
hand up for a moment and eventually switched to the other hand. She started to call T3’s name,
with her hand still in the air. There was no acknowledgement. A moment later, T3 said to the
class, “You need to raise your hand, if you need help.” T3’s rule of raising a hand to speak was
not followed on behalf of T3 because when students raised their hands, they were not always
called on to speak. This was interesting to note because during the initial interview, T3
described how African American students often raise their hands, and began waving their hands
when they have something to say. Even with this insight, T3 did not acknowledge the student.
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 84

As the lesson progressed, T3 asked students to talk to their table partners about how a
mother can be helpful. Students talked with their groups. An AAF was called on to respond.
AAF1 raised her hand to say something, but T3 did not acknowledge her. AAF1 put her hand
down. Additionally two AAMs raised their hands to make a comment. T3 did not acknowledge
them, instead she told the class to talk to their table partners. AAF1 raised her hand again. T3
acknowledged her. AAF1’s comment to T3 was not clear to the researcher.
As the lesson continued, AAF1 raised her hand again and asked T3, “You got some
tissue?” T3 corrected her by saying, “Do you have some tissue?” AAF1 repeated the statement
correctly and T3 gave her the tissue. At the end of the lesson, AAF1 raised her hand to answer
the T3’s question. She was not acknowledged, so she kept her hand in the air. Eventually she
started saying, “Me…Me…” at first T3 did not call on her. Instead, she called on other students
in the class, who were both African American and Latino students. Despite repeated attempts on
the part of AAF1 to be heard, the teacher continued to ignore her. The reason is unclear.
Research Question Three

What strategies do teachers use which enable AAE students to acquire proficiency in Standard
Academic English?

Analysis of this research question required the researcher to examine multiple sets of data
to identify the types of strategies teachers use to assist AAE students in acquiring SAE. First,
teachers were asked the following questions:
 How do you support language learners in acquiring Standard Academic English?
 What strategies do you use when African American students struggle with a concept?
 What type of feedback do you provide?
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 85

Second, teachers were asked to submit writing samples, with teacher feedback, of African
American students, particularly speakers of AAE. Last, the researcher conducted observations to
identify strategies used in the classroom.
Interviews. Each teacher identified different strategies used to enable AAE students to
acquire proficiency in SAE. However, many of the strategies were not specific to speakers of
AAE, and some are not considered instructional strategies. T1 and T2 identified one of their
strategies as providing additional time. They described additional time in different ways. T1
explained, “I use a lot of my lunchtime and that isn’t necessarily just for African American
students, but any student who is struggling. But I will say many of my African American
students are the students who do not bring their homework back, so we spend a lot of time at
lunch together.” Although T1 did not identify particular instructional strategies in the interview,
she used various effective strategies in the classroom.
T2 explained she allows students extra time to think about their responses during class
discussions. T2 also stated she models SAE while teaching, so students are exposed to using
academic English. T3 stated she corrects AAE speakers when they do not use SAE during
instruction. T3 also stated she tries to have students respond using complete sentences.
General Teacher Feedback. One interview question asked teachers to describe feedback
provided to students. Responses to the feedback question ranged from general verbal feedback to
explicit writing feedback. T2 stated she likes to provide verbal feedback during the lesson or use
close physical proximity to help students feel safe to speak. She stated,
I give them a lot of love…great! That was great!.. A lot of verbal feedback. Sometimes
if it is a longer answer, I walk to the student and give them a pat on the shoulder just so
they know that I’m appreciating what they are saying…

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 86

T3 described her feedback as verbal praise to increase student empowerment. She also
likes to provide tangible incentives to motivate students. T1 explained she provides explicit
feedback, especially on students’ writing. She further explained she selects only one or two
focus areas for feedback and links suggestions for improvement.
Teacher Written Feedback. Teachers were asked to submit writing samples produced
by unidentified AAE students in order to illustrate feedback provided to assists students acquire
proficiency in SAE. Despite multiple attempts to collect writing samples, with teacher feedback,
T1 did not submit any student work. This was a loss to the study because T1 is the teacher with
the most knowledge of culture and linguistics.
T2 and T3 submitted writing samples with teacher feedback. Originally, teachers were
expected to provide writing samples from the observed lesson. T2’s class produced an informal
paragraph at the end of the lesson. T3’s students did not complete the writing component, so no
samples were provided from the observed lesson. However, T3 did submit student writing from
a previous lesson.
Teacher Two. T2’s students wrote a multi-sentence paragraph which required students’
to use text-based evidence. A writing rubric was not used as part of the evaluation process. T2
did not write any comments on the majority of the papers, so the students did not receive
feedback on their paragraphs. One common pattern noted on a few papers was the omission of
the letter “s” on the word “says” The nature of the deviation from SAE was not identified nor
commented on by the teacher. Instead, the teacher provided comments in reference to the
common core expectations for writing. Samples of the comments are as follows: (a) your claim
is unclear, (b) no evidence, (c) use quotes and (d) you need to explain your evidence. The
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 87

comments were generally about the lack of evidence and the non-use of quotes in the writing
piece.
Teacher Three. The submitted writing in T3’s class was based on California Common
Core Standards. The researcher was not clear regarding assignment instructions because the
teacher presented the assignment and writing was completed prior to observations. However, the
rubric provided some insight into the criteria for student mastery of the writing task. The focus
of the Informative/Explanatory Writing Rubric, adapted from the Smarter Balance Rubric and
Common Core Assessments, was to focus on the following writing components: (a) focus &
elaboration, (b) organization & coherence, (c) conventions, and d) voice. In each category
students can receive a score from zero to four. The final papers were computer generated, so it
was difficult to distinguish between computer corrections or students’ ability to self-correct. T3
did not provide any explicit handwritten comment on the final drafts. Instead, she included brief
statements in the comment section at the bottom of the rubric. Some of the comments are as
follows:
 Student, you gave many details of Mr. Serling’s life and not enough about his writing and
style. Please use text evidence and sub-headings in future explanatory essays. Good use
of hook in your introduction.
 Good use of organization and information student. Now work on adding more text
evidence, and elaborating with details or examples. Good intro with your own wording.
 Student, your paper explains Ms. Yolen’s life and writing. In the future use some text
evidence and elaborate on some ideas.
 Student, your work is well organized and stays on topic. In the future, keep working on
creating your own writer’s voice even though writing in the formal style.

