A CASE FOR RAP MUSIC PEDAGOGY IN COMPOSITION By VICTORIA L. BATTEN Bachelor of Arts in English Columbus State University Columbus, Georgia 1990 Master of Arts in English Austin Peay State University Clarksville, Tennessee 1994 Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate College of the Oklahoma State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY May, 2010 A CASE FOR RAP MUSIC PEDAGOGY IN COMPOSITION Dissertation Approved: Dr. Richard P. Batteiger Dissertation Adviser Dr. Gene Halleck Dr. Ron Brooks Dr. Gary Duhon Dr. A. Gordon Emslie Dean of the Graduate College ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This dissertation is dedicated to my loving sister, Theresa. Theresa uses Standard American English (SAE) as the base for her phonological and morphological representations of ―[g] plus reduplication‖ words; I use Hawaii Creole English (HCE). These bases and representations are significant because they are linked to our identities. As a realtor, Theresa identifies with SAE; as a Ph.D. student of English, I identify with HCE. Yet we both identify with ―[g] plus reduplication.‖ Even though my sister and I understand each other‘s different oral representations of ―[g] plus reduplication,‖ she offers her own explanation as to why her variety is more appropriate than my variety— she is high class and I am low class. Our debate seems a never-ending issue much like Students‘ right to their own language (SRTOL). Because of students‘ diverse linguistic experiences in and out of school, because of issues regarding diversity in academia, language use, class, race, and identity become critical issues, issues taken up in A case for rap music pedagogy in composition. I appreciate the many faculty members in the Department of English at Oklahoma State University for helping me to make complete sense of the interdisciplinary facets of this dissertation. First, I want to acknowledge and thank my Ph.D. adviser and committee chair, Dr. Richard P. Batteiger, who guided me in my endeavor to complete this dissertation. As a language scholar, he showed great patience and understanding of the issues I grappled with while having to learn the features of HCE and the G code. I iii want to acknowledge and thank Dr. Carol Moder, Head of the Department of English, for meeting with me on various linguistic aspects of this dissertation‘s Literacy narrative and for helping me rediscovered my linguistic and cultural identity. I am grateful to Dr. Gene Halleck for encouraging my scholarship on rap music in a TESL methods course. My interest in rap music began there. I want to extend a thank you to Dr. Ron Brooks for providing the thought-provoking assignment which assisted in my finding common ground with ―ontological constructionism,‖ the notion that ―There are no languages‖ and that language use is performative and tied to identity (LePage and Tabouret-Keller, 1985, as cited in Pennycook, 2007, p. 110; LePage and Tabouret-Keller, p. 14). My interest into the behaviors of language use is indebted to Dr. Gary Duhon, whose learning theories course raised my interest into how people, animals, and things behave. Moreover, I thank Dr. Ravi Sheorey for training me in the process of getting IRB approval for research involving participants. I want to show gratitude to Dr. Garzon for encouraging me to put ―[g] plus reduplication‖ into writing. I did so using HCE as the base because like the G code, HCE is my linguistic behavior and identity. I appreciate Professor Stephen Locy for helping me acquire the very important newspaper articles that substantiated my linguistic claim to acquisition and proficiency in a ―[g] plus reduplication.‖ I also appreciate Dr. Richard Frohock for checking the accuracy of my translation of a text written in German. I want to thank my colleague, Jason Roberts, for providing insightful comments on my Literature review. I thank all of them for helping me to find answers, to struggle and to grapple with theories, debates, models, pedagogies, and practices that related to or informed this dissertation. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. LITERACY NARRATIVE...……………………………………………… 1 1.1 Educational and Academic Experiences: An Overview…... 1 1.2 The Semiotic Nature of Codes…………………………….. 30 1.3 Diachronic and Synchronic Aspects of the G Code……….. 31 1.4 Identity Formation, HCE, and the G Code ………………... 39 1.5 Language Loyalty, HCE, and the G Code ………………… 41 1.6 Conclusion…………………………………………………. 43 II. LITERATURE REVIEW………………………………………………….. 47 2.1 Vernacular Pedagogy: The Impetus……………………….. 47 2.2 Calls for Rap Music Pedagogy: An Introduction………….. 57 2.2.1 The Literary Approach to Rap Music Pedagogy…... 63 2.2.2 The Critical Approach to Rap Music Pedagogy…… 77 2.2.3 The Social Approach to Rap Music Pedagogy…….. 93 2.3 Conclusion…………………………………………………. 96 III. THE NATURE OF RAP MUSIC TEXTS……………….………………... 102 3.1 Introduction………………………………………………... 102 3.2 The Nature and Complexity of Texts………………………104 3.3 The Nature and Complexity of Rap Music Texts…………. 107 3.4 Rap Music Texts and The Black Oral Tradition…………... 110 3.5 Rap Music Texts and The Literate Tradition……………… 113 3.6 Conclusion………………………………………………… 116 IV. METHODOLOGY………………………………………………………... 121 4.1 Introduction………………………………………………... 121 4.2 Research Method………………………………………….. 122 4.3 Research Instrument………………………………………. 123 4.4 Participants………………………………………………… 124 4.5 Selection Process………………………………………….. 124 4.6 Data Collection Plan, Recording, and Transcription……… 125 v 4.7 Analysis and Coding of Data……………………… ……... 128 4.8 Research Questions and Design…………………………… 129 4.9 Conclusion………………………………………………… 130 V. FINDINGS………………………………………………………………... 132 5.1 ―Pre-Categorized Measures‖..……………………………… 132 5.1.1 Rap as Narrative……………………………………. 133 5.1.2 Rap as Poetry………………………………………. 136 5.1.3 Rap as Audience…………………………………… 138 5.1.4 Rap as Drama……………………………………… 141 5.1.5 Rap as Style.……………………………………….. 143 5.2 Emergent Categories……………………………………….. 147 5.2.1 Rap as Sustenance………………………………….. 148 5.2.2 Rap as Survival…………………………………….. 150 5.2.3 Rap as Motivation………………………………….. 152 5.2.4 Rap as Interaction………………………………….. 155 5.2.4.1 Rhetorical Aspects………………………… 158 5.2.4.2 Linguistic Aspects…………………………. 160 5.2.5 Rap as Advocacy……………………………………168 5.3 Conclusion…………………………………………………..172 VI. CONCLUSION…………………………………………………………….. 173 6.1 Dissertation Summary……………………………………… 173 6.2 Implications…………………………………………………177 6.3 Limitations…………………………………………………. 180 6.4 Future Research……………………………………………. 182 REFERENCES.……………………………………………………………………..185 APPENDICES: A-F.………………………………………………………………. 214 Appendix A: The G Code: ―[g] plus reduplication‖……………………... 215 Appendix B: Rap Music Lesson Plan…………………………………… 219 Appendix C: SISURP Inventory…………………………………………. 220 Appendix D: Informed Consent Script……………………………………221 Appendix E: Interview Script……………………………………………..223 Appendix F: IRB Approval……………………………………………….224 vi LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 Camps in Rap Music Pedagogy .......................................................................62 2 The Mixed Approach to a Rap Music Pedagogy .............................................63 3 Scherpf‘s (2001) First Academic Discourse on Rap ........................................84 4 Scherpf‘s (2001) Second Academic Discourse on Rap ...................................86 5 The Three ―Oral-Formulaic Composition Theories‖... ..................................108 6 Back then on the ―Freytag Pyramid‖….……………………………………114 7 Back then in Essay Format ................................................................………115 8 ―Pre-Categorized Measures‖ of Rap Music ...................................................133 9 Emergent Social Categories of Rap Music ....................................................147 vii CHAPTER I LITERACY NARRATIVE 1.1 Educational and Academic Experiences: An Overview In this Literacy narrative, I tell a story about my experiences with learning AE in public educational institutions in Hawaii and in other U.S. states in order to ―complicate dominant narratives of literacy and race‖ (Young, 2004, p. 12) and to show that some American students have personal and private meanings for AE. According Eldred and Mortensen (1992), a ―literacy narrative constructs a character‘s ongoing, social process of language acquisition‖ (p. 512). For me, AE meant Standard English, someone else‘s ideology. Trudgill (1999) defined SE: ―Standard English, whatever it is, is less than a language, since it is only one variety of English among many. Standard English may be the most important variety of English, in all sorts of ways: it is the variety normally used in writing, especially printing; it is the variety associated with the education system in all the English-speaking countries of the world, and therefore the variety spoken by those who are often referred to as ‗educated people‘; and it is the variety taught to non-native learners.‖ (p. 118) For Baugh and Welborn (2009), ―Without a doubt, the concept of Standard English is a useful one, especially in the realm of education‖ because ―even this ‗standard‘ comprises a range of dialects‖ (pp. 43-44). Research by Wolfram, Adger, and Christian (1999) 1 believed that speakers have ―a shared understanding among members of a speech community of what the ‗standard‘ dialect is for their group. Often that dialect is closely associated with educated people and economic power‖ (pp. 16-17, p. 19, pp. 30-31; Wolfram, Adger, & Christian, as cited in Baugh & Welborn, 2009, p. 44). They believed that ―Standard English is a collection of the socially