









































8

C O L E M A N  |  O U R  L A N G U A G E

ENGAGE!  |  st u d e n t  vo i c e s

keywords:

African American Vernacular English, culturally 
responsive curriculum, reading initiatives, reflective 
teaching, sociolinguistics 

 
key terms
African American Vernacular English (AAVE)- 
the dialect of American English that most African 
Americans descended from enslaved people speak 
(Rickford, 2003).   
 
Barbara and Edward Netter Center for Community 
Partnerships- an organization that uses the University 
of Pennsylvania (Penn) resources to help solve universal 
problems manifested locally in West Philadelphia 
partly through establishing mutually transformative 
relationships with the community (Netter Center, 2019). 
 
Culturally Responsive Teaching- from Gloria 
Ladson-Billings, this is a “pedagogy of opposition” 
committed to empowerment through academic success, 
the development of cultural competence, and the 
development of a critical awareness that pushes students 
to question current social contexts and social order 
(Ladson-Billings, 1995). 
 

 
 
Mainstream American English (MAE)- often called 
the “standard” form of English, this dialect is the 
most spoken English dialect, which is also used in 
professional and academic settings (Rickford, 2003). 
 
Penn Reading Initiative (PRI)- a student-run 
organization at the Netter Center whose goal is to 
improve reading skills in West Philadelphia; this 
organization works in Comegys and Hamilton 
Elementary Schools, two University Assisted 
Community Schools. 
 
Problem-Solving Learning Paper (PSL)- a paper 
whose overall goal is to identify a universal problem 
manifested locally, understand it, develop a solution, and 
identify strategies for implementation. 
 

abstract 
Millions of Black Americans speak a version of 
English not reflected in the American education 
system. This version of English—African American 
Vernacular English (AAVE)—is rule-governed, oral, 
and systematically different from the “standard” form 
of English (referred to as Mainstream American English 
(MAE) from hereon) used in academic spaces. Though 

Our Language Belongs in Our 
Learning: A Culturally Responsive 
Approach to Improving Literacy in 
West Philadelphia 

Author
LUKE COLEMAN, (formerly) Director of Tutor Education at the Netter Center for Community Partnerships at the University of 
Pennsylvania; Fulbright Teaching Assistant at IES Miguel de Cervantes in Madrid, Spain 



VO L .  5,  I S S U E  19

C O L E M A N  |  O U R  L A N G U A G E

many young Black students enter the education system 
knowing AAVE, classroom instruction occurs in MAE. 
Black students are instructed in a language different 
from the one used at home yet are expected to perform 
at levels similar to those of students who already 
speak MAE. This expectation contributes to the well-
documented achievement gap, wherein Black students, 
on average, perform at lower levels than white students 
on educational evaluations.  
 
This manuscript is a community-centered attempt to 
address the achievement gap in two West Philadelphia 
elementary schools by leveraging the University 
of Pennsylvania’s resources. This article describes 
qualitative problem-solving learning research, where 
the author works alongside the community to address 
using the Penn Reading Initiative as a vehicle for 
change to support students’ cultural and sociolinguistic 
backgrounds in the classroom, ideally improving literacy 
through culturally responsive pedagogy. This article 
lays out the problem of dialectical miscomprehension 
and details a solution developed alongside community 
members in West Philadelphia. This article also reflects 
on the progress made in the two years since the original 
solution was implemented. It highlights the development 
of the Netter Center’s Professional Development 
Associates team and the Anti-Racism Working Group—
both having been influenced by work in this problem-
solving learning framework. 

introduction 

essential context and 
statement of the problem
This problem-solving learning (PSL) article is a 
community-centered approach to addressing the lack 
of culturally responsive educational opportunities for 
Black students in the American education system (Cook, 
2015). It focuses on developing a program that enhances 
early literacy learning for young Black children in 

West Philadelphia. A PSL is a unique framework for 
an article. In a PSL, the author identifies a universal 
problem manifested locally. This means the author 
looks for an issue—whether through direct experiences, 
quantitative data, interviews, etc.—widely present in 
society and breaks this issue down to the local level. 
The author begins seeking community input to learn 
how the issue is manifested in the area. This entails 
interviewing community members and stakeholders 
in the problem and working alongside the community 
to comprehend better an issue's complexities and how 
its local context impacts local citizens. A collaborative 
solution begins as the author moves through the PSL 
process alongside community members. After months 
of intensive work with the community, the result of a 
PSL is an implementable solution that relies on various 
stakeholders to come to fruition. It is, above all, an 
attempt to solve a problem with the community. It is 
not work done for a community nor upon a community 
but a mutually transformative approach to collaboration 
that yields a new understanding of the problem and a 
new way of addressing it. While taking part in this PSL, 
I was a student in the Penn Program for Public Service 
(PPPS) at the Netter Center—a program whose long-
term goal is to “contribute to the radical transformation 
of research universities to function as democratic, 
civic, and community-engaged institutions dedicated 
to advancing learning and knowledge for democracy, 
social change and the continuous betterment of human 
life” (Harkavy et al., 2020). Netter is an organization 
whose mission is to foster mutually transformative 
relationships for the University of Pennsylvania and 
West Philadelphia communities. A main strategy of 
Netter is partnering with local schools to transform 
them into University-Assisted Community Schools 
(UACS). One of Netter’s UACS programs, the Penn 
Reading Initiative (PRI), aims to improve reading skills 
through a 1:1 tutoring model. This involves improving 
elementary literacy at two UACS sites: Hamilton and 
Comegys Elementary. This article, attacking a universal 
problem manifested locally, will focus on PRI’s methods 
to yield a more culturally competent program—capable 