According to Freeman and Freeman (2004), writing structure develops as students
understand conventions involved in effective written communication. Therefore, it is important
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 88

for teachers to focus on the message contained in the writing more than the structure of the
writing. Based on this understanding of writing development, T2 did not provide enough
feedback to help students understand how to improve their writing piece. However, T3’s
feedback was more explicit and provided information on areas to improve. In both instances, the
researcher wondered if students were provided the opportunity to share with peers before
completing the published writing. Freeman and Freeman (2004), asserts the issue of conventions
can be addressed through peer editing. Hence, students need the opportunity to receive feedback
from their peers during the draft process.
Observations
Culturally Responsive Instructional Strategies. According to Ladson-Billings (1994),
culturally responsive teaching is “…an approach to teaching and learning that empowers students
intellectually, socially, emotionally, and politically, by using cultural references to impart
knowledge, skills, and attitudes.” This approach to teaching requires knowledge of culture and
use of effective instructional strategies that promote student achievement for speakers of AAE.
During observations, teachers used a range of instructional strategies such as teacher modeling,
use of thinking maps and student collaboration. Nevertheless, for the purpose of this study, the
researcher looked for strategies associated with RQ#2 which are consistent with culturally
responsive pedagogy (Ladson & Billings, 1994).
Third Space Strategies
Teacher One. T1 demonstrated an ability to integrate AAE speakers’ home language and
culture with the lesson. She facilitated students’ use of AAE to help accomplish the objective of
the lesson. She consistently implemented the use of third space strategies during the observation
of her fourth period class. Students brought their home language and culture to an academic
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 89

setting created by the teacher’s instructions to use evidence to analyze a character in a story. In
this way, Space #1 (student knowledge) and Space #2 (teacher knowledge) meet in the third
space of purposeful dialogue to construct knowledge (Gutierrez, 2008).
Teacher Two. The researcher did not find any explicit examples of culturally responsive
teaching for speakers of AAE. However, the researcher acknowledges instructional strategies
observed such as: teacher modeling, use of thinking maps, and student collaboration are effective
strategies. Yet, these strategies were not implemented specifically for speakers of AAE. It
should be noted, when implemented appropriately, these strategies can benefit speakers of AAE;
these strategies may not intentionally build on the student’s home language as a means for
scaffolding students into proficiency in SAE. The important role of discourse, in which students
have frequent opportunities to use language and hear language, were minimal in the observation.
Teacher Three. The researcher noted there were aspects of T3’s lesson, the review of
President Obama’s speech, which could have provided AAE speakers with opportunities to use
their home language for the purpose of discussing the implications of the speech.
Summary
Based on the information gathered through interviews and observations, the researcher
confirmed speakers of AAE use AAE, which is a rules-based language (Green, 2002) as a means
to participate in classroom discourse (Gutierrez, 1995). The engagement of such students
included varied phonetic representations, AAE rule-based grammar and student interactions.
The way the students participated in discourse demonstrated their level of communicative
competence for the environment (Green, 2002). The teacher with the most background
knowledge of culture and linguistics pertaining to speakers of AAE, was also the one whom
implemented culturally responsive pedagogy during the observations. She engaged students
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 90

cognitively, emotionally, and socially to create a classroom culture that demonstrated respect for
all students.
Teacher-student interactions varied from class to class. T1’s interactions reflected
aspects of a “warm demander” (Ware, 2006, p.432), as demonstrated by the way she maintained
high-expectations for the students. She held students accountable for their work and provided
support in getting the work done. T2’s interactions with students were generally positive. There
was not a distinct difference in the way T2 engaged with the African American students and
other students in the classroom. She solicited responses from African American students during
the lesson and provided oral feedback on their writing at the end of the lesson. T3’s interactions
with students varied throughout the lesson. Initially, she greeted students at the door, but by the
end of the lesson students were punished for not maintaining engagement throughout the lesson.
Based on T3’s responses during the interviews, she is knowledgeable of African American
culture and understands how African American students generally participate in the classroom.
Even with this knowledge, she was dismissive (Ferguson, 2003) to some students when they
tried to participate in the lesson.
The strategies used to support African American students to acquire proficiency in SAE
varied according to the teacher. Although T1 did not identify particular strategies during the
interview, she demonstrated the skill of engaging students in academic discourse to assist them
in acquiring needed skills. It was apparent to the researcher the lesson was not created for the
observation because students understood the communicative competence (Green, 2002) needed
for that particular task. T2 did not exhibit any particular strategies aligned to culturally
responsive teaching. Although the strategies used in the classroom were helpful, they were not
specific to African American students. It appeared to the researcher T3 was conflicted in using
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 91

culturally responsive strategies. Perhaps utilizing these strategies would have required her to give
up power in the class and allowed students the opportunity to construct their understanding of the
lesson with her role being a facilitator or coach. Additionally, T3’s strategy of constantly
correcting AAE speakers was counter-productive in helping AAE students acquire proficiency in
SAE.
Based on the submitted writing samples, the researcher could not determine any written
feedback specific to AAE speakers which would assist in the area of writing conventions. It is
important to note that T3’s samples were computer generated, so the researcher could not
determine if variations were made and corrected by the computer. In terms of paragraph writing,
T2’s comments were very short and did not provide many details to support students in
improving. In contrast, T3’s comments included more information on ways to improve the
writing piece. It would have been important to have seen T1’s feedback to students’ writing,
especially because she was effective in honoring and promoting language use in the classroom.
However, her scaffolding interaction with students while they were constructing a written
assignment was pertinent.
Overall, this study confirmed many African American students use AAE in both formal
and informal settings within the school environment. Therefore it is imperative educators
understand language diversity (Hudley & Mallison, 2011) and how to guide AAE speakers in
obtaining SAE, while respecting the student’s language and culture (Delpit, 1998). The major
difference between the instruction AAE students received was based on the additional
educational training one of the teachers. The teacher with the most training, outside of the basic
teaching credential program, was the one that implemented culturally responsive pedagogy.

