I enjoyed reading Jamal Cooks’ and Arnetha Ball’s article on “African-American Vernacular English (AAVE).” Many years ago I heard about “Ebonics” (AAVE) and jumped on the negative band wagon, without really understanding the background information. The argument was about “Ebonics” being an approved language in the school system, thereby creating an inclusive classroom versus an exclusive classroom. Cooks and Ball discuss how “[a] long standing concern has been how to develop classroom cultures and curricula that promote equity in opportunity and accessibility to learning for individuals across boundaries of class and ethnicity” (142). The Oakland school district felt by allowing Ebonics to be an accepted language in the school system it would open the door to equity in the class. With that said, I found it interesting that while schools allow for other cultural languages in the classroom the goal is to shape all students to conform to Standard American English, which negates the inclusive culture concept.
Cooks and Ball in the section on “Curriculum, Instructional Strategies, and Pedagogical Approaches” discuss various ways in which teachers try to incorporate alternative methods of teaching besides the “traditional” structured learning methods. In particular, I liked Cooks use of “hip-hop as a tool to develop expository writing skills” (145). Many of the teachers in my classes have discussed the alternative methods they employ in the class to engage students in the learning process. Dr. Foreman in her CTAC 124 Fundamentals of Speech class used the data from a survey she did at the beginning of the semester to create an inclusive classroom environment. Along with the information she pared up students who were less confident speakers with more confident speakers to help build confidence and camaraderie in the class.
I did have a question on a statement made in the “Assessment” section. Cooks and Ball state that the Georgia High School Writing Test revealed that overall “choice on types of writing chosen on writing tasks didn’t matter . . . except when they focused on female and African American students, choice seemed to positively impact their assessment scores” (146). I found this very interesting and wished that Cooks and Ball would have explained their findings in more detail. For instance, what were the choices? What choices did the female and African American students choose? Why did those particular choices make a positive impact on their scores? What did the male and other ethnic students choose?
It would be interesting to see updated data on the AAVE- speaking students’ retention rates and post-secondary education choices. I also would be interested in reading teachers, administrators, and support staff opinions on the success or failure of their choices. Did the teachers embrace the change? How did they restructure their classrooms? What was successful and not so successful in implementing curriculum that encompassed AAVE students? All of this information could be used in other school districts that have diverse cultures with various languages and/or dialects being spoken. Not to mention being an interesting read.
Interesting point, Theresa. It would be useful to better understand what those choices were and why they specifically connect with the female population. Gender is yet another lens that impacts language and the human experience, and I can only imagine how different the female experience is for those from the outside, ranging ethnic backgrounds. I just saw an international student from the Middle East. She described the patriarchal society that exists in her homeland and the cultural aspects that are both similar and different to the United States. I can only imagine how complicated her ESL courses are as she tries to assimilate culture, language and gender into her writing. Your comment provoked my thinking about gender, and I,too, would love to hear more that aspect in the Georgia High School research.
ReplyDelete