The Tutoring Book - California State University, Sacramento

writer had trouble understanding your implicit/indirect feedback, try making it more and more
explicit/direct until they do. Remember, since AAVE features are similar in many ways to ESL features,
we may want to address them similarly as well.
� Communicate the value of maintaining their voice once they gain control of using both SAE and AAVE.
Hopefully, during our open discussions, we will have touched on the educational implications brought
about through both AAVE and SAE writing. If our tutees reach a place in their writing where they show
advanced control over both dialects, we get to embark on the joyous task of helping them find ways to
maintain their identity by creatively incorporating some rhetorical features of AAVE. Perhaps once they
reach this point, they won’t be coming to tutoring sessions, but if nothing else, we need to encourage
individuality by acknowledging the value of a tutee’s voice and teaching them to acknowledge that value
as well.
This is a recursive process. It is not linear. It is important to perpetually build trust and rapport, to discuss and
communicate openly about said implications and the value of maintaining identity through voice, all the while
bringing to light existing features and providing the appropriate tools to give the writer independent control down
the road. Once a strong confidence is established between tutor and tutee, you might find that these are some of
the hardest working writers you will ever work with.
References
Balester, V. M. (1993). Cultural divide: A study of African-American college-level writers. Portsmouth:
Boynton/Cook Publishers, Inc.
Blackburn, M., & Stern, D. (2000). Analyzing the role of the vernacular in student writing: A social literacies
approach. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 16(1), 53-69.
Chapman, I.T. (1994). Dissin’ the dialect on discourse surface differences. Composition Chronical. 7(7), 3-7.
Cooks, J.A. (2004). Writing for something: essays, raps, and writing preferences. The English Journal, 94(1), 72-
76
Donlan, D. (1974). What research says about teaching Standard English to the disadvantaged student. Peabody
Journal of Education, 51(4), 261-168.
Fasold, R. W., & Shuy, R.W. (1970). Teaching Standard English in the inner city. Washington DC: Center for
Applied Linguistics.
Labov, W. (1969). A study of non-standard English. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.
Labov, W. (1972). Language in the inner city. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Labov, W. (1965). Stages in the acquisition of Standard English. In R.W. Shuy (Ed.), Social Dialects and
Language Learning (pp. 77-103). Champaign, Illinois: NCTE.
Linn, M.D. (1995). Stylistic variation in vernacular Black English and the teaching of college composition. In D.
Rubin (Ed.), Composing social identify in written language (pp. 33-46). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
McCrary, D. (2005). Represent, representin', representation: the efficacy of hybrid text in the writing classroom.
Journal of Basic Writing (CUNY), 24(2), 72-91.
Roozen, K. (2008). Journalism, poetry, standup comedy, and academic literacy: Mapping the interplay of
curricular and extracurricular literate activities.
Smitherman, G. (1977). Talkin and testifyin: the language of black America. Detroit, Michigan: Wayne State
University Press.
Sternglass, M. S. (1974). Close similarities in dialect features of black and white college students in remedial
composition classes. TESOL Quarterly, 8 (3), 271-283.
Walker,G. P. (1977). Afro-American linguistic patterns: impact on academic success. Atlanta: Southern Regional
Education Board.
117