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 92

CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

The overriding purpose of this qualitative study was to examine the influence of language
and culture in learning and literacy development for speakers of AAE. Preconceived biases have
permeated the educational system and so-called minority students have become instructional
casualties (Tileston, 2011). Therefore, the researcher sought to understand how teachers’
interactions with students, particularly speakers of AAE, influence students’ ability to acquire
proficiency in SAE and thus access to the curriculum.
The research questions were designed to help in understanding the following: (a) the
cultural and linguistic uniqueness of AAE students, (b) effective and ineffective practices
impacting AAE students’ participation in classroom academic discourse (c) knowledge and skills
educators need to work effectively with AAE students.
1).What are some ways African American students express AAE in the classroom as a
means of participating in classroom discourse?
2) How do the interactions between teachers and speakers of AAE demonstrate teachers’
attitudes and perceptions of speakers of AAE?
3).What strategies do teachers use which enable AAE students to acquire proficiency in
Standard Academic English?
The literature review demonstrated how language, culture and learning are
interconnected, particularly for speakers of African American English. The three theories
used for the conceptual framework were Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model of Human
Development, Sociocultural Theory, and third space. Interconnectedness of these frameworks
reflects how each theory works to positively impact learning for speakers of African
American English. According to Bronfenbrenner (1994), it is important for students to have
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 93

healthy relationships within four key environments directing influence in their lives. Within
educational settings, the child continues to develop within the world by participating and
learning from others. The adult in the environment, usually the teacher, understands and
respects the language and culture each student brings to school. This information helps the
teacher to develop discourse strategies allowing the student to utilize home language to
acquire conventional classroom language and fully participate in learning and classroom
discourse.
Through the findings from this study, it is possible for teachers to gain increased
knowledge and appreciation about the role of language in promoting student learning,
particularly literacy. This study may provide findings to help teachers form more informed
perceptions leading to more effective pedagogy assisting African American English speakers in
making meaningful connections to the core curriculum. Making meaningful connections through
greater participation in classroom discourses and engagement with course texts is an important
aspect of learning. The potential results include increased participation in classroom academic
discourse and improved student outcomes.
Findings and Interpretation
Research Question One

What are some of the ways African American students express AAE in the classroom as
their means of participating in classroom discourse?

Based on the information gathered through interviews and observations, the researcher
confirmed speakers of AAE use AAE, a rule-based language (Green, 2002) as a means to
participate in classroom discourse (Gutierrez, 1995). The engagement of such students included
varied phonetic representations, AAE rule-based grammar and student interactions. The way the
students participated in discourse demonstrated their level of communicative competence for the
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 94

environment (Green, 2002). In the third space classroom it was important for students to merge
their first space (home and community) with the second space (school) to reach a place of
learning (third space) appropriate for formulating new understandings and academic discoveries
which provide evidence of what they are capable of doing (Gutierrez, 2008).
In order for this level of learning to take place, educators are placed in a positon where
they are encouraged to understand and respect the cultural influences involved with student
learning (Hudley & Mallison, 2011). The teacher with extensive knowledge in this area was the
most successful instructor. She understood what active participation looks and sounds like for
speakers of AAE (Green, 2002); therefore, she allowed certain interactions to occur while
strategically guiding pupils through discourse. Without such knowledge, students may have
been punished for their active involvement because it may have been misconstrued as
disrespectful behavior (Green, 2002). The usefulness of orally scaffolding students into SAE
was apparent as they began adopting academic vocabulary in their discourse. Also, students
were observed vacillating between AAE and SAE usage. Thus, students were using language to
facilitate higher order thinking. Consistent with Vygotsky’s assertion that students learn
language in the midst of meaningful activity, language becomes part of their inner speech
enabling learners to manage their environment and regulate their own behavior (Vygotsky,
1978).
Research Question Two

How do the interactions between teachers and speakers of AAE demonstrate teachers’
attitudes and perceptions of speakers of AAE?

Teacher-student interactions varied from class to class. One teacher reflected
characteristics of a warm demander (Ware, 2006). In contrast, another teacher was dismissive
(Ferguson, 2003) to some African American students during the lesson. The third teacher was
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 95

generally positive towards African American students. Again, in this instance, the teacher with
the most formal training was the one considered a warm demander (Ware, 2006). She
maintained high expectations for African American students and provided appropriate supports
to ensure success on the assignment. The teacher exhibiting more dismissive behaviors (Ware,
2006) was also the one who, during the interviews, expressed a need for more training to
understand African American culture demographic. The researcher is lead to believe there is a
direct connection between teacher training and positive learning environments for African
American students.
Research Question Three

What strategies do teachers use that enable AAE students to acquire proficiency in
Standard Academic English.

The strategies used to support African American students in acquiring proficiency in SAE
varied according to the teacher. For the most part, teachers were not able to articulate any
particular culturally responsive strategies used in the classroom. Although T1 could not identify
particular strategies, she demonstrated the skill of engaging students in academic discourse to
assist them gain competence in. The teacher who displayed dismissive interactions (Ware,
2006), was also the one utilizing overcorrection as a strategy to support students. According to
Green (2002), sometimes well-intentioned teachers use ineffective strategies as their method of
helping students. In this case, the researcher believes the teacher was trying to the help the
students, but lacks understanding of the ramifications aligned with of overcorrecting students as
they develop proficiency in SAE.
Based on the submitted writing samples, it was unclear what type of feedback AAE
speakers received on writing conventions. However, it is important to note some samples were
computer generated, so the researcher could not determine the types of variations made. Overall,
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 96

there were no identifiable strategies for AAE speakers in the areas of phonology/ spelling and
grammar. In terms of written feedback, the teachers’ comments were based on writing according
to the common core standards, not specifically for speakers of AAE. In this case, the teacher
with the most educational knowledge did not submit any samples of analysis; therefore, it was
difficult to determine the general practice used at this particular school site.
One important principle found in the literature was not evident in the interviews,
observations, nor the student written work samples. The researcher found no evidence of explicit
teaching of contrastive analysis. Contrastive analysis teaches students to contrast rules and
conventions of AAE and SAE, so they can become proficient in both languages with
understanding the appropriate occasions to use one or the other (Hudley & Mallison, 2011).
Limitations
The information gathered in this case study is subject to various limitations. First, the
study was conducted at one predetermined school site; hence, the information gathered may only
reflect the experiences of this particular school. Therefore, the study findings may not be
generalizable (Merriam, 2009). Secondly, the allotted time frame for the study was not
conducive to intensive long-term involvement which would allow the researcher to conduct
repeated observations and interviews (Maxwell, 2013). Although the researcher gathered data,
rich data collection through long-term involvement was limited (Maxwell, 2013).
The ability to effectively triangulate the data was compromised because one teacher did
not submit student writing samples to assist with understanding the type of feedback teachers
provide to AAE students. Hence, the document analysis section reflects the practices of two
teachers.
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 97