ENGAGE!  |  st u d e n t  vo i c e s

C O L E M A N  |  O U R  L A N G U A G E

of producing competent tutors prepared to teach 
conventions of the English language to speakers of 
African American Vernacular English (AAVE).   

The tutors PRI funnels into West Philadelphia 
(undergraduate and graduate students from Penn) 
possess sociolinguistic privilege. Most of the tutors 
in this program speak Mainstream American English 
(MAE), while a vast majority of the students they 
teach do not (Bynum, 2020). Additionally, these 
tutors are generally very privileged—class privilege, 
white privilege, and educational privilege (Abbott, 
2020). This linguistic, socioeconomic, cultural, and 
racial misalignment gives way to miscomprehension, 
hampering the development of language skills in 
students working with the program (Horwitz, Improving 
Cross-Dialectical Comprehension in our Community 
2020). This problem has a wide range of effects, 
solutions, and characteristics that make it difficult to 
solve. This article will reflect on each of these.

statement of identity & 
awareness 
Self-awareness is critical when working to ameliorate 
social issues. As a Black biracial man of a particular 
socioeconomic class who attended an incredibly well-
resourced university, I speak on these issues from the 
point of compounded privileges. I feel as though, based 
on my social and cultural upbringing, I rarely struggled 
with dialectical miscomprehension in a professional or 
academic setting, nor have I experienced a significant 
lack of quality education. Thus, I came to this problem 
with limited insight but respect and the best intentions. 
I am also not a linguist, and much of this paper grapples 
with linguistic complexities—adapting solutions to 
fit each cannot be accomplished in one body of work. 
Nonetheless, I have worked to counteract my lack of 
understanding in West Philadelphia classrooms by 
gathering input from tutors, program coordinators, 
Netter staff, and local elementary school faculty.  

Also, throughout this work, I do not refer to Black 
people as African Americans, though I refer to the 
language they often use as African American Vernacular 
English. There are three reasons for this. First, 
many communities have moved away from the term 
“African-American” to describe themselves (Eligon, 
2020). Second, calling the language “Black” English 
is not accurate. Many Black people worldwide speak 
English but do not use AAVE. For example, the Black 
community in the UK does not speak AAVE—calling 
AAVE “Black English” may lead to misunderstandings 
of which communities use this language. Third, the 
scholarly linguistic community has referred to AAVE as 
such, and this phrase is maintained to avoid confusion

The penn reading initiative: a 
local vehicle for change
overview  
The Penn Reading Initiative is a student-run 
organization created by a partnership between the 
University of Pennsylvania’s Netter Center and the 
Penn Linguistics Lab (Netter Center, 2018). Using 
a 1:1 tutoring model, PRI tutors instruct students at 
Comegys and Hamilton Elementary Schools with 
the Reading Road curriculum. Their schools place 
elementary students in the program (Faulstich, 2020). 
This occurs when students fall below the required 
proficiency (Faulstich, 2020). On the tutor end, students 
from Penn apply at the beginning of the year to be 
tutors (Faulstich, 2020). The Reading Road curriculum 
focus on the cultural context of its intended audience—
employing themes aimed at children in under-resourced 
communities (Faulstich, 2020; Netter Center, The 
Reading Road). It has been used with children of 
varying races.  

 
 
 

10



VO L .  5,  I S S U E  1

C O L E M A N  |  O U R  L A N G U A G E

identified areas for 
improvement   
PRI tutors lack a degree of community with West 
Philadelphia students (Bynum, 2020). An important 
facet of effective teaching is building a personal bond 
with students, and, as the PRI assignment is 1:1, that 
relationship is imperative (Georgetown Center for 
New Design in Learning and Scholarship, 2020). 
The students have trouble connecting with the tutors, 
especially within the 1-hour per week time constraint 
(Faulstich, 2020; PRI Evaluation Team, 2020). At 
the beginning of this PSL process, PRI tutors lacked 
the cultural competency required to build these 
relationships with students in West Philadelphia. Penn 
students are generally removed from the Philadelphia 
community—especially areas west of 40th street. This 
divide has historically served as a cultural, resource, and 
communal barrier—preventing the two communities 
from positively interacting with each other (O'Mara, 
2015). This degree of separation yields the infamous 
“Penn Bubble.” Before the collaboratively built solution 
was identified, PRI offered linguistic and basic cultural 
training for tutors, but not enough sustained and 
reflection-based education dissecting race, privilege, 
culture (AAVE), the school-to-prison pipeline, and 
more (PRI Evaluation Team, 2020). The solution and 
problems sections detailed later address these identified 
areas further. 

