FEATURE ARTICLE
Learning to Talk Like the Test
GUIDING SPE A K ERS OF A F RICAN A MERICAN
VERNACUL AR ENGLISH
Douglas Fisher & Diane Lapp
Are your students prepared to succeed on next-generation CCSS
assessments? Questions and concerns about our students succeeding
on varied daily assessments was the foundation for this study and
instruction.
E
634
ngaging in conversations with the high
school students we teach reminds us of the
range of topics on which they are conversant.
True, the breadth is often more comprehensive than
the depth, but they have lived only 14 to 17 years.
Hail to the Internet that allows any topic to be only a
click or two away. But we are disheartened when our
students, who speak either English as an additional
language or African American Vernacular English
(AAVE) as their home register, achieve failing grades
on the state English test required for graduation.
They are failing not because of their lack of
knowledge but because, for some, English is not
their first language and they have not yet become
proficient
with
it.
Others
are
failing
because their first or
home register is not a
Authors (left to right)
close
approximation
Douglas Fisher and Diane Lapp
of academic English.
are professors at San Diego State
University, California, and teachers
Like their nonnative
at Health Sciences High and Middle
English-speaking peers,
College in San Diego, California,
USA; e-mails [email protected].
they are failing not
edu and [email protected].
because of a lack of
intelligence or language but because of their lack of
understanding and use of the conventions of academic
English—the language register of English that is used
in classrooms, at the workplace, in textbooks, and on
tests (Scarcella, 2003).
Although we know, appreciate, and applaud
the in-depth ideas our students use to create their
spoken and written discourses, we also understand
the discontinuity they experience between their
home and school languages. And, like it or not, we
also know the reality of the state exam and the power
it has over their futures. It is for this reason that we
believe our students must acquire the language of
the test and exert the choice to apply this academic
language when they believe it is a factor for success.
We believe this because of the high-stakes assessmentfailure rate of our African American students, not to
mention the failure rates countrywide. We set out to
radically increase the pass rate of our students on the
state high school exit exam because, in 2008, none
of our African American students had passed the
mandatory exam on the first attempt.
Further discussion in this article focuses on our
students who speak AAVE and refer to academic
English as “proper English,” to which their attention
Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 56 (8) May 2013 doi:10.1002 /JA AL.198 © 2013 International Reading Association (pp. 634 – 648)
JAAL_198.indd 634
4/26/2013 3:50:57 PM
JAAL_198.indd 635
the necessarye supports to move with linguistic ease
among the experiential landscapes of their homes
and school and into a world full of new possibilities
awaiting their exploration.
Mindful of the linguistic debates that foreground
the belief that success is tied to being able to give
voice to one’s ideas in a standard English format,
as well as those who argue that expecting standard
English usage of all students is promulgated racial
discrimination (Baugh, 2000; Dillard, 1972;
Richardson, 2003; Wolfram, Adger, & Christian,
1999), we wondered how we could teach all of our
students, especially our African American students,
about language variation without disparaging their
homes and communities.
We recognized that in the social situations of
school, students speak different registers without failing
to communicate because they respect one another
and want to communicate. We were concerned,
however, that when our students encountered others
outside school who viewed academic English as the
prestige register, they must have a knowledge about
this register that would enable them to communicate,
if they wished to do so. Armed with this expanded
knowledge of language and the power to choose
among their registers, we believe our students will have
the same opportunities, both in and outside school, as
their peers who, from their home experiences, initially
speak academic English with greater ease.
We knew this knowledge must be developed
by not disparaging their home register but instead
promoting the concept that language and power
within any community are directly linked, and that
one’s home register should be afforded as much respect
as an academic register. This realization promoted a
view encouraging pride in having multiple language
registers as well as the expertise and insight to use
each to support situational advancements. Common
language registers are presented in Figure 1.
An Instructional Possibility
The instructional approach we used to support our
students’ expansion of knowledge about language
was contrastive analysis, traditionally used to teach
foreign languages (Feigenbaum, 1970). In our
work, which was funded through an International
Reading Association Elva Knight Grant, we designed
instruction that offered students opportunities to
compare the phonological and syntactic features of
their home registers with those of academic English.
Learning to Talk Like the Test: Guiding Speakers of African American Vernacular English
was directed early in life when their families insisted
they be proper and polite and say please, thank
you, and yes, ma’am. These early learned patterns
of “proper” are supported by Delpit (1988), who
identified standard, or academic, English as the
“power code” that measures the potential for upward
social mobility and greater employment choices.
Gee’s (1990) work helps us to understand that
each person has an identity kit that is characterized
by experiences, behavior, language, and the social
expectations of others with whom they interact.
Referred to as a Discourse community, home
language is quite intact by the time a student comes
to school. Although we are much in agreement with
Gee’s (1986) argument that being conversant in any
language is all that is needed to achieve full cognitive
development, we also live with the reality that the state
exam is situated in U.S. society, where there exists a
range of thinking and acceptance about language
variation. The prestige of the language shared in
one’s home community is perceived by others outside
that community with degrees of acceptability (Lave
& Wegner, 1991).
Unfortunately, the register that sounds the most
academic often receives the highest prestige rating
(Shaughnessy, 1979). As Hymes (1981) noted, “It
may sometimes seem that there are only two kinds
of English in the United States, good English and
bad English” (p. v) and that “the United States is a
country rich in many things, but poor in knowledge
of itself with regard to language ” (p. v). There
exists a negative profile of speakers who are unable
to use academic English (Bernstein, 1970), which
promulgates a deficit image of both the speaker
and his spoken language. Students who do not
speak academic English well enough to succeed at
school often hold this negative image of themselves
as scholars. This personal image of deficit can be
changed only if students who come to school with
limited experience with formal or academic language,
which is the register resulting from early experiences
privileged by financial security, can engage in new
language situations that model respect for their home
languages while sensitizing them to differences
between these and their teachers’ in-school ways of
speaking.