The researcher attempted to minimize threats to internal validity by acknowledging
potential biases (Maxwell, 2013). The two major threats to validity were the researcher bias and
“reactivity”, which is the effect of the researcher on the participants (Maxwell, 2013). In terms
of potential bias, the researcher is African American and a speaker of AAE. Hence, there may
have been instances where characteristics of AAE were displayed, but because of the
researcher’s familiarity with AAE, the information was not included in the study because the
researcher did not consider it characteristic of AAE.
The second potential threat to validity was reactivity (Maxwell, 2013). The researcher
recognized her presence in the environment may have altered the actions of participants because
participants knew the researcher worked as a principal in the same district. The researcher
attempted to address this potential threat during the introduction phase of the study. The
researcher explained ethical issues involved and assured the participants information gathered
would not be shared with anyone, not included as part of the study, including the site principal.
Strengths of the study are supported by the ethical manner in which the study was
conducted. During the introductory phase the researcher explained the purpose and method used
to gather data; informed consent was established. Participant confidentiality was upheld
throughout the duration of the study.
One strength to the study can be contributed to participant years of teaching experience.
All three participants have been teaching for a minimum of eighteen years. Furthermore, they
have all worked at the same school for at least six years.

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 98

Implications for Practice

Overall, findings from this study are consistent with what the literature states is
characteristic of AAE and ways African American students express cultural communicative
competence (Green, 2002). Furthermore, the study confirmed a need for educators to understand
how positive interactions support speakers of AAE. Positive support from teachers is
fundamental to the success of students (Perry & Delpit, 1998). It is important for educators to
explore how their language attitudes can help or hinder their interactions with speakers of other
varieties (Hudley & Mallison, 2011). Educators need to understand that students learn according
to the norms of their culture (Sousa, 2008) and the linguistic forms students bring to school are a
reflections of their identity and community. If educators fail to see the connection between
language, culture and learning, the black-white achievement gap will persist.
Recommendations

Based on the results of this study, the researcher recommends educational institutions
develop a systematic plan to build the knowledge-base and develop the skills of current
educators and future career professionals. It is imperative for teacher preparation programs,
professional organizations, districts and schools to address the educational needs of speakers of
AAE by doing the following:
1) Teacher credentialing programs, districts, and schools should provide professional
trainings to help educators develop cultural competency. The trainings will assist
educators do the following:
 Recognize language brought to the academic environment by African
American students is a valid rule based language and learn to appreciate
its value as a communicative tool (Freeman & Freeman, 2004).
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 99

 Examine personal attitudes and develop an understanding of how their
perceptions can impact the educational experience for speakers of AAE.
 Understand the culture of African American students and how their culture
influences the way they learn.
2) Teachers require training to understand the practical applications of Vygotsky’s Socio-
cultural theory (Vygotsky, 1978) and understand the social nature of language is essential
to the learning process.
3) Teachers require professional support to learn AAE is a rule-based language which
contains grammatical structures based in West Africa. Most importantly, it is a language
which is not to be confused with slang.
4) Teacher preparation programs, districts and schools explicitly develop teachers’ ability to
implement classroom discourses that include the active process of co-constructing
knowledge in a Third Space model (Gutierrez, 2008). Teachers should be able to identify
and respect characteristics of AAE speech interactions (Green, 2002), in order to
facilitate AAE speakers participation in classroom discourse.
5) Teacher preparation programs, districts, schools and teachers understanding should
reflect the importance of implementing Culturally Competent Common Core Practices in
response to the new Common Core Standards (Sprott, 2014). Although the new
standards are designed to prepare students for college and careers, the Common Core
Standards offer little guidance for teachers of diverse students in regards to lesson
planning and practice (Sprott, 2014). Therefore, it will be important for teachers to: (a)
develop self-awareness and cultural skills, (b) recognize each student’s potential, (c)
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 100

develop cross cultural knowledge and, d) learn to value diversity in order help diverse
learners (Sprott, 2014).
6) District and schools require training in implementing effective methods of reaching out to
the African American community for the purpose of building positive and strong bonds.
These bonds in turn will be useful when it comes to helping practitioners understand
cultural aspects of AAE speakers. According to Bronfenbrenner (1994), development of
respectful relationships between home and school is important for the positive
development of students.
Future Direction
In the future, the researcher would expand the study to include policy makers and
curriculum designers in order to determine if they understand the connection between language,
learning and culture. If they understood the influences culture on academic achievement, there
may be changes in the way students are educated, particularly in urban school districts. As of
now, teachers are expected to follow pacing guides to teach standards. Unfortunately, teaching
standards, according to pacing guides, interferes with teachers taking time to develop students’
academic proficiency. Culturally responsive teaching requires educators to understand culture
and know how to use differences as a spring board to student learning. The notion of discourse
takes time, so it is imperative for policy makers and curriculum developers to allot time for
teachers to learn how African American students can use their home language to effectively
transition into effective use of SAE and develop life-long critical thinking skills.
Conclusion
Conducting this study was personally relevant to the researcher because as an African
American educator, it is frustrating to see the persistent achievement gap between African
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 101

American students and their white counterparts. This issue is not new, yet it still exists. It has
become easy for educators to see the needs of African American students from the lens of
remediation, instead of looking at it from an instructional perspective. Addressing this issue will
force educators to explore their attitudes about language and culture. Unfortunately, the
researcher also believes many educators are not willing to confront their underlying beliefs about
speakers of other languages.
Despite efforts towards educational equality in America, inequality still exists in the
everyday classroom. Black and Latino students are seated next to each other, yet instructional
practices are designed to meet the needs of the mainstream students. I can honestly say, for the
most part, I do not think educational professionals are purposely trying to exclude African
American students from learning. To the contrary, they want all students to achieve.
Unfortunately, many lack the knowledge and skill to make it happen.
It is the researchers hope this study will open a dialogue to address the cultural
implications in educating African American students. More importantly, I hope this study will
move people into action to make a difference in the educational experiences of African American
students.