understanding the problem: 
american classrooms and 
american english   
The problem outlined here has multiple arms—it 
involves understanding AAVE to combat dialectical 
miscomprehension and implementing culturally 
responsive pedagogy to create more effective learning 
opportunities for students. Key stakeholders were 
interviewed to identify a starting point for this work 
and develop it to fit the community's needs (see table 
1). Alongside these interviews, existing research in 

education, sociolinguistics, and urban studies was 
examined to understand the root causes of the problem.

what is african american 
vernacular english?   
AAVE refers to the variety of English used by many 
Black Americans (Rickford, 2003). AAVE is spoken 
and systematically maintains grammatical and phonetic 
distinctions from MAE along with words unique to 
the Black experience (Rickford, 2003). While AAVE 
has been a topic of debate in education and linguistics 
for millions of Black Americans, AAVE has a strong 
cultural significance (Nero & Delpit, 2006). In West 
Philadelphia, a majority-Black neighborhood home 
to hundreds of thousands of Black people, AAVE is a 
staple in daily life. 

Distinctive Features 

The grammar variations between MAE and AAVE 
are not erroneous; classifying them as such fails to 
recognize that deviations from “standard” rules are 
not accidental (Horwitz, Improving Cross-Dialectical 
Comprehension in our Community 2020).   
 
For example, a frequent grammatical discrepancy 
between the two dialects is the function, presence, 
and even absence of the conjugations of the auxiliary 
verb “to be” (Rickford, 2003). The present tense 
conjugations of “to be” are systematically removed 
from phrases in AAVE (e.g., he runnin’ (AAVE) vs. he 
is running (MAE)). However, when referencing what an 
individual habitually does in the present, the auxiliary 
verb is included in its unconjugated form (e.g., he be 
runnin’ (AAVE) vs. he is usually running (MAE)). This 
selective inclusion and omission point to rules accepted 
in the AAVE speech community.   
 
Also, a common structure unique to AAVE is negative 
inversion. A negative inversion involves switching 
the negative quantifier and auxiliary verb (Rickford, 
2003). For example, nobody (negative quantifier) and 

11



12ENGAGE!  |  st u d e n t  vo i c e s

C O L E M A N  |  O U R  L A N G U A G E

Table 1
Key Stakeholders for the Penn Reading Initiative

can’t (negative auxiliary) are inverted to become “can’t 
nobody.” This appears to be a question. Instead, it is 
an emphatic statement meaning no one. This can cause 
confusion between speech communities because these 
constructions mean different things in different linguistic 
contexts.  
 
AAVE also has words specific to the dialect that are 
staples of Black culture and identity. These words, 
largely because of the influence of Black culture, 

frequently transcend racial boundaries (e.g., lit, swag) 
and are appropriated by speakers of MAE. For example, 
AAVE has often been cited as slang from Generation 
Z. This misunderstanding of where the language hails 
causes misuse.   
 
There are many grammatical distinctions between MAE 
and AAVE; this section is small but represents these 
differences. Words in AAVE are frequently omitted, 
conjugated differently, and inverted compared to MAE. 



VO L .  5,  I S S U E  113

C O L E M A N  |  O U R  L A N G U A G E

These phenomena may impede understanding between 
speech communities. 

Cultural Significance 

AAVE is a cultural treasure. Its rules have been passed 
down through generations. When coming to the table—
especially those of us who are not Black or enjoy certain 
privileges—to discuss AAVE in education, there must 
be a recognition of the dialect’s importance.  
 
The language took root with ancestors of the current 
Black population whose origins, much like AAVE, 
cannot be accurately traced (Rickford, 2003). The 
dialect is significant because it is one of few things 
Black communities could maintain throughout 
American history—family, riches, and power often 
erased by racism and colonialism—that connects the 
past and the present. Beyond this historical perspective, 
AAVE is the language in which millions of Americans 
first experience love and joy (Nero & Delpit, 2006). 
AAVE is essential in continuing Black identity because 
it is a fixture of daily, communal life.   

implications of aave and the 
current education system   
Implications in the Classroom 

The American education system frequently conflicts 
with AAVE and culturally responsive teaching—often 
opting to instruct all students in MAE with a neoliberal 
education model (Terry et al., 2015). A neoliberal 
education model refers to policies in schools (like 
standardized testing and homogenous curricula) that 
measure scholarly performance and prioritize learning 
for production in a free market (Terry et al., 2015).  
 
