Teachers should learn how to speak in Ebonics if teaching in a community where it is prevalent.

"However, the concept that counter-cultures and the divisions they create should not be brought into accordance with mainstream society, especially in situations of education and business does not make sense whatsoever."This was never stated. This debate is about whether or not teachers should be taught Ebonics so that they could incorporate it in pedagogical instructions. Indeed, AAVE-users should learn Standard English in order to do well in society. My argument is, though, that instruction of Standard English should incorporate AAVE, so that the students would be able to understand Standard English through the lens of their native language/dialect, AAVE. "He speaks on the evolution of the romance languages from the Vulgar Latin dominate within the Roman Empire, this not only does not contribute to the case of supporting Ebonics, it also further proves the ability of one language to dominate others (a concept that pro states is blatantly false)."Straw Man Argument. It was never stated that a language cannot be dominant in a society. "However, I would argue that it is not only a political and far superior base of speakers that makes languages dominant over another, but it is also the capabilities of the language."Again, a language is not static; as a culture feels that the incorporation of new words would be advantageous, the culture develops its language to include them. This is the evolution of a language from a sociocultural perspective. As an aside, the opponent is drifting away from the resolution; this is not about whether or not AAVE is superior or not. Rather, this is about whether it should be incorporated in the education system as a means of instruction. Whether or not it is a "lesser language", which the opponent believes (and I have rejected), the fact of the matter is that people within communities do speak it. And in order to more effectively teach these students Standard English, as well as other subjects, it would be beneficial to incorporate AAVE into the curricula of institutions in such communities. This is not about hypothetical "superiority," as the opponent seems to interpret it, but rather a matter of pragmatism."As pro does not offer any contribution that Ebonics has given society I will list a few: [blah blah blah]"These are silly mainstream examples that are irrelevant to AAVE in their natural cultural context. But whether or not AAVE contributed to society or not (and I would argue that no language inherently contributes anything), it is a predominant language in some communities. Hence, it would be in the best interest of students from these communities and educational facilities (who seek strong results from their student bodies) to incorporate AAVE in their didactic curricula. "I would argue that Ebonics could not clearly define nor teach any of these concepts, it is a restrictive limited dialect that is inadequate when compared to languages that have reached what society could label as mature, as these mature languages can communicate deeper meanings and thought processes."AAVE cannot explain certain concepts in other languages for the same reason that English cannot explain concepts in other languages (including AAVE.) And this does not attack the resolution. Teachers could use a combination of Ebonics and English to get points across (if Ebonics does not seem suitable to describe a certain concept); this would still involve the incorporation of Ebonics. ---The opponent seems to be dodging the point of the resolution. Whether or not AAVE is an acceptable or unacceptable language in the eyes of the opponent, the fact of the matter is that people in certain urban communities and areas in the South use AAVE as their native language. In order to assimilate them into our education system, we should use their native language/dialect AAVE to convey ideas to them and to teach them Standard English and other subjects. To teach Russian people English, ESL instructors explain concepts of the English language in Russian; in the same way, English (along with other subjects) should be explained through the lens of AAVE to AAVE-speaking students in order to more effectively get information across to them. In conclusion, it would be pedagogically sound to implement AAVE in the academic curricula of academic institutions in communities where AAVE is prevalent. The opponent has provided arguments that are not germane to the resolution, and those that were were effectively refuted. Many thanks to the opponent and readers/voters.