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 102

References
Anderson, E. (2012). Reflections on the “Black-White Achievement Gap”. Journal of School
Psychology, (50), 593-597.
Aud, S., Hussar, W., Planty, M., Snyder, T., Bianco, K., Fox, M…Drake, L. (2010). The
Condition of Education 2010. National Center for Education Statistics. Ball, A.F. (1995).
Text Design Patterns in the Writing of Urban African American Students: Teaching to
the Cultural Strengths of Students in Multicultural Settings. Urban Education, 30(3),
253-289.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1994). Ecological models of human development. In International
Encyclopedia of Education, Vol. 3, 2
nd
. Ed. Oxford: Elsevier. Reprinted in Gauvain, M. &
Cole, M. (Eds.) Readings on the development of children, 2
nd
Ed. (1993, pp.37-43). NY:
Freeman.
Byrnes, J.P., Wasik, B.A. (2009). Language and Literacy Development What Educators Need to
Know. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Cazden, C. B. (1998). Classroom Discourse: The language of teaching and learning.
Portsmouth. NH: Heinemann
Cohen, D.J., White, S., Cohen, S.B. (2012). Mind the Gap: The Black-White Literacy Gap in the
National Assessment of Adult Literacy and Its Implications. Journal of Literacy Research
44(2) 123-148. doi:10.1177/1086296X12439998
Connor, C.M., Craig, H.K. (2006). African American Preschoolers’ Language, Emergent
Literacy Skills, and Use of African American Vernacular English: A Complex Relation.
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49, 771-792. doi: 1092-
4388/06/4904-0771
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 103

Covey, H. C., Lockman P. T. (1996). Narrative References to Older African Americans Living
Under Slavery. The Social Science Journal, 33, 23-37
Cushman, K. (1991). Behavior in a Thoughtful School: The Principal of Decency. Retrieved
from http://www.essentialschools.org/resources/99
Darensbourg, A.M., Blake, J.J (2013). Predicators of Achievement in African American Students
At Risk For Academic Failure: The Roles of Achievement Values And Behavioral
Engagement. Psychology in the Schools, 50(10). doi: 101002/pits.21730
Delpit, L. (1998). What should teachers do? Ebonics and culturally responsive instruction. In the
Perry & Delpit (Eds.). The real Ebonics debate (pp. 17-26). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
Delpit, L. (2003). Educators as “Seed People” Growing a New Future. Educational Researcher,
7(32) 14-21
Donovan, M.S., & Cross, C.T. (Eds.). (2002). Minority Students in Gifted and Special
Education. Washington, D.C: National Academies Press.
Fantuzzo, J., LeBoeuf, W., Rouse, H., Chen, C. (2012). Academic achievement of African
American boys: A city-wide, community-based investigation of risk and resilience.
Journal of School Psychology 50, 559-579
Ferguson, R. (2003). Teachers’ perceptions and expectations and the Black White test score gap.
Urban Education, 38, 460-507
Freeman, D. E., Freeman, Y.S. (2004). Essential Linguistics What You Need to Know to Teach
Reading, ESL, Spelling, Phonics, and Grammar. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Gee, J. P. (2001). Reading as situated language: A sociocognitive perspective, Journal of
Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 44(8)
Gee, J. & Gee, J P. (2007). Social linguistics and literacies, New York: Routledge
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 104

Green, J. L. (2002). African American English: A linguistic introduction. Cambridge, England:
Cambridge University Press.
Green, P.C. III. (2008). The Impact of Law on African American Males. American Behavioral
Scientist, (51) (7), 872-884. doi: 10.1177/000276420731195
Gold, M.E., Richards, H. (2012). To Label or Not to Label: The Special Education Question for
African Americans, Educational Foundations
Gutierrez, K. D (1995). Unpacking Academic Discourse
Gutierrez, K.D. (2008). Developing a Sociocritical Literacy in the Third Space. Reading and
Research Quarterly, 43(2), 148-164
Gutierrez, K., & Larson, J. (1994). Language boarders: Recitation as hegemonic discourse.
International Journal of Educational Reform, 3(1), 22-36.
Hudley, A. H. & Mallison, C. (2011) Understanding English Language Variations in U.S.
Schools, New York: Teachers College Press.
Hymes, D. (1972). Models of the interactions of language and social life. In J.J. Gumperz & D.
Hymes (Eds.) Directions and sociolinguistics: The ethnography of communication. New
York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Irvin, J. J. (2012). Complex Relationships between Multicultural Education and Special
Education: An African American Perspective. Journal of Teacher Education, 63(4) 268-
274
Kunjufu, J. (2005). Keeping black boys out of special education. Chicago: African American
Images.
Kuykendall, C. (1992). From Rage to Hope: Strategies for Reclaiming Black and Hispanic
Students. Bloomington, Indiana: National Educational Services
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 105

Ladson-Billings, G.J. (1994). The Dreamkeepers: Success teachers of African American
children. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Labov, W. (1995). Can reading failure be reversed: a linguistic approach to the question in
Vivian Gadsden and Daniel A. Wagner (eds.), Literacy Among African-American Youth:
Issues in Learning, Teaching, and Schooling, Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, Inc., pp.39-
68
Lantolf, J.P., Appel, G. (Eds.). (1994). Vygotskian approaches to second language research.
Westport, Connecticut & London: Ablex Publishing Journal of School Psychology,
38(5), 423-445.
Lantolf, J.P., & Thorne, S. L. (2000). Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning

LeMoine, N. (2003). The Impact of Linguistic Knowledge on Teacher Attitude toward African
American Language (Ebonics) (Doctoral Dissertation) Retrieved from the University of
Southern California
Matthew, J. S., Kizzie, K. T., Rowley, S.J., Cortina, K. (2010). African Americans and Boys:
Understanding the Literacy Gap, Tracing Academic Trajectories, and Evaluating the Role
of Learning-Related Skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3). 757-771
Maxwell, J.A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3
rd
ed.).
Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
McEwan, E.K., McEwan, P.J. (2003). Making Sense of Research What’s Good, What’s Not, and
How to Tell the Difference. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press
McKown, C., Weinstein, R.S. (2008) Teacher expectations, classroom context, and the
achievement gap. Journal of School Psychology, (46), 235-261.
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 106

Mehan, H. (1979). Learning Lessons: Social organizations in the classroom, Cambridge. MA:
Harvard University Press
Merriam, S.B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation.
San Francisco: Jossey- Bass
Michelle, A. B. (2008). Self-Emancipation and Slavery: An Examination of the African
American’s Quest for Literacy and Freedom. The Journal of Pan African Studies, 2(5)
Ochs, E. (1998). Culture and language development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ogbu, J.U. (1982). Socialization: A cultural ecological approach. In K.M. Borman (Ed.), The
social life of children in a changing society. Hillsdale, NJ: Praeger.
Pearson, B. Z., Conner, T., Jackson, J. E. (2013). Removing Obstacles for African American
English-Speaking Children Through Greater Understanding of Language Difference.
Developmental Psychology, 49(1), 31-44
Perry, T. & Delpit, L. (1998). The Real Ebonics Debate: Danger Educated Black Man. Boston:
Beacon Press.
Reid, D. K., Knight, M. G. (2006) Disability Justifies Exclusion of Minority Students: A critical
history grounded in disabilities studies. Educational Researcher, 35(6), 18-23
Rickford, J. R. (1997, February 26). Interview by Clarence Johnson of the San Francisco
Chronicle
Rickford, J.R. (1999). African American Vernacular English. Maden, MA: Oxford/Blackwell.
Rickford, J. R. (2010). Geographical Diversity, Residential Segregation, and the Vitality of
American Vernacular English and its Speakers
Rickford, J. R., Sweetland, J., Rickford, A. E. (2004). African American English and Other
Vernaculars in Education. Journal of English Linguistics, 32(3) 230-320
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 107