The lack of recognition of AAVE in the classroom poses 
a critical problem in education—a significant additional 
cognitive load for young AAVE speakers taught and 
tested in MAE (Terry et al., 2015). In schools, this 
contributes to the onset of the achievement gap. The 
achievement gap is the rift in success between students 

of color (specifically Black students in this article) and 
white students. This rift can be partially attributed to the 
inaccurate assessment of Black students, as classroom 
instruction is not built for their language (Cook, 2015). 
For example, linguist John Rickford found a racial 
dichotomy when studying California's Palo Alto school 
district. He determined that predominantly white schools 
in Palo Alto could build on students’ skills and talents, 
but predominantly Black schools in the area could 
not (Rickford, 2003). He notes that Black students in 
this region did steadily worse from 3rd grade to 6th 
grade. His analysis points to an issue of literacy that 
disproportionately afflicts Black students.   
 
Though it is beyond the scope of this article, it is 
worth noting the connection between the achievement 
gap and the school-to-prison pipeline—both having 
disproportionate effects on Black students. Without 
culturally responsive teaching and lessons reflecting 
the language they know, many Black students have 
their achievement trajectory set for them (Cook, 2015). 
Their “underperformance” is often criminalized by 
schools whose overall performance increases with the 
removal of underachieving students (ACLU, 2020). The 
classroom implications for students who only speak 
AAVE in the current education system are, at best, a 
cognitive overload or, at worst, juvenile criminalization 
of “underperformance.”  
 
Implications in American Society 

Neoliberal reforms—by negating the importance of 
context and culture—detract from the empowered 
learning that culturally responsive pedagogy supports 
(Sleeter, 2012). This has dire consequences in the 
classroom for students of color and reinforces outdated 
notions of racial superiority in broader American 
society. Because students, regardless of their culture and 
identity, are taught similarly with the same curriculum, 
students whose identities are not adequately represented 
disproportionately fall behind while their culture is 
systemically erased from education (Cook, 2015).



The societal implications for people in the American 
education system who speak only AAVE can be 
devastating. Because neoliberal reforms frame education 
as a practice that builds workers, those who are 
viewed as underperforming are also considered unfit 
to participate effectively in an economic environment 
(Sleeter, 2011). Those at the intersection of Blackness 
and “deficiency” are funneled into the criminal justice 
system through zero-tolerance policies and increased 
policing of schools. Victimized students face reduced 
high school graduation, college attendance, and 
recidivism rates.

the present condition: 
arriving at the problem   
Having detailed what AAVE is along with its 
implications in American education, the problem can be 
adequately articulated. In schools, many Black students 
experience a significant, additional cognitive load at the 
beginning of their educational career (Terry et al., 2015). 
This cognitive load transcends disciplinary boundaries, 
and without specific support to counteract this burden, 
many students are placed on an educational trajectory 
below their white peers (Terry et al., 2015). Lacking 
support, Black students are often pushed out of schools 
and into the criminal justice system (ACLU, 2020). 
Criminalization jeopardizes employment and education 
prospects. Many who stay in the education system do 
not have these gaps corrected, so they may leave the 
system unprepared (Cook, 2015). This is a prevalent 
problem in American society that cannot be surmounted 
in a single article. Rather, this article chronicles a 
community-centered attack on this vicious cycle.  
 
The root problem this article faces is a lack of 
culturally responsive quality education, which, 
because of institutional constraints, cannot easily be 
circumnavigated by teachers under budget and structural 
pressures. Using PRI as a vehicle for change, the Penn 
community can better work with teachers as they 
traverse this treacherous educational terrain. In attacking 

the problem of illiteracy, West Philadelphia and Penn 
(through the Netter Center) come together to attack 
the achievement gap, the school-to-prison pipeline, 
and cyclical poverty (Charity Hudley et al., 2019). We 
address this problem because, after community input, 
it appears to break down educational stereotypes and 
racist frameworks in two of the Netter Center’s partner 
schools, Hamilton and Comegys Elementary Schools. 

the solution: learn, practice, 
reflect    
The identified solution—built alongside stakeholders, 
Netter staff, and PRI—is to implement sustained 
tutor education modules focusing on responsiveness 
and reflection. The first training module focuses 
on understanding culturally responsive teaching, 
privilege, and oppression. These are topics identified 
by stakeholders to be of utmost importance (Abbott, 
2020). Following this first training, modules occur as 
part of the PRI’s biweekly board meetings. Each module 
has a reflection component where the tutors reflect on 
their experiences through the lens of the last module 
and connect it to the current module. Based on feedback 
from faculty at Netter partner schools, these modules 
will be made available to teachers of our tutees, so they 
know what we are discussing and can offer input as 
learning continues.   

