Ways of teaching cultural competency to jurors A critical reflection on cultural assumptions is necessary in forming a culturally responsive learning strategy. From this perspective, jurors are taught to reflect on cultural assumptions that lead to stereotyping and widely accepted misconceptions. Culturally-responsive teaching is critical in instilling self-awareness among the jurors. In this regard, jurors are able to identify any cause of cultural misunderstanding. Consequently, a sense of respect and acceptance of cultural diversity is achieved among the jurors. Culturally-responsive teaching activity such as diverse instructional groups is essential in eliminating individual differences (Sleeter, 2013). An inter-cultural communication method is another important aspect of culturally competent teaching. This method acknowledges that each juror has a unique cultural value. This can be evidenced from the diversity of traditions, norms and learning behaviors. From this perspective, mutual respect among jurors is achieved amicably. A teaching methodology that positions the learner as the subject of learning is an effective teaching component. In this context, jurors are perceived to be the learning subjects. From this perspective, jurors’ compassion, integrity and respect of others is accommodated and influenced to meet required standards. The effective means to influencing a learner are through accommodative strategies such as extra learning lessons or verbal discussions between teacher and learner. Active listening is also an important teaching competent for culturally competent instructors. This strategy is effective for critical reflection among jurors who speak different languages. Intentionally structured environments are essential in harnessing perspective-taking behaviors among the jurors. This strategy involves the formation of intentional group of students from diverse racial backgrounds with an intention of accruing positive beliefs and values form each other. In this regard, an effective culturally competent teaching for jurors embraces the need to understanding other peoples’ worldview and personal beliefs. Ways that could have broken the barrier between Juror B37 and Rachel Jeantel The barriers between Juror B37 and Rachel Jeantel were evident during George Zimmerman trial (Lawrence-Brown & Sapon-Shevin, 2013). Cultural competency in Juror B37 would have been significant in understanding the awareness of cultural worldview of two opposing racial backgrounds. Juror B37 is a white female while Rachel Jeantel is a black woman from an African-American neighborhood. Apparently, Juror B37 personal view on Rachel Jeantel is that she is not an adequate witness. Perhaps her perception is shaped by the fact that most African-Americans are inadequately educated. Moreover, Juror B37 opinion is shaped by historical stereotyping of black people who visit white-dominated neighborhoods. Black people are perceived as thugs, especially if they do not reside or visit such neighborhoods regularly. On the other hand, Rachel Jeantel does not agree with the juror’s description of a thug. This controversy raises the concern of cultural competency among jurors. From the George Zimmerman’s case, cultural competency in Juror B37 would have been integ