Rupley, W.H., Nichols, W.D., Blair, T.R. (2008). Language and Culture in Literacy Instruction:
Where Have They Gone? The Teacher Education, 43: 238-248. doi:
10.1080/8878730802055180
Srin, S.R. & Rodgers-Srin, L. (2005). Components of school engagement among African
American adolescents. Applied Developmental Science, 9, 5-13.
Doi:10.1207/s1532480xads0901_2
Smitherman, G. Black English/Ebonics: What It Be Like? In the Perry & Delpit (Eds.). The real
Ebonics debate (pp. 17-26). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
Sousa, D. A. (2005). How the brain influences behavior: Management strategies for every
classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Sprott, K. (2014). Culturally Competent Common Core Practices: A Delphi Study. Journal of
Research Initiatives, 1(2) 1-20
Tileston, D. W. (2011). Closing the RTI Gap Why Poverty and Culture Count. Bloomington, IN:
Solution Tree Press.
Tileston, D.W., Darling, S. K. (2009). Why culture counts: Teaching children of poverty.
Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Ware, F. (2006). Warm Demander Pedagogy Culturally Responsive Teaching That Supports a
Culture of Achievement for African American Students. Urban Education, 41 (4), 427-
456. doi: 10.1177/0042085906289710
Waters. L., Harris, S. (2009). Exploration of the Lived Experiences of Illiterate African
American Adults. The Western Journal of Black Studies, 33(4)
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 108

Weiss, R.S. (1994). Learning From Strangers: The Art and Method of Qualitative Interview
Studies. Boston, MA: Free Press
Wells, G. (1986). The Meaning Makers: Children Learning Language and Using Language to
Learn. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Wilkinson, L.C. (1982). Communicating in the classroom. New York: Academic.

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 109

Appendix A – Principal Interview Questions
1. Please indicate your ethnic identity:
o Black (non-Hispanic)
o White (non-Hispanic)
o Hispanic
o Asian
o Filipino
o Native American
o Pacific Islander
o Other (specify)________________________________

2. How many years of teaching experience do you have? ___________________________

3. Is English your first language? ______________________________________________

4. Do you speak other languages? _____________________________________________

5. If you speak other languages, were they acquired in school or elsewhere? ____________

6. Which of the following sentences are AAE/Ebonics?

1. Where did you put my shoes?
2. That car is straight up dope.
3. Don’t nobody never wanna talk to her.
4. We were just chilling in the hood.
5. My momma be at home doing her work.
6. I never did like school very much.
7. She walk to school with her friend sister every day.
8. I don’t have to do anything you tell me to do.

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 110

Appendix B – Teacher Interview Protocol
General Background Information
1 Are you a:
o Credentialed Teacher
o Teacher Intern

2. Your highest level of education completed is:
o BA or BS
o MA or MS
o PhD

3. What is your gender?
a. Male
b. Female

4. Please indicate your ethnic identity:
a. Black (non-Hispanic)
b. White (non-Hispanic)
c. Hispanic
d. Asian
e. Filipino
f. Native American
g. Pacific Islander
h. Other (specify)________________________________

5. How many years of teaching experience do you have? _________________________

6. Is English your first language? ____________________________________________

7. Do you speak other languages? _____________________________________________

8. If you speak other languages, were they acquired in school or elsewhere? ___________

_______________________________________________________________________

Language and Linguistic Coursework

9. Have you taken any courses related to bilingual education or second language
acquisition? ___________________________________________________________

10. Have you taken any courses in language development? _________________________
_______________________________________________________________________

11. How many formal language courses have you taken? _____________________________
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 111

12. On a scale of 1-10 (10 being the highest) what is your level of knowledge of linguistics?
_______________________________________________________________________

13. Do you have any of the following credentials?
o CLAD
o BCLAD

14. Have you participated in any trainings or staff development related to African American
speakers of African American English? If yes, what was the duration of time?
o Yes
o No

15. Have you taken any courses/seminars related to Black history and or culture?
o Yes
o No

Familiarity with Competence in AAE

16. What is your definition of African American English/Ebonics?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

17. On a scale of 1-10 (10 being the highest) to what extent are you familiar with African
American English? ________________________________________________________

18. Are you a speaker of AAE?
a. Yes
b. No

19. To what degree do you understand someone speaking AAE?
a. Never
b. Barely
c. Sometimes
d. Often
e. Always

20. Which of the following sentences is AAE/Ebonics?
1. Where did you put my shoes?
2. That car is straight up dope.
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 112

3. Don’t nobody never wanna talk to her.
4. We were just chilling in the hood.
5. My momma be at home doing her work.
6. I never did like school very much.
7. She walk to school with her friend sister every day.
8. I don’t have to do anything you tell me to do.

21. What role does African American English play or should play in educating African
American students?
22. How do you describe Standard English?
23. How do you support language learners in acquiring Standard Academic English?
24. What are some common methods African American students us when participating in
classroom discussions? How do you feel about it?
25. What strategies do you use when African American students struggle with a concept or
lesson?
26. What type of feedback do you provide? What are the benefits? What are the challenges?

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 113

Appendix C: Observation Protocol
Name of Observer Date of Observation Time Frame

Location

Who are the
participants? What’s
their role in the setting?

General demographical
information of the
setting:
Grade
Ethnicity
Gender
Number of Adults

How many focus
participants are being
observed?

Physical Space
Classroom configuration and seating location of participants.

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 114

Time Frame
Teacher

What is the teacher doing?
Students

What are students doing?