how should we train our 
tutors?    
How to Be a Good Educator: An Understanding of 
Critical Culturally Responsive Pedagogy  
 
Theorists of pedagogy, politics, and punishment often 
overlap in education. Paolo Freire, in Pedagogy of 
the Oppressed, poses a question that guides this PSL: 
“how can the oppressed, as divided, unauthentic 
beings, participate in developing the pedagogy of their 
liberation” (Freire, 1968)? How can PRI facilitate the 

14ENGAGE!  |  st u d e n t  vo i c e s

C O L E M A N  |  O U R  L A N G U A G E



VO L .  5,  I S S U E  1

destruction of debilitating structures locally? Freire’s 
solution is to have the subjugated perceive the reality 
of their oppression not as inescapable but as a limiting 
situation they can transform (Freire, 1968). PRI must 
thus reaffirm tutees’ culture to counteract the notion 
that their identities are deficient. To do this, tutors must 
understand this goal, educational power dynamics, 
educator efficacy, critical reflection, critical pedagogy, 
race relations, and so much more—an effective way 
to foster these understandings is to have a sustained 
method of learning, practicing, and reflecting (Freire, 
1968).  

 
These education modules must emphasize self-care 
and self-awareness. Michel Foucault posits we cannot 
care for ourselves without knowledge of ourselves 
(Foucault et al., 1987). If the health and awareness of 
our educators are essential to effective education, as 
research has demonstrated it is, and care for oneself is 
knowledge of oneself, a process of critical reflection 
must take place (Nero & Delpit, 2006). Thus, the 
general outline for the education that must occur takes 
form, as the graphic below demonstrates (see figure 
1). One, learn— understand the concepts we must be 
aware of as we engage in education. Two, practice—
implement the lessons into interactions with tutees. 
Three, reflect—self-evaluate, and self-advocate as a 
self-care practice to enrich tutee interactions and foster a 
better understanding of the self. 

What must we know and do to be culturally 
responsive? 
As culturally responsive teaching relies on engaging 
with students' culture, language, and community to 
support their identities, tutors must be knowledgeable 
of their students. This involves a sustained practice of 
critical reflection, which pushes educators to confront 
their personal biases (Richards et al., 2007). With these 
biases and perceptions under review, tutors are more 
effective in our student interactions. Maintaining focus 

on reflection, work must also be done on understanding 
students' culture. Knowing students’ identities and 
interests fosters trust in relationships but foraying 
further into actively experiencing their community to 
bring it into learning effectively is necessary (Sleeter, 
2011). Thus, communal interaction is imperative: bring 
speakers in from the schools, bring tutees to Penn, and 
practice community enrichment programs on-site as 
often as possible.  

15

C O L E M A N  |  O U R  L A N G U A G E

Figure 1 Workshop learning process

  As culturally responsive 
teaching relies on engaging 

with students' culture, language, 
and community to support their iden-

tities, tutors must be knowledgeable of 
their students. This involves a sustained 

practice of critical reflection, which pushes 
educators to confront their personal bias-
es (Richards et al., 2007).



ENGAGE!  |  st u d e n t  vo i c e s 16

C O L E M A N  |  O U R  L A N G U A G E

As discussed earlier, AAVE has an intense cultural 
significance in the Black community (Nero & Delpit, 
2006). Communicating that AAVE is not “wrong” 
is fundamental. Doing so demonstrates that tutors 
appreciate the people who speak it (Woo & Curtis, 
1996). Nonetheless, it must be simultaneously 
recognized that not teaching students “standard” 
English may inevitably hamper their prospects given 
current societal norms (Nero & Delpit, 2006; Abbott, 
2020; Rogers, 2020).  
 
A principal problem at play in this problem-
solving learning research is that of dialectical 
miscomprehension. AAVE speakers in classrooms 
prioritizing MAE exist in quasi-foreign language 
situations (Horwitz, Improving Cross-Dialectical 
Comprehension in our Community 2020). Though 
current Penn students are not responsible for this, there 
is potential to exacerbate these challenges (Horwitz, 
Interview 2020). PRI’s goal is to enhance reading 
skills in West Philadelphia students, so tutors must 
consciously understand what students are saying, 
reaffirm their sociolinguistic identity, and demonstrate, 
through the curriculum and their support, what MAE 
sounds like.  
 
The most important takeaways from this subsection 
are the significance of understanding the tutor’s role 
in the communities we work in, the language of these 
communities, and the culture with which they identify. 
When these identities ate recognized as assets and 
tapped into, we create an optimal environment for 
learning (Educators Team at Understood, 2020).

the new training     
PRI has three different groups: coordinators, tutors, 
and tutees. The coordinators' responsibilities include 
recruitment, organization, training, and evaluation 
(Bynum, 2020; Faulstich, 2020). The tutors' main 
responsibility is teaching the tutees (Bynum, 2020). 
The tutees’ responsibility is to learn, but the interaction 
between the tutees and the tutors is intended to be 
mutually transformative. I have visually detailed this 
organizational model below in figure 2. 
  

Figure 2. Organizational model for the Penn Reading 
Initiative

The current training methods, as evidenced by the 
information gathered in this article, have not been 
able to achieve the desired goal of the PRI: to improve 
reading skills in West Philadelphia Schools (Faulstich, 
2020; Netter Center). This could result from the 
training’s lack of focus on critical reflection, cultural 
responsiveness, privilege, and systemic racism. Based 
on conversations with stakeholders, generating training 
is laborious. As such, a new position at PRI has been 
added to focus solely on tutor education. The new 
trainer position takes over the responsibility of educating 
tutors (see figure 3). 

 



C O L E M A N  |  O U R  L A N G U A G E

VO L .  5,  I S S U E  117

Figure 3. New organization structure for the Penn 
Reading Initiative 

Structure of the Training Modules 

The training modules have a structure designed to push 
PRI tutors to learn the module discussed, practice that 
learning in their interactions with tutees, and critically 
reflect on that informed interaction individually and 
during the proceeding training module. The figure below 
demonstrates the outline and structure of the modules 
(see figure 4). 
 
The learning component of this training starts with 
each module. After the workshops are complete, the 
learning component does not stop. Instead, tutors 
carry what they learn into their interactions with their 

students. In this engagement, the tutors learn how the 
concepts alter or reinforce their relationships with their 
students. As part of the reflections they complete under 
the current PRI structure, they also discuss how this 
learning affected their teaching experience (Bynum, 
2020). At the following training module, group and 
individual reflections on the past weeks clearly focus 
on how that experience relates to the current training: 
how do we connect these models? Why is it necessary to 
connect them? How do they influence one another? This 
structure makes learning adaptive and continuous; new 
dimensions to our understanding are added, and their 
places within the communal context are reflected upon.  
 
Another integral facet of this training is practice. 
Practicing learned topics must be emphasized to be 
successful in culturally responsive pedagogy. The 
practice portion is facilitated by the presentation of 
skills for implementation in each module—offering 
tips for adjusting teaching styles based on the module 
that has just been presented. It also includes small 
portions of discussion and example scenarios to model 
what informed practices look like and how to tailor 
interactions to mirror content. The practice portions of 
training occur during work with students in tutoring 
sessions.   
 
The last aspect of the program is reflection. Reflection 
pushes tutors to review behavior, beliefs, and biases—
interrogating negative stereotypes or untruths about the 
community. The reflection component provides time 

Figure 4 New workshop learning process

ENGAGE!  |  st u d e n t  vo i c e s 



ENGAGE!  |  st u d e n t  vo i c e s 18

C O L E M A N  |  O U R  L A N G U A G E 

for this evaluation and encourages critical discussion 
through a system of sustained activities that occur 
before, during, and after the training modules. To do 
this, the trainer identifies the desired outcomes, designs 
reflection activities that support those outcomes, 
engages in sustained reflection, and has systems to 
assess learning and implementation (Critical Reflection, 
2012). 
 
Implementation  

At the first biweekly board meeting of each academic 
year, the trainer presents a module on the most important 
facets of the work tutors are doing: AAVE, culturally 
responsive teaching, critical reflection, the philosophy 
behind the training, and strategies for implementation 
in tutor/tutee interactions. After this first meeting, the 
first interactions between tutors and tutees occur. At the 
second meeting, the trainer presents new content on 
oppression and privilege to analyze power dynamics that 
may strain educational relationships. At the end of the 
module, tutors are prompted with a series of questions 
that urge them to reflect on their most recent interactions 
with students and the last training module from the 
prior meeting through the lens of the current module. 
This is to foster an interconnectedness between all the 
modules. The structure for the second meeting is the 
general structure that continues throughout the academic 
year. As new modules requiring expertise or communal 
knowledge are created, speakers from Netter, the partner 
schools, and the community are included.  
 
The most important part of these sessions is that they are 
designed to be changed. Because cultures, communities, 
identities, and the needs of our students and teacher 
partners in West Philadelphia change, having a static set 
of training modules is almost counterproductive. The 
modules are under review based on evaluation from the 
trainer, PRI tutors, coordinators, Netter staff, and faculty 
in UACS schools. 

conclusion and reflection     
AAVE is a cultural artifact that holds significance for 
many Black Americans. When young Black students 
enter the classroom, many speak a language not 
reflected in their education. Many of these pupils are 
instructed in a language they do not understand and are 
expected to succeed in an education system that does not 
care for their cultural identity. Attempts to navigate this 
dialectical miscomprehension in the public education 
system have had limited success. The solution this 
article discusses is a sustained, culturally responsive 
tutor education program that attempts to increase 
literacy in West Philadelphia by preparing Penn students 
to engage effectively with a different community.  
 