Concerned that our students who are speakers
of AAVE may be lumped into this deficit profile,
we wanted them to have the knowledge they need
to succeed in any venture. As their teachers, we feel
that one of our major tasks is to provide them with
635
4/26/2013 3:51:08 PM
FEATURE ARTICLE
FIGURE 1 Language Registers
Fixed or frozen. Fixed speech is reserved for traditions in which the language does not change.
Examples of fixed speech include the Pledge of Allegiance, Shakespearean plays, and civil
ceremonies such as weddings.
Formal. At the formal level, speech is expected to be presented in complete sentences with
specific word usage. Formal language is the standard for work, school, and business and is more
often seen in writing than in speaking. However, public speeches and presentations are expected
to be delivered in a formal language register.
Consultative. The third level of language, consultative, is a formal register used in conversations
Less appropriate for writing, consultative language is often used by students in their classroom
interactions.
Casual. This is the language that is used in conversation with friends. In casual speech, word
choice is general and conversation is dependent upon nonverbal assists, significant background
knowledge, and shared information.
Intimate. This is the language used by very close friends and lovers. Intimate speech is private
J OURN AL OF ADO L ESC EN T & ADU LT L I TE RACY
5 6 ( 8 ) MAY 2 0 1 3
and often requires a significant amount of shared history, knowledge, and experience.
636
JAAL_198.indd 636
We integrated contrastive analysis into the
instruction already occurring within the high school,
specifically teacher modeling, productive group work,
and independent learning. Rather than simply tell
students about the differences between their home
language and school language, we wanted them
to experience the differences and then engage in
conversations about those differences.
While comparing the use of their home and
school registers in various situations, our students
noted differences by identifying the audience, the
intent of the communication, and the wordage that
best conveyed the sharing of a message with an
intended recipient. Using this frame for language
instruction supported the call for teaching situated in
a culturally responsive framework (Delpit, 2012; Gay,
2000; Ladson-Billings, 1992) that articulates respect
for the learner’s cultural mores. Such instructional
practice responds to and honors students’ home
experiences while enhancing their future lives.
The Population of Students
We teach and coach teachers in a high school in San
Diego, California, where all students must pass a
state test to be eligible to graduate from high school.
The students in the school are diverse culturally,
economically, linguistically, and academically. The
cultural demographics of 52% Latino/Hispanic,
20% African American, 19% Caucasian, and 9%
Asian/Pacific Islander include 71% of students who
speak a home language other than English; the
majority of the African American students speak
AAVE.
Concerned that many students who are speakers
of AAVE as their home language were not passing the
state high school exit exam, we decided to provide
highly intentional language instruction to all students
during their English classes, focusing especially on 91
AAVE speakers who had not passed the exam. These
91 focus students had either not yet taken the exam or
failed to receive the minimum passing score. These
students were spread throughout 12 sections of 9th-,
10th-, and 11th-grade English and were taught by six
different teachers, including us.
We acknowledge that our personal cultural
heritages as working-class Caucasians influenced
our understandings of, and expectations about,
language. We also acknowledge that our decades of
experience in teaching students who live in poverty
4/26/2013 3:51:08 PM
Why We Shared What We Shared
We studied various instructional moves that suggested
to our students there are different variations of
English—that, for example, their home language of
AAVE or Black English Vernacular (BEV), which is
rule governed at the syntactic and semantic levels,
has a long history of contributing to the artistic,
literary, and political accomplishments of African
American people. We also acknowledged that many
prominent speakers of Black English also know and
use an academic English variation when they decide
it is situationally efficient.
Our intent was to provide instruction that
conveyed a model of different but not deficit (Gorski,
2006); a model that eradicates classism rather than
one that attempts to repair economically poor children
(Payne, 2005); a model that afforded our students a
choice of the registers they selected to communicate
their ideas to various audiences. We did so because
JAAL_198.indd 637
we worry about students whose home register is not
a close variation of academic English; we know that
not passing the state high school exit exam is just the
first step in having doors of opportunity shut to them.
Aware of those who will broker the power
decisions about their future postsecondary school and
work applications, interviews, positions, and successes,
we believe that these power brokers should come to
know the depth of thoughtfulness of ideas, arguments,
and reasoning presented in voices and grammars that
may not sound like their own (Lee, 2005, 2006, 2007).
However, we heed the cautions of Delpit (1995), who
noted that “we all interpret behaviors, information,
and situations through our own cultural lenses;
these lenses operate involuntarily, below the level of
conscious awareness, making it seem that our own view
is simply ‘the way it is’” (p. 151). The personal lenses
of those making judgments may differ from students
whose cultures have been historically disenfranchised
and have consequently not experienced academic
achievement. These are our students, those for whom
classroom practice must be developed with the goal
of providing them with opportunities to develop a
continuum of language that results in preparing them
to successfully move, by choice, among speakers of
the language varieties they will encounter at home, at
school, and in their future worlds.
instruction that conveyed a model
Learning to Talk Like the Test: Guiding Speakers of African American Vernacular English
and who speak a variety of languages influenced the
instruction we developed and delivered.
We further believed that these students had the
knowledge to pass the exam, but not the language
register needed to express that knowledge. We
worked closely with our English teacher colleagues,
formatively planning and debriefing lessons. Students
received instruction during a regular school year—
85 minutes, four days per week—over a two-year
period. Of this, a minimum of 15 minutes per day
was devoted to “talking like the test,” as the students
called it. On some days, the entire class period was
devoted to this type of learning, whereas other days
were limited to focused lessons.