Questions/Comments I
have…

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 115

APPENDIX D

Analysis of Classroom Observation Protocol
Part I: General Information
School District: _______________________________________________________________
School Name: ________________________________________________________________
Teacher: _____________________________________ Subject: ________________________
Date: _________________________________________Time Frame: ____________________
Setting (Check all that apply)
 Whole class
 Small group
 Pair
 Individual
Part II: Observation Protocol
Unit of Analysis – Classroom Instruction
 Teacher actions/interactions
 Students’ actions/interactions
Part III: Observation Reflections
Research Questions
1. What are some ways African American students express African American English in the
classroom as their means of participating in classroom discourse?
2. How do the interactions between teachers and speakers of African American English
demonstrate teachers’ attitudes and perceptions?
3. What strategies do teachers use that enable African American English speakers acquire
proficiency in Standard Academic English?
General Classroom Structure
1. What languages were used during instruction? If more than one, what was the dominate
language?
2. What languages were used during noninstructional conversation? Among students?
Between teacher and students?
3. What evidence was there that the classroom reflected the cultural and linguistic diversity
of the students in the class?
General Classroom Culture
1. Was there evidence that a tone of decency (fairness, generosity & tolerance) existed
among the students and between the teachers and students?
 Decency defined as the habit of mind and behavior that is evident throughout the
school both formally and informally (Cushman, 1991)
 Evidence of classroom rules created with student input (Kuykendall, 1992)
 Teachers and students speak to each other respectfully (Kuykendall, 1992)
 Teachers do not blame students for their deficiencies, instead teachers reflect on
their role in bringing the students along (Cushman, 1991)
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 116

Physical Environment:
 Did the classroom environment inspire achievement and excitement (Kuykendall,
1992)?
 Lighting, ventilation, temperature
 Room décor
 Positive slogans that foster values, keep students inspired, and facilitate
persistence
 Display of information on the accomplishments and/or contributions of
African Americans
 Display of student work and accomplishments
 Physical setting conducive to student-student interaction and teacher-
student interaction
 Teacher facilitates student pride in the classroom by encouraging
cleanliness
 Did the atmosphere foster: (Kuykendall, 1992)
 Mutual trust and respect
 Mutual helpfulness between students
 Teacher acceptance of student differences and multicultural appreciation
 Freedom of student expression

2. Did the tone of decency vary by the ethnic or linguistic make-up of the students and/or
teacher?

3. Was there evidence that the teacher and students trusted one another?
 Teacher model mutual helpfulness, mutual support, interdependence (Kuykendall,
1992)
 Teacher used praise and affirmations in communicating with students
(Kuykendall, 1992)
 Teacher uses close physical proximity to monitor student progress (Kuykendall,
1992)
 Students exhibit risk-taking behaviors in the comments they make in class
 Teachers do not respond sarcastically to students (Cushman, 1991).
 Teachers do not ridicule students (Cushman, 1991).

4. Was there any evidence of teachers conveying unanxious high expectations to their
students? How?
 All students have access to a rigorous curriculum (Ford and Moore III, 2013).
 Teachers challenge all students equally (Ford and Moore III, 2013).
 Lesson is appropriately paced to support student learning and teacher prioritize
academic instruction and curriculum related activities (Muijs, et al., 2014).
 Did the teacher give more attention to the high expectancy pupils and spend more
time with them (Muijs, et al., 2014)?
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 117

 Did the teacher do any of the following: (Muijs, et al., 2014)
 Criticize low expectancy students more and or offer fewer praises?
 Teacher did not provide wait time for students to respond?
 Did the teacher call on students equally?
 Did the teacher only ask AAE speakers lower order questions?
 Did the teacher provide more seatwork and low academic tasks to AAE
students?
 Did the teacher exclude AAE students from some learning activities?
5. Were these high expectations conveyed equally to all students?
Pedagogy
1. Were there any pedagogical adjustments made to accommodate culturally diverse
students?
 Teacher Questioning: (Muijs, et al., 2014)
 Did the teacher review and/or repeat key concepts at the beginning of the
lesson (Muijs, 2014)?
 Did the teacher ask questions throughout the lesson?
 Did the teacher ask questions at the end of the lesson?
 Did the teacher communicate clearly without digressing (Muijs, 2014)?
 Did the teacher communicate at the comprehension level of the students, or did
he/she speak above using patterns of speech that impair what is being taught
(Smith and Land, 1981; Walberg, 1986)?
2. How would you characterize the teacher-student interactions you witnesses? (e.g.,
frequent, haphazard, nonexistent, friendly, consistent, etc.)
 How did the teacher use physical proximity (Kuykendall, 1992)?
 Support/helpfulness
 Dominate
 Discipline
 Degrade
General definitions taken from (Merriam-Webster Online)
 Frequent – Teacher interacts with students on many occasions.
 Haphazard – Teacher lacks any obvious organization in how he/she
interacts with students.
 Nonexistent – Teacher does not interact with students at all.
 Friendly – Teacher demonstrates kindness and support for student
learning. Teacher is not antagonistic.
 Consistent – Teacher continually behaves and interacts the same way with
students.
3. Did the teachers employ a pedagogy that motivated students to use language to generate
their own understanding? How?
 Did the ask questions, rather than just lecture to get students involved (Cazden,
1986; Kyriakides and Creemers, 2008)?
LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 118

 Did students ask questions to verbalize their thinking/understanding (Cazden,
1986; Kyriakides and Creemers, 2008)?
Linguistically and Culturally Sensitive Curriculum
1. Did the curriculum as planned and presented allow for the development of students’
native linguistic talents? If not, were there times when such opportunities would have
been appropriate?
2. Did the curriculum foster a sense of personal and cultural identity? If so, how?
 Did the classroom environment foster freedom of expression (Kuykendall, 1992)?
Examples:
 Poetry
 Artwork
 Song/rap
 Dance
 Other media
 Use of standard English in speaking and writing
Interaction
1. Where there frequent opportunities for interactions and discussion between
teacher/student and among students, which encouraged elaborate responses about lesson
concepts?
 Did the teacher provide feedback to student which resulted in more student
questions and/or answers to the teacher’s question (Muijs, et al., 2014)?
 How does the teacher respond the students’ answers? When a student’s answer is
partially correct, does the teacher prompt the student to find the remaining part of
the answer before moving to the next student (Muijs, et al., 2014)?
 Does the teacher incorporate students’ responses in the lesson (Muijs, et al.,
2014)?
 Interactions consistently provide sufficient wait time for student responses
(Kuykendall, 1992)
Discourse
1. Teacher/Student Dialogue – Discourse between teacher and students must be extended to
at least two speech turns each, and must consist of more than just providing an answer or
a fact. Speech turns consisting of “yes”, “no”, “uh-huh”, or “I don’t know” are not
sufficient to earn this coding. Look for the providing of clues, asking of open-ended
questions, or sustained conversation on a single topic.
2. How did the teacher respond to AAE speakers when they got the answer correct? Did the
teacher say “O.K” without providing additional feedback on the quality of the student’s
response (Kuykendall, 1992)?