The overarching goal is to use the human resources of 
Penn to assist in the navigation of institutional barriers 
which make culturally responsive education a logistical 
challenge. This problem-solving learning article is one 
piece of a larger culturally responsive puzzle, one that 
Penn, the Netter Center, and the country must work 
harder to assemble.  
 

The foundational writing of this research occurred more 
than two years ago, during the summer of 2020. That 
summer, when COVID-19 and protests against racial 
injustice dominated global headlines, this project was 

taken on to support early literacy in West Philadelphia. 

Black students enter the 
classroom, many speak a lan-

guage not reflected in their educa-
tion. Many of these pupils are instruct-

ed in a language they do not understand 
and are expected to succeed in an educa-
tion system that does not care for their cul-
tural identity.



C O L E M A N  |  O U R  L A N G U A G E

VO L .  5,  I S S U E  119

This PSL process continued after this summer with 
establishing of the director of tutor education position at 
PRI. I held this position for two years until I graduated 
in May 2022. With a team of Netter staff, modules (on 
linguistic identity, privilege, trauma-informed education, 
etc.) were built and presented to PRI’s tutors.  
 
The inaugural year of this program had difficulties—
with scheduling, content creation, and COVID—but it 
culminated in creating of the professional development 
associates team at the Netter Center. As one of the 
founding members, I, along with four remarkable peers, 
centered community voices to expand reflection and 
development modules to all 23 Netter Center UACS 
programs—not just PRI. Each associate tailored 
modules to fit a specific subject. For example, modules 
to support the linguistic identities of students were built 
for programs like PRI, while modules on unconscious 
bias in STEM were facilitated for programs with 
STEM-based goals. Each of these modules had a goal of 
centering communal voices.  
 
The second and final year of my direct work on this 
project allowed me to serve as another inaugural 
member of a new team at Netter: The Anti-Racism 
Working Group. This group’s mission is to “advance 
the Center’s efforts to further develop approaches, 
strategies, and actions to actively combat and ultimately 
eradicate racism in all its forms” (Anti-Racism Working 
Group, 2021). Alongside six of Netter’s full-time staff 
and community leaders, I co-convened this working 
group—comprised of dozens of West Philadelphia 
and Penn stakeholders. My specific focus with this 
group was to co-lead the safe spaces subcommittee. 
The goal of this committee is to create events for staff, 
K12 students and parents, and partners. These events 
would be safe spaces for discussion, professional 
development opportunities for staff and Penn students, 
and opportunities to share anti-racism and social justice 
ideas. Safe spaces are created with the safe-spaces 
toolkit (a product of this subcommittee), outlining 
procedures and practices to foster comfortable 

engagement that allows for positive growth. The work 
of this subcommittee also culminated in the Netter 
Center’s first annual community block party, where 
individuals from Penn and West Philadelphia came 
together to learn about, experience joy with, and engage 
with each other.  
 
After graduating, I left Netter and the University of 
Pennsylvania. Nonetheless, the solution generated by the 
community lives on through new programs established 
and new students eager to create a more just society. The 
work of PRI (and its new director of tutor education), 
the PD Associates, and the Anti-Racism Work Group 
continues with goals to counteract racism around West 
Philadelphia to better support a community that has 
been marginalized for decades. 



References

Abbott, J. (2020, July 11). Inter-
view with Joyce Abbott. personal.  

ACLU. (2020). School-to-Prison 
Pipeline. Retrieved July 2020, 
from https://www.aclu.org/is-
sues/juvenile-justice/school-pris-
on-pipeline   

 
Anti-Racism Working Group. 
(2021, June 18). Anti-Racism 
Working Group Mission. About the 
Center. Retrieved September 29, 
2022, from https://www.netter-
center.upenn.edu/about-center/
anti-racism-working-group   

 
Bynum, R. (2020, July 21). Inter-
view with Regina Bynum. per-
sonal.   

Charity Hudley, A. H., Mallinson, 
C., Bucholtz, M., Flores, N., Hol-
liday, N., Chun, E., Spears, A., & 
Leonard, W. Y. (2019, May). Lin-
guistic Society of America State-
ment on Race. Linguistic Society 
of America. Retrieved July 2020, 
from https://www.linguisticsoci-
ety.org/content/lsa-statement-
race   

 
Educators Team at Understood. 
(2020, February 14). Culturally 
Responsive Teaching: What You 
Need to Know. Culturally Respon-
sive Teaching: A Guide. Retrieved 
July 31, 2020, from https://www.
understood.org/en/school-learn-
ing/for-educators/universal-de-
sign-for-learning/what-is-cultural-
ly-responsive-teaching   

 
Eligon, J. (2020, June 26). A 
debate over identity and race 
asks, are African-Americans 
'black' or 'black'? The New York 
Times. Retrieved January 17, 
2023, from https://www.nytimes.
com/2020/06/26/us/black-afri-
can-american-style-debate.html   

 

Faulstich, A. (2020, July 6). In-
terview with Andrew Faulstich. 
personal. 

 
Foucault, M., Fornet-Betancourt, 
R., Becker, H., Gomez-Müller, A., & 
Gauthier, J. D. (1987). The Ethic of 
Care for the Self as a Practice of 
Freedom: An Interview with Mi-
chel Foucault. Philosophy & Social 
Criticism, 12(2), 112–131. https://
doi.org/10.1177/0191453787012
00202   

 
Freire, P. (1968). Pedagogy of the 
Oppressed. Bloomsbury Aca-
demic.  

 
Georgetown University Center 
for New Designs in Learning and 
Scholarship. (2020). Top Qualities 
of an Effective Teacher. CNDLS. 
Retrieved July 30, 2020, from 
https://cndls.georgetown.edu/at-
program/twl/effective-teacher/   

 
Harkavy, I., Simmonds, T., & 
Moyse, N. (2020). Seminar 08. 
URBS 208. Philadelphia.  

 
Horwitz, S. (2020, July 2). Inter-
view with Sara Horwitz. personal

 
Horwitz, S. (2020). Improving 
Cross-Dialectal Comprehension in 
Our Community (thesis).   

Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But 
That’s Just Good Teaching! The 
Case for Culturally Relevant Peda-
gogy. Theory Into Practice.   

Nero, S. J., & Delpit, L. (2006). 
What should teachers do? Ebon-
ics and culturally responsive edu-
cation. In Dialects, Englishes, Cre-
oles, and education (pp. 93–100). 
essay, Lawrence Erlbaum.  

 

Netter Center for Community 
Partnerships. (2019, June 24). 
Our Mission. Retrieved July 2020, 
from https://www.nettercenter.
upenn.edu/about-center/our-mis-
sion   

 
Netter Center for Community 
Partnerships. (2018, August 
9). Penn Reading Initiative. Re-
trieved June 2020, from https://
www.nettercenter.upenn.edu/
what-we-do/programs/universi-
ty-assisted-community-schools/
penn-reading-initiative   

 
O'Mara, M. P. (2015). Building 
"Brainsville": The University of 
Pennsylvania and Philadelphia. 
In Cities of Knowledge: Cold War 
Science and the Search for the 
Next Silicon Valley (pp. 142–181). 
essay, Princeton Univ. Press. 

 
Richards, H. V., Brown, A. F., & 
Forde, T. B. (2007). Addressing 
Diversity in Schools: Culturally 
Responsive Pedagogy. Teaching 
Exceptional Children, 39(3), 
64–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/0
04005990703900310    

Rickford, J. (1996, December). Eb-
onics Notes and Discussion. Re-
trieved July 1, 2020, from https://
web.stanford.edu/~rickford/eb-
onics/EbonicsExamples.html   

 
Rickford, J. (2003). Using the 
Vernacular to Teach the Standard. 
Retrieved July 14, 2020, from 
https://web.stanford.edu/~rick-
ford/papers/VernacularToTeach-
Standard.html   

 
Rickford, J. R. (2003). What is Eb-
onics (African American English)? 
Retrieved July 1, 2020, from 
https://www.linguisticsociety.
org/content/what-ebonics-afri-
can-american-english   

Rogers, B. (2020, July 22). Inter-
view with Brian Rogers. personal

 
Sleeter, C. E. (2011). An Agenda to 
Strengthen Culturally Responsive 
Pedagogy. English Teaching: Prac-
tice and Critique, 10(2), 7–23. Re-
trieved July 2020, from http://ed-
ucation.waikato.ac.nz/research/
files/etpc/files/2011v10n2art1.
pdf.   

 
Sleeter, C. E. (2012). Con-
fronting the Marginalization 
of Culturally Responsive 
Pedagogy. Urban Education, 
47(3), 562–584. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0042085911431472  

 
Terry, J. M., Hendrick, R., Evange-
lou, E., & Smith, R. L. (2015). Dia-
lect Switching and Mathematical 
Reasoning Tests Implications for 
Early Educational Achievement. 
In The Oxford Handbook of Af-
rican American Language (pp. 
637–658). essay, Oxford Univer-
sity Press.   

Woo, E., & Curtis, M. (1996, De-
cember 20). Oakland School 
District Recognizes Black English. 
Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 
July 14, 2020, from https://www.
latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-
1996-12-20-mn-11042-story.html   

20ENGAGE!  |  st u d e n t  vo i c e s

C O L E M A N  |  O U R  L A N G U A G E