At the time of this study, all teachers were
already reading aloud to their students and discussing
narrative and expository texts. Teachers also modeled
their thinking, engaged students in collaborative
conversations, and formatively assessed students.
These were important parts of the efforts to improve
student achievement but were not sufficient to ensure
that all students passed the mandatory test.
We also acknowledge the limitations of this type
of testing (e.g., Kohn, 2000) as well as the reality that
teachers are faced with students’ assessment results
being used to rank schools and determine who can
graduate. As such, we choose to focus on tests as a
genre that can be taught, especially given the fact that
tests will be part of their lives after school, when they
want to attend college, gain a promotion, or drive a car.
of different not deficit.
637
What We Shared
The academic language instruction we shared was
grounded in the belief that a child’s success in school
can be ensured if instruction builds upon home
literacy practices and language. Our work in this area
was mindful of the request from Edwards (2007), who
implored all educators to provide instruction that
ensured every student be taught all the language registers
needed to succeed in situations outside the home.
Rather than viewing academic English as just
a list of content-related words set within standard
English phraseology, we offered a view to our
students that language is needed for every encounter
of their lives. School and work are just two of these
encounters, and success in any encounter depends
on having the language tools or registers needed to
Our intent was to provide
4/26/2013 3:51:08 PM
FEATURE ARTICLE
converse orally or in writing with others who share
these situationally appropriate spaces, or
J OURN AL OF ADO L ESC EN T & ADU LT L I TE RACY
5 6 ( 8 ) MAY 2 0 1 3
Discourses which are ways of being in the world,
or forms of life which integrate words, acts,
values, beliefs, attitudes, and social identities,
as well as gestures, glances, body positions, and
clothes. A Discourse is a sort of identity kit,
which comes complete with the appropriate
costume and instructions on how to act, talk, and
often write, so as to take on a particular social
role that others recognize. (Gee, 1996, p. 127)
638
JAAL_198.indd 638
Although we are sharing information about
91 speakers of AAVE, the instructional practices
we used to support their academic language growth
are appropriate for any speaker wishing to add or
strengthen his or her academic language register to
successfully converse in academic and professional
settings. We believe that all students need continual
practice in speaking an academic, content-related
English vernacular.
We also believe that because these 91 African
American students had been exposed to the academic
speaking of their teachers for at least nine school years
and still had not added the phonological and syntactic
features they heard their teachers speaking as a
register of their own language, additional instruction
needed to be shared through contrastive analysis,
which involved language being explicitly conveyed,
analyzed, and practiced.
The instruction we provided did not simply ask
students to translate from their home register to an
academic register but, instead, helped them to better
understand the differences in the registers and the
process of switching codes at the word and phrase levels.
We made a decision to include such detailed instruction
because, although their on-paper attempts to switch
between their home and school registers went fairly
well and supported their developing understandings
and explanations of the grammatical and syntactic
differences in usage patterns, many wanted to add a
school register but weren’t exactly sure how to do so.
How We Shared
Updating Teacher Modeling
On a daily basis, teachers at our school model their
thinking about texts as they read aloud. This practice
has been in place for years and has a strong research
base (Davey, 1983). As Duffy (2003) pointed out,
“The only way to model thinking is to talk about
how to do it. That is, we provide a verbal description
of the thinking one does or, more accurately, an
approximation of the thinking involved” (p. 11).
However, we did not specifically comment about
discourse during these instructional events. Rather,
we focused on comprehension, word solving, text
structures, and text features (Fisher, Frey, & Lapp, 2008).
From the outset of this effort, we added contrastive
analysis to teachers’ modeling. In some cases, the focus
text included AAVE, and the teacher modeled his or
her thinking about how this same information might
be presented in academic English. In other cases, the
text was in academic English, and the teacher thought
aloud about the way it could be presented in AAVE.
For example, while reading aloud a news
article about road racing, the teacher shared several
possibilities about “how I might tell my friends about
this. If I were using Black English, I would say, ‘Man,
people be dyin’ ’cuz of them road racing. It don’t be
worth mine’s life. I never gonna be in that place.’”
This practice was integrated into students’ learning
experiences from the start of the year. Following the
first month of contrastive analysis, we focused on
situationally appropriate language.
Creating Awareness of the Need for Situationally
Appropriate Language
To understand the power of AAVE and to build pride
among our African American students, we studied
AAVE as a language register. We introduced this
idea as students watched and discussed the range of
language that a person needs to function in all their
daily situations (see, for example, www.youtube.com/
watch?v=E9AMiKmzV0M).
As they watched this video, we asked them to
(a) note the range of registers the speaker was suggesting
a person needed to function effectively, (b) notice the
reasons why this range was needed, and (c) assess
themselves to see if there might be additional registers
they would like to add to their existing language.
The following is a discussion that occurred after
the viewing (all student names are pseudonyms):
DeMarius: Some of my homies think that when
black folk speak like that, they tryin’ to sound
white.
Lajuana: That’s lame. Soundin’ white means
soundin’ smart.
Shay: I’d like ta add this academic talk; then I
can say it if I want. I be decidin’ cuz I’m smart,
too [laughing].
4/26/2013 3:51:08 PM
JAAL_198.indd 639
others regarding language registers, (b) encourage
them to share their responses while developing
an understanding that school or academic talk
was an additional register they could choose
to use, and (c) assess how their home registers
related and how they might be expanded. Some
of the videos they enjoyed critiquing included
“Stop Talking White!!!!?” (www.youtube.com/wa
tch?v=G0j8disIFWo&feature=fvwrel) and “Sai’s
Ebonics Language Lesson” (www.youtube.com/
watch?v=q4BJrdBAD8w).
As the small groups assessed their PhotoBooth
performances, they noted they hadn’t been sure
whether their subjects and verbs agreed and that
maybe this knowledge was what they needed to learn
to add to their home registers. The conversation
resulted in the group deciding that lots of language
was, as James noted, “important ta have ta get
a good job, and ya need to know how ta talk it
right.”
To concretize the need for a wide array of registers
and also to think again about language patterns, we
invited students to list all the people with whom they
engage in discourse within the course of a day and
then to write a few lines of dialogue that might occur
during these interactions. We asked them to consider
if they had all the language needed to interact as well
as they would like.
During the sharing of these experiences,
Anthony stated that he often felt unable to talk to
the principal because he wasn’t sure how to say
what he was thinking. Kenneth agreed, adding that
the principal might think he is too stupid to answer.
James quickly noted that when the police routinely
stop him because of where he lives, and he isn’t
sure how to answer their questions, they often
think he is being disrespectful. Robert added that
sometimes when this happens to him, the police
talk so fast and use language he hasn’t even heard,
which makes understanding and responding almost
impossible.
After students shared their feelings in their home
vernacular, we all agreed that to succeed in each of our
daily communications, we need to be able to convey
and receive information in a variety of ways. We need
to be able to speak to more than one audience, and
sometimes to do these two things at the same time.
We further agreed that we need to have more than
one register and also know when it is appropriate to use
each. As Harmony said, “We needs to be on the same
page.”
Learning to Talk Like the Test: Guiding Speakers of African American Vernacular English
Although Shay’s statement summed up the thoughts
of the majority of students who felt they needed
to expand their more formal or school registers,
DeMarius’s point of view was also very real. We knew
that we had to be transparent about our goals with
students, letting them know that the language they
used with friends and families was valued and that
they could choose to use academic English in specific
situations. We felt they understood the difference
based on our modeling, but they did not yet have
sufficient facility with academic English usage to
have the power to choose.
To address this shortfall, we invited our students
to search YouTube videos to find perspectives that
addressed their thoughts about academic English.
We also tasked them with preparing a response
that evaluated, supported, extended, or countered
the intent and presentation of the messages they
were hearing. Because we wanted our students
to continually hear their language and assess its
appropriateness as classroom talk, and also to
note any additions or changes that were needed
to fit this situation, we encouraged them to share
their responses through writing and also through
PhotoBooth presentations, for which they were to use
the register of academic English.
PhotoBooth is an application available on
current Mac computers that allows users to record
their image and voice using the built-in camera
and microphone. Users can edit their digital video
before sharing it with others. A sample PhotoBooth
presentation can be found by viewing the video clip
“Describing Language” in the online version of this
article, under Supporting Information.
This project required three weeks of instructional
time, 20 minutes per day. Students needed help,
often in small groups and individually, to analyze
the YouTube videos and to develop their own. They
had not yet begun to shift naturally between registers
but could easily recognize the differences in others.
This activity has become a regular part of the English
curriculum because it helps students understand that
language registers are different and that they can
analyze those differences.
Students’ ideas and presentations were next
shared in small groups, in which each speaker felt
comfortable assessing written and spoken ideas
and the use of a classroom register. Using Figure
2, we asked them to chronicle their thinking and
assess their presentations. The purposes of this
task were to (a) expose them to the thinking of
639
4/26/2013 3:51:09 PM
FEATURE ARTICLE
Studying Language Patterns
We began our study of language patterns halfway
into the first year by paralleling the instructional
moves suggested by Wheeler and Swords (2006) as
we presented a shared reading of Flossie and the Fox
(McKissack & Isadora, 1986), noting the differences
in the language patterns used by the two main
characters (see Figure 3). We shared that this text
was part of the rich and powerful oral tradition of
the African American community. Over the course
of a week, we code-switched phrases such as “Why
come Mr. Jay can’t catch the fox with his dogs?” to
“How come...” and talked about the grammatical and
syntactic changes we were making between registers.
The students’ sense of the elements of
communication grew as they talked about how
making these changes ruined the communication
among the characters in the text. They talked about
FIGURE 2 Response to the YouTube Video and PhotoBooth Presentation
Name __________________
Part 1: YouTube (site)_____________________
1. The YouTube video message suggested that a speaker needs_________________ registers because
____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________.
2. As suggested in this video, the reasons a speaker needs multiple registers are:
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________.
3. I think a person needs to think about the following when they speak:
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________ ____________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________.
Part 2: My Photo Booth Presentation
J OURN AL OF ADO L ESC EN T & ADU LT L I TE RACY
5 6 ( 8 ) MAY 2 0 1 3
Rating scale: 3 = well done 2 = average 1 = not well done
640
JAAL_198.indd 640
Criteria
3 2 1 Thoughts/Suggestions
Conveyed a clear message.
Shared information appropriate for a
school setting.
Included a good sequence of
information.
Provided a conclusion that
connected the YouTube ideas and
mine.
Used academic language to share
ideas.
Used a formal but friendly style.
Included appropriate pauses.
Contained subject–verb agreement.
Used the verb to be appropriately.
Used singular and plural words as
needed.
4/26/2013 3:51:09 PM
how Flossie spoke using AAVE and the fox spoke using
an academic, or school, register. Together we decided
that communication involves more than grammatical
patterns, and that intention and audience are two
significant features of communication. We agreed
that more than one register is a must.