LANGUAGE, LEARNING AND CULTURE 119

APPENDIX E- Writing Analysis Protocol
Grade level: _______Teacher (pseudonym): _________________Years of Experience: _______
CCSS (if applicable): ___________________________________________________________
Title of Writing Assignment: _____________________________________________________ Genre:
_______________________________________________________________________

Assignment Information

Yes/
No
Student’s deviations
from SAE
(Hudley & Mallison, 2011)

Teacher’s Feedback
1. Is assignment aligned with
CCSS?
2. Are instructions/prompts clear?
3. Is assignment based on standard
that’s taught?
4. Does teacher explicitly state that
students were expected to write in
SAE?
5. Does teacher guide students
toward peer editing/peer support?

RUBRIC
6. Did teacher have or students
create a rubric?
7. Did students see rubric before
writing?
8. Does rubric include language
requirements or criteria?
9. Does rubric make a distinction
between content and language use?
10. Is the rubric consistent with
what was taught?
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N

Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N

Phonology/Spelling
o /r/ is missing
o /th/ written as f or d
o /b/ written as p
o /d/ written as t
o /g/ written as k
o uses i   e
o final consonant clusters
written as 1 sound/letter
o ask written as ax, axe,
aks

Grammatical
o uses ain’t
o multiple negatives
o absence of –s inflection
o invariant forms of be
o existential it
o Direct (explicit feedback above or
near students’ deviation of SAE),
indirect (indicates student’s deviation
of SAE, but does not provide a
correction or meta-linguistic
information), or both (Bitchener &
Ferris, 2012)
o Positive (response that it is correct),
negative (response that it is not
correct), or both (Alimohammadi &
Nejadansari, 2014)
o Focused (feedback on limited
number of targeted types) or
unfocused (feedback on wide range
of categories) (Bitchener & Ferris,
2012)
o Red edit mark
o Crossed out
o Substituted with SAE form
o Meta-linguistic explanation (teacher
provides extra information on the
correction) (Bitchener & Ferris,
2012)
o Explanatory end note (Bitchener &
Ferris, 2012)
o Designates any next steps
o Feedback regarding content
(details, ideas, topic, ideas, quantity,
choice of form) (Peterson & Portier,
2014)
o Feedback regarding conventions
(spacing, neatness, punctuation,
spelling, letter formation, grammar,
sentence structure) (Peterson &
Portier, 2014)
o Comments reflect a tone of decency
(Datnow & Yonezawa, 2004)

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Speakers of African American English (AAE) often encounter unsupportive classroom environments because teachers may not recognize the influence of language and culture on literacy development, particularly for African American students. Bronfenbrenner’s Theory of Human Development (Ecological Systems) describes the influence of immediate environmental factors on healthy development. Two key environments are the child’s home and school. This study examined student linguistic codes as a reflection of student identity. More specifically, the study investigates the impact linguistic codes may have on students’ opportunity to learn, when teachers demonstrate respect for linguistic variation within academic communities. The study examined interactions between teachers and their students who are speakers of language varieties differing from Standard Academic English (SAE) to identify ways these interactions might support student achievement. Primary attention was directed toward ways in which teachers’ interactions with speakers of AAE influence students’ ability to acquire proficiency in Standardized Academic English and gain access to the curriculum. Such a study is important in order to identify effective and ineffective instructional practices influencing language minority students’ participation in meaningful classroom discourse. The study used purposeful sampling to select a school with 17% African American student enrollment, which is increasingly rare in Southern California schools, where African Americans represent 6% of the student population. Three teachers whose classrooms met or exceeded the school’s percent of African American students were selected for the study. The unit of analysis was the classroom interaction between teachers and African American students who are speakers of African American English. Data were collected conducting interviews with selected teachers, conducting classroom observations and examining writing samples produced by students in the observed classrooms.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

First and second grade teachers' knowledge and perceptions about African American language speakers

PDF

Perceptions about and strategies for African American speakers of Ebonics

PDF

Arts integration for standard English learners: implications for learning academic language

PDF

Influences of African American English that contribute to the exclusion of African American students from academic discourse

PDF

Instructional proficiency strategies for middle school English language learners

PDF

Support for English learners: an examination of the impact of teacher education and professional development on teacher efficacy and English language instruction

PDF

Teacher perceptions of English learners and the instructional strategies they choose to support academic achievement

PDF

Examining the relationship between knowledge, perception and principal leadership for standard English learners (SELs): a case study

PDF

The relationships between teacher beliefs about diversity and opportunities for culturally and linguistically diverse students, reflectiveness, and teacher self-efficacy

PDF

The intersections of culturally responsive pedagogy and authentic teacher care in creating meaningful academic learning opportunities for students of color

PDF

Young, Black, and female: the education of Black female students and effects on identity development

PDF

The audacity to teach: creating access to rigor for African American and Latino high school students

PDF

The role of secondary mathematics teachers in fostering the Algebra 1 success of African American males

PDF

Factors that influence the identification of elementary African American students as potentially gifted learners

PDF

An examination of the possible selves of African American males in grades 9-12 and the educational systems that contribute to their positive and negative perceptions

PDF

Examining the learning environments of urban high school educators who are culturally aware and serve a majority of students from historically marginalized populations

PDF

Educational factors at urban public school that contribute to variation in academic achievement: comparison of high and average achieving Chinese Americans

PDF

The effects of culturally responsive standards based instruction on African American student achievement

PDF

"Creaming" students in the charter school admission process: a case study of admission practices in charter schools

PDF

The plight of African American males in urban schools: a case study

Asset Metadata

Creator Jones, Topekia Lasundra (author)

Core Title The influence of language and culture in the literacy development of speakers of African American English

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

Publication Date 07/17/2015

Defense Date 04/10/2015

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag African American,Black,culture,Language,Literacy,OAI-PMH Harvest

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Rousseau, Sylvia G. (committee chair), Green, Alan Gilford (committee member), Ott, Maria G. (committee member)

Creator Email topekiaj@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-599059

Unique identifier UC11301684

Identifier etd-JonesTopek-3636.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-599059 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-JonesTopek-3636-0.pdf

Dmrecord 599059

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Jones, Topekia Lasundra

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA