Redefining Correctness in Writing Assessments: A Delphi Study on Culturally Responsive Scoring

Purpose: Traditional writing assessments in United States (U.S.) schools often privilege General American English (GAE) as the norm, systematically disadvantaging students who use nonmainstream American English (NMAE) varieties, including African American English (AAE). This study aimed to develop consensus on which AAE features should be considered acceptable within writing assessments, and which may indicate a need for further language support. It also examined appropriate scoring decisions and instructional approaches for each feature. Method: Using a three-round Delphi method, a diverse panel of educators, speech-language pathologists, researchers, and community members evaluated 48 AAE features in writing. Panelists rated each feature along dimensions of classification, scoring decisions, and instructional recommendations. Results: Panelists reached high consensus on classification for 75% of features: 54.2% categorized as language variation, 35.4% as overlap, and only one feature as a potential indicator of language disorder. However, only 39.6% of features reached high agreement for scoring decisions. Code-switching was the most frequently recommended instructional approach, endorsed for 72.9% of features regardless of classification or scoring category. Conclusions: Findings revealed tension between recognizing AAE features as rule-governed variation and determining how they should be scored, especially when overlap with language disorders was perceived. The strong endorsement of code-switching as an instructional approach suggests a shared commitment to honoring students’ language practices. Results can inform more culturally responsive scoring frameworks that support both equity and development. Keywords: dialect, African American English, writing, assessment, child language, Delphi method