The next language-discourse project built on
the shared reading of Flossie and the Fox. As with
the previous project, we devoted three weeks of
instruction, about 20 minutes per day, to this task.
In partner teams, students analyzed the written and
spoken discourse patterns of historically prominent
Americans from many arenas (e.g., historians, poets,
musicians, educators), such as Barack Obama,
Paul Laurence Dunbar, Langston Hughes, Harper
Lee, Zora Neale Hurston, August Wilson, James
Baldwin, Toni Morrison, Maya Angelou, Benjamin
Zephaniah, Tupac Shakur, Jay-Z, Evan Jones, Lil
Wayne, Common, and Outkast. We invited them to
code-switch from the one presented by the author to
either academic English or AAVE.
Students were primarily intent on switching
AAVE to academic English and, when finished,
were eager to share their revisions with other partner
teams. As a class we analyzed if the changes had been
made at the word, phrase, and/or sentence levels. We
also compiled a class chart (Figure 4) to illustrate
the suggested changes they had identified. Doing so
allowed students to more deeply analyze real texts to
identify patterns of grammar and usage and the rules
governing each. They noted differences in subject–
verb agreement, singular–plural patterns, tense
changes, use or lack of possessives, past versus present
time, use of be, and negatives.
JAAL_198.indd 641
When Darius said that he couldn’t
find any speech by a famous African
American who used AAVE, several
others concluded that, when giving
a speech, the speaker probably uses
academic language. This signaled their
understanding of the power of having
multiple registers, and that capable
speakers and writers choose the register
based on the audience and the message
they wish to convey.
Based on their discussion and
performances, we assessed that students
were getting fairly good at identifying
academic grammatical patterns and
when these patterns should be used.
However, as Shaniqua noted, she had
not transferred these patterns to her spoken or written
discourses. In her words, “I be kinda good at knowin’
when ta use ’em, I just be forgettin’. I needs practice.”
As others concurred, we suggested that adding these
formal English patterns to their spoken and written
discourses would take practice, much like when
learning a foreign language. At this point, they were
clearly more aware of their ability to code-switch but
had not yet reached automaticity.
Another conclusion shared by Angel, which was
immediately agreed upon, was, “I be thinkin’ that
switchin’ take away from the strenth of the speaker’s
voice.” Her comment indicated that she and her
peers realized that the power of these pieces was not
just in the message but also in the language used
to share the message. Our students again realized
that having multiple registers and selecting when to
use them afforded the power to the speaker. It took
nearly six months of intentional instruction to create
this realization. At this point, we were confident that
students understood different registers and could use
them. We also knew that they were not yet using them
in situationally appropriate ways.
Based on their ideas, we suggested that next we
should focus more closely on the word and phrase
patterns they had identified. We made this decision
because we were designing instruction based on
students’ responses rather than simply implementing
a predetermined plan of instruction. We realized that
our students were developing an understanding of the
differences between home and school registers, but
they needed to engage in language-based social and
academic interactions to authenticate the need for
and use of multiple registers.
Learning to Talk Like the Test: Guiding Speakers of African American Vernacular English
FIGURE 3 Flossie and the Fox
641
4/26/2013 3:51:09 PM
FEATURE ARTICLE
FIGURE 4 Code-Switching Registers
Speaker
Text Title &
AAVE
Genre
Academic
Type of Change
English
Langston
“Dreams”
Life for me ain’t
Life for me hasn’t
ain’t—hasn’t:
Hughes
(poem)
been no crystal
been a crystal
Changing
stair.
stair.
colloquial
contraction from
informal to formal
use.
no—a: The article
a is used before a
noun that begins
with a consonant.
Benjamin
“No Problem”
I am not de
I am not the
de—the: Change
Zephaniah
(poem)
problem.
problem.
of colloquial de to
the article the,
which is used to
call attention to
one specific
instance of an
identified noun.
Jay-Z
“Empire State
Yeah, yeah, I'ma
Yes, yes, I am
Yeah, yeah,
of Mind”
up at Brooklyn,
going to Brooklyn,
I’ma—Yes, yes, I
(song)
now I'm down in
now I’m down in
am going to:
Tribeca.
Tribeca.
Changing from the
slang to standard
way of saying Yes,
yes, I am going to.
Evan Jones
“The Song of
He looked at m’ol’
He looked at my
m’ol’—my old:
the Banana
clothes brown wid
old clothes that
Changed from
Man” (song)
stain.
were brown with
slang contraction
stain.
to formal language.
that were:
Maintaining the
past tense form
introduced by the
J OURN AL OF ADO L ESC EN T & ADU LT L I TE RACY
5 6 ( 8 ) MAY 2 0 1 3
suffix -ed (looked).
wid—with:
Changing the slang
to formal use of the
preposition with.
Harper Lee
To Kill a
Lula stopped, but
You don’t have
You ain’t got no—
Mockingbird
she said, "You
any business
You don’t have
(novel)
ain't got no
bringing white
any:
business bringin'
children here.
Change of informal
white chillun
They have their
to formal use of a
here—they got
church. We have
negative
their church, we
ours. It is our
contraction.
got our'n.It is our
church, isn’t it,
bringin’ white
church, ain't it,
Miss Cal?
chillun—bringing
Miss Cal?"
white children:
Adding the suffix ing to support
present tense.
Changing
colloquial
pronunciation and
642
spelling of the word
children.
JAAL_198.indd 642
Trying on a Standard English Register
With three months left in the school year,
it was obvious that our students were able
to code-switch the songs, poems, and
speeches of artists. At this point, we invited
them to again think about their daily
language situations, ones that demanded
they be able to switch registers to have a
successful interaction. The last project of
the year involved working in pairs to create
dialogues. These dialogues were then
performed for other partner teams and
evaluated using Figure 5 (for an example
dialogue, please refer to the video clip
“Before a Live Audience” in the online
version of this article, under Supporting
Information). Again, we devoted three weeks
of instructional time, about 20 minutes per
day, to this project. As part of this project,
we introduced students to language frames.
Language Frames
To support their conversations, we worked
with students to create language frames
that contained academic English language
patterns they wanted to continue practicing.
College composition experts Gerald Graff
and Cathy Birkenstein (2006) recommend
the use of frames (they call them templates)
as an effective way for developing students’
academic writing skills. They defend the
use of frames or templates by noting that,
after all, even the most creative forms of
expression depend on established patterns
and structures. Most songwriters, for
instance, rely on a time-honored versechorus-verse pattern, and few people
would call Shakespeare uncreative because
he didn’t invent the sonnet or dramatic
forms that he used to such dazzling
effect....Ultimately, then, creativity and
originality lie not in the avoidance of
established forms, but in the imaginative
use of them. (pp. 10–11)
As Graff and Birkenstein (2006) noted,
writing frames help students incorporate
established norms of academic writing. We
believed these frames would also scaffold
their transfer between registers. For example, we initially provided students with easyto-use language frames that could support
4/26/2013 3:51:09 PM
FIGURE 5 Dialogue Analysis
Rating scale –How well did I do using my academic register?
3 = well done 2 = average 1 = not well done
Name____________________
Partner’s Name_______________
Criteria
3
2
1
Thoughts &
Suggestions
The Message
Conveyed clear message.
Main ideas were obvious
Included a logical sequence of information.
Supported each point with facts.
The Communication Style
Shared information in conversational language appropriate for a
school setting.
Maintained academic English grammatical structure.
Used appropriate vocabulary
Spoke in a formal but friendly style.
Kept the interest of the other person.
Responded well to questions.
Annunciated well.
Listened before speaking
Used appropriate gestures.
Maintained good eye contact.
their introduction to the use of academic English
patterns (see Figure 6). These were included in their
writers’ notebooks and posted as charts in their classrooms. Each student maintains a writers’ notebook
in English class. Students can remove pages to take
home for revisions, but the notebook remains in the
classroom for daily use. These notebooks are used for
self-collection of vocabulary, timed writing exercises,
drafting literary response essays, summarizing informational texts, and free writing.
As shown in Figures 7 and 8, as students’ awareness
of a school register became more sophisticated, the
language frames also became more sophisticated and
were used more widely and more often. Together we
decided to keep these frames posted on a sentence
wall and to review and add to them whenever students
wished. The sentence wall, which worked much like a
word wall, continued to grow as students gained new
JAAL_198.indd 643
insights about the differences between their academic
and home registers.
During the second year, we repeated these lessons
with new students and continued the modeling,
sentence frames, and contrastive analysis work with
continuing students. For example, during year two,
the 10th- and 11th-grade students completed another
video analysis project using Voki, a Web-based
animation program that allows students to create an
avatar and have the avatar speak. This assignment
required that students rewrite the same content using
two different registers. They could use AAVE, but
they did not have to. An example Voki can be found
at ow.ly/fMAQY. Notice that this student switched
codes within one text as a way to share her thinking.
In addition, during year two, students in 10th and
11th grades were asked to participate in a debate.
This is a common assignment in the school, but this
time students were asked to debate twice, once in
Learning to Talk Like the Test: Guiding Speakers of African American Vernacular English
Took turns speaking.
643
4/26/2013 3:51:11 PM
FEATURE ARTICLE
FIGURE 6 Basic Language Frames
She ______at work.
I ___ good at ____________________________.
I was going to_____________________.
Once I arrived ____________________________.
We are trying to____________________________.
My friends and I were___________________ and then we__________________________________.
We are going to__________________________________ because we want to ________________
before__________________________________.
FIGURE 7 Academic Language Frames
I believe____________________, because ____________________________.
My hypothesis is _______________________________because____________________________.
My hypothesis, which is ____________________________________________, suggests
that__________________________________.
My ideas are supported by facts such as _______________________________________, which I read
in_____________________________________________________________.
The sources I used include ____________________________________________.
I would like to add____________________________________________________.
Am I correct that you’re suggesting that________________________________?
I wonder why you think_______________________________________________
.
I conclude that___________________________________________________.
What evidence supports your conclusion that______________________________?
I am confused by your statement that____________________________________.
You made an interesting point when you said______________________; however, I was wondering
why___________________________________________________?
J OURN AL OF ADO L ESC EN T & ADU LT L I TE RACY
5 6 ( 8 ) MAY 2 0 1 3
I’ve really enjoyed our conversation about_______________________________.
644
JAAL_198.indd 644
I concur, and to sum it up, I would like to add that _____________________________.
academic English and once in another register of
their choice. The audience evaluated the debates,
assigning a winning team each time. During the
second year of our efforts, we added information
about the impact of the register on the evaluation
and required that student judges identify situations in
which each register was appropriate.
For example, during an informal register
debate about legalizing marijuana, the judges
identified a coffee shop, texting, and talking with
friends as examples of situations in which this
register would be appropriate. During a debate
about elective cosmetic surgery for teenagers
using academic English, the students identified
the following situations as appropriate for this
register: at school or college, on TV, in discussions
with parents who spoke this register, and when
asking a doctor for help. During the spring of the
second year of our efforts, when the majority of our
students would take the graduation requirement
test, we regularly observed them shift their language
when the classroom was focused on academic
interactions.
