Teaching Showcase Presentation Script
Topic: The Politics of Standard English
Presenter: Tiffany Tang
Slide 1: Title Slide Hi everyone! My name is Tiffany, and
welcome to my teaching activity showcase. Today I’ll be
sharing a lesson I designed around the topic of The Politics of
Standard English.
Slide 2: Contents Here is a quick overview of my presentation:
First, I’ll introduce the context and aims of the lesson. Then, I’ll
walk you through the four phases of the activity and explain
how they support student learning. After that, I’ll share my
reflection on what worked well and what challenges I
encountered. Finally, I’ll briefly talk about the theoretical ideas
behind my design and how they supported each phase.
Slide 3: Introduction and Aims This lesson explores how
Standard English is socially constructed and connected to issues
like power and identity. It encourages students to reflect on their
own language experiences, and helps promote respect for
English diversity. The main aims are:
To understand the origins, features, and ideology of
Standard English
To examine how it relates to identity and social inequality
To build students’ confidence in their own language use
And to raise awareness of English diversity globally
Slide 4: Context and Audience This lesson is for 20 second-
year university students who are future English teachers. They
come from different cultural and linguistic backgrounds, and
some are native speakers while others are not. I, the teacher,
have a Master’s degree in linguistics and TESOL training, with
overseas study experience. The class runs for one hour in a
multimedia classroom and is part of a course on language
awareness and sociolinguistics.
Slide 5: Activity Phase Overview The lesson includes four
main phases:
Before the introduction of Standard English, I will spend
about 10 minutes engaging students with a warm-up
activity.
After that, I will provide a input session to clarify key
ideas about what Standard English is and why it matters.
Then, students will apply this understanding in a practical
task, where they work in pairs to reconstruct sentences.
Finally, they will complete a personal reflection task.
Now I’ll walk you through each phase.
Slide 6: Phase 1 – Critical Listening & Discussion In this
phase, students watch a short YouTube video showing 24
different English accents. Then in groups, they discuss: “Which
one sounds like Standard English, and why?” They post their
answers on Padlet, which helps visualise their collective
opinions. This activity surfaces hidden biases about accents and
opens discussion on the idea that Standard English is often
wrongly associated with pronunciation.
Slide 7: Phase 2 – Input Stage: What is Standard English? In
this teacher-led stage, I explain that Standard English is not
neutral – it’s a socially and institutionally accepted form, often
used in education, media, and formal writing. I highlight how it
is connected to social power and inequality. This input helps
students prepare for the next task, where they apply this
understanding.
Slide 8: Phase 3 – Text Reconstruction Here, students work in
pairs to rewrite short sentences written in non-standard English
into Standard English. For example, a line like “She always like
that one” would be changed to “She is always like that.” This
activity is not about fixing grammar, but about discussing which
forms are considered acceptable and why. It encourages students
to reflect on the power behind what we call ‘standard.’
Slide 9: Phase 4 – Output Stage: Reflection The final task is
individual writing. Students write a short reflection (no more
than 200 words) on their own experience:
Have they ever been judged or misunderstood for how
they speak or write English?
How did it feel?
What do they now think about ‘Standard English’? This
task allows personal engagement and consolidates critical
thinking.
Slide 10: Reflection Overall, I think the lesson achieved its
aims. Students were engaged, the activities were thought-
provoking, and Padlet helped everyone participate. Challenges
included time pressure and the emotional sensitivity of
discussing language bias. In the future, I might reduce the
number of discussion questions or allow more time for the
reflection.
Slide 11: Theoretical Framework Now I’ll briefly explain the
theories that supported my design decisions:
Critical Language Awareness (Fairclough, 1992;
Hawkins & Norton, 2009): This framework underpins the
entire lesson. It encourages learners to question whose
language is seen as ‘correct’ and how that reflects power
relations. This is reflected in every phase, especially the
reflection task.
Task-Based Language Teaching (Ellis, 2003): The
lesson is structured around real-world tasks that involve
communication, collaboration, and reflection. Each
activity is designed with a communicative purpose, not
just language practice.
Multiliteracies Pedagogy (Cope & Kalantzis, 2000): I
included different types of input and output—video,
discussion, Padlet, writing—so students can engage using
multiple modes.
Input Hypothesis (Krashen, 1985): The concept
clarification in Phase 2 provides comprehensible input to
help students understand ‘Standard English’ before
applying it.
Output Hypothesis (Swain, 1985): The reconstruction
and personal reflection tasks give students chances to
produce meaningful output, deepening their learning
through use.
All these frameworks work together to create a lesson that is
interactive, reflective, and critical.
Slide 12: Conclusion To wrap up, this lesson helped students
understand that Standard English is not neutral—it reflects
social power. By combining critical discussion, interactive tasks,
and personal reflection, the lesson supports students in
becoming more aware, confident, and inclusive users of English.
Thank you for listening!
Slide 13: References (APA 7th reference list shown on slide.)