We also observed them switch to other registers
as they interacted with peers or in less-formal
discussions in class. Although they occasionally made
mistakes, the flow seemed natural and the setting
seemed to influence the register they chose to use.
As Angel said, “My voice is still here. It’s even louder,
now that I understand my audience and what they
4/26/2013 3:51:11 PM
JAAL_198.indd 645
Learning to Talk Like the Test: Guiding Speakers of African American Vernacular English
FIGURE 8 Language Frames Depicting Students’ Academic Language Growth
645
4/26/2013 3:51:12 PM
FEATURE ARTICLE
expect. I have more power because I can choose how
people see me.”
As our students’ awareness grew, so did their
language use. They jokingly reminded one another
if they slipped into an informal register in class.
They assessed their writing to look for the formal or
academic language registers we studied. They tasked
themselves to notice the language in their daily world
of the Internet to see which register was being used
when, by whom, and for which type of audience.
During each class, students shared new insights they
were noticing, for example, how a friend might sound
informal on Facebook and formal in class.
J OURN AL OF ADO L ESC EN T & ADU LT L I TE RACY
5 6 ( 8 ) MAY 2 0 1 3
Did They Learn to Talk Like the Test?
646
JAAL_198.indd 646
We have attempted to present the contrastive analysis
instruction we shared with our students in a friendly
yet informational manner, because this is the tone
we used to address the topic with our students. Our
curriculum was, however, purposefully planned and
systematically shared. It addressed all the topics we’ve
presented as a way to help our students understand the
word-, phrase-, and sentence-level differences that exist
between their home and school language registers.
When it came time for the state test, our students
experienced increased success. Every one of the
students who had taken the test and failed ended up
passing. Thus, none of the students were prevented
from graduating based on failing the test. In terms of
the students who had yet to take the test when they
participated in this focused instruction, 97% passed
the first time, and the remaining six students passed
on a second try. In other words, the passage rate for
African Americans increased from none (0%) in 2008
to 78% in 2010 and 97% in 2011.
Informed Actions
Based on two years’ work on academic English, and
the success our students experienced on the state test,
we believe that our initial assumptions were correct.
Students who speak AAVE have the knowledge
necessary to be successful on these measures, but they
lack the language. Devoting at least 15 minutes per
day and integrating several projects during the year
that build students’ contrastive analysis skills ensured
that students were able to code-switch based on the
situation. They needed explicit instruction to be able
to do so, including modeling the differences between
various registers and integrating sentence frames.
It seems reasonable to suggest that English
teachers devote instructional time to validating
students’ home languages while expanding their use
of language. Although not typically considered part
of the formal English curriculum, contrastive analysis
seems to have a role to play in students’ developing
academic English proficiency.
As we watched and supported the language
development of these students, we identified the
following four principles that continue to guide our
instructional practice.
1. Academic language learning is enhanced
when students understand why the register
of school is one they may need for some life
interactions.
2. Academic language learning develops naturally when the home registers of students are
valued and respected.
3. Academic language is acquired as students
engage in language-based social and
academic interactions occurring in situations
that authenticate the need for and their use of
multiple registers.
4. Language expansion becomes a reality of
importance to students when their teachers
provide scaffolded language and conceptual
experiences based on their developing ideas
and questions.
These principles can be integrated into
instructional experiences for secondary school
teachers
through
high-quality
professional
development. Given that many teachers have not had
to learn a second register or have not experienced
a deficit orientation toward their home language,
awareness of the need is a first step. This can come
from teachers watching the videos that we showed to
our students.
Another step will likely involve teachers
integrating language variations into their modeling.
Teachers can be supported in selecting texts to read
aloud that allow them to notice various language
registers. They can also model their thinking about
the situation and the appropriateness of the language
for that situation. Further, they could invite students
to consider the situation and the language used.
This developing understanding of language is
illustrated in the video clip “Role Playing Characters”
(found under Supporting Information in the online
version of this article) as we observe students
4/26/2013 3:51:42 PM
Take Action
S T E P S F OR IMMEDI AT E IMP L EMEN TAT ION
To support students’ developing a register of
academic or school language, we suggest the
following actions for your consideration.
✓ Use the resources we have identified as
references to begin to understand the
difference between home and school
discourses.
✓ Plan everyday engaging and enjoyable orallanguage experiences similar to those we’ve
mentioned that support your students in
adding or expanding their academic or school
register.
✓ Use a model of contrastive analysis to help
students easily identify differences in the
patterns of their school and home registers.
✓ Be sure the language experiences you plan
include technology resources that support
viewing, talking, and writing.
✓ Check your instruction to be sure you are
providing an additive rather than a subtractive
model of language learning.
✓ Develop language rubrics with your students
that invite their personal assessment of their
use of academic language. As they assess their
language, they can decide which patterns need
their attention. Being aware of one’s language
patterns supports a model of additive language
development. It also encourages students to
realize that adding a new register involves time,
attention, and practice.
JAAL_198.indd 647
language frames for these aspects of academic
English. Together, these instructional moves provided
students with choices, and they learned to make
informed choices about their language use.
References
Baugh, J. (2000). Beyond ebonics: Linguistic pride and racial
prejudice. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bernstein, B. (1970). Social class, language, and socialization.
In P.P. Giglioli (Ed.), Language and social context: Selected
readings (pp. 157–178). London: Penguin.
Davey, B. (1983). Think-aloud: Modeling the cognitive
processed of reading comprehension. Journal of Reading,
27(1), 44–47.
Delpit, L. (2012). “Multiplication is for white people”: Raising
expectations for other people’s children. New York: New
Press.
Delpit, L.D. (1988). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy
in educating other people’s children. Harvard Educational
Review, 58(3), 280–298.
Delpit, L.D. (1995). Other people’s children: Cultural conflict in
the classroom. New York: New Press.
Dillard, J.L. (1972). Black English: Its history and usage in the
United States. New York: Random House.
Duffy, G.G. (2003). Explaining reading: A resource for teaching
concepts, skills, and strategies. New York: Guilford.
Edwards, P.A. (2007). The education of African American
students: Voicing the debates, controversies and solutions.
Presidential address to the National Reading Conference,
Austin, TX.
Feigenbaum, I. (1970). The use of nonstandard English in
teaching standard: Contrast and comparison. In R.W.
Fasold & R.W. Shuy (Eds.), Teaching English in the inner
city (pp. 87–104). Washington, DC: Center for Applied
Linguistics.
Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Lapp, D. (2008). In a reading state of
mind: Brain research, teacher modeling, and comprehension
instruction. Newark, DE: International Reading
Association.
Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research,
and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
Gee, J.P. (1986). Orality and literacy: From the savage mind
to ways with words. TESOL Quarterly, 20(4), 719–746.
doi:10.2307/3586522
Gee, J.P. (1990). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in
discourses. New York: Falmer.
Gee, J.P. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in
discourses. New York: Routledge Falmer.
Gorski, P. (2006). Savage unrealities: Classism and racism
abound in Ruby Payne’s framework. [Electronic version]
Rethinking schools. 21( 2), 16–19. Retrieved November
14, 2012, from www.rethinkingschools.org/archive/21_02/
sava212.shtml
Graff, G., & Birkenstein, C. (2006). They say/I say: The moves
that matter in academic writing. New York: W.W. Norton.
Hymes, D. (1981). Foreword. In C. Ferguson & S.B. Heath
(Eds.), Language in the USA (pp. v–ix). New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Learning to Talk Like the Test: Guiding Speakers of African American Vernacular English
“trying on” various language patterns found in their
readings.
In addition, teachers can develop or use alreadydeveloped projects that require contrastive analysis.
In our experience, several of these projects are
required if students are to move from recognizing the
differences to naturally switching registers based on
the situation. Further, teachers can use instructional
supports, such as language frames, to remind
students about aspects of language they want to
learn.
In our case, students wanted to learn more about
subject–verb agreement, singular–plural patterns,
tense changes, use or lack of possessives, past versus
present time, use of be, and negatives. We developed
647
4/26/2013 3:51:42 PM
FEATURE ARTICLE
More to Explore
C O NNE C T E D C O N T E N T- B A SE D R E S O U R C E S
READWRITETHINK.ORG LESSON PLANS
• Shea, R.H. (n.d.). “Exploring language and identity: Amy
Tan’s ‘Mother Tongue’ and beyond”: www
.readwritethink.org/classroom-resources/lesson-plans/
exploring-language-identity-mother-910.html
• Striegel, P. (n.d.). “Dialect detectives: Exploring dialect in
Great Expectations”: www.readwritethink.org/
classroom-resources/lesson-plans/dialect-detectivesexploring-dialect-30869.html)
IRA BOOK CHAPTER
• Lapp, D. (2010). Stories, facts, and possibilities: Bridging
the home and school worlds for students acquiring a
school discourse. In K. Dunsmore & D. Fisher (Eds.),
Bringing literacy home (pp. 136–158). Newark, DE:
International Reading Association.
IRA BOOK
• Edwards, P.A., Thompson McMillon, G., & Turner,
J.D. (2010). Change is gonna come: Transforming literacy
education for African American students. Newark,
DE: International Reading Association.
Supporting Information
Additional Supporting Information may be found in
the online version of this article:
Video S1: Before a Live Audience
Video S2: Describing Language
Video S3: Role Playing Characters
J OURN AL OF ADO L ESC EN T & ADU LT L I TE RACY
5 6 ( 8 ) MAY 2 0 1 3
Kohn, A. (2000). The case against standardized testing: Raising
the scores, ruining the schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1992). Reading between the lines and beyond
the pages: A culturally relevant pedagogy. Theory into Practice,
31(4), 312–320. doi:10.1080/00405849209543558
Lave, J., & Wegner, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate
peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University
Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511815355
Lee, C.D. (2005). Double-voiced discourse: African American
Vernacular English as resource in cultural modeling
classrooms. In A. Ball & S.W. Freedman (Eds.), New
literacies for new times: Bakhtinian perspectives on language,
literacy, and learning for the 21st century (pp. 129–147).
New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/
CBO9780511755002.007
Lee, C.D. (2006). Every good-bye ain’t gone: Analyzing the
cultural underpinnings of classroom talk. International
Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 19(3), 305–327.
doi:10.1080/09518390600696729
Lee, C.D. (2007). Culture, literacy and learning. New York:
Teachers College Press.
McKissack, P., & Isadora, R. (1986). Flossie & the fox. New York:
Dial.
Payne, R.K. (2005). A framework for understanding poverty (4th
ed.). Highlands, TX: aha! Process.
Richardson, E. (2003). African American literacies. New York:
Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203166550
Scarcella, R. (2003). Academic English: A conceptual framework.
University of California Linguistic Minority Research
Institute. Technical Report 2003–1.
Shaughnessy, M.P. (1979). Errors and expectations: A guide for the
teacher of basic writing. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wheeler, R.S., & Swords, R. (2006). Code-switching: Teaching
standard English in urban classrooms. Urbana, IL: National
Council of Teachers of English.
Wolfram, W., Adger, C.T., & Christian, D. (1999). Dialects in
schools and communities. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
648
JAAL_198.indd 648
4/26/2013 3:51:42 PM