Despite decades of sociolinguistic research, African American Language (AAL) remains stigmatized throughout the United States education system. There have been proposals to counteract this through curricula and/or ideological interventions targeted at teachers that seek to validate AAL while maintaining Dominant American English (DAE) as an educational target. However, such approaches have been criticized for giving limited attention to combating the racism that underlies much linguistic marginalization. We used a mixed-methods approach to explore the benefits and limitations of a dialect-shifting curriculum in shaping teachers' language ideologies. Participants (n = 40) were K-1 teachers in a predominantly Black mid-Atlantic city. They were participating in an efficacy study of a dialect-shifting curriculum; schools were randomly assigned to teach the curriculum (intervention condition) or continue with business as usual. Before and after the intervention, teachers completed a survey of their language attitudes, and a subset (n = 16) participated in semi-structured interviews. On the survey, teachers displayed more favorable attitudes toward language variation at the end of the school year, regardless of condition. The interviews revealed a range of perspectives, revealing a tension between a belief in the utility of DAE for their students and an understanding that many students will wish to use AAL in their communities. The curriculum provided shared vocabulary to discuss this tension and increased some teachers' acceptance of AAL in non-academic settings, but many did not view dialect variation as relevant to their priorities as K-1 teachers. These findings clarify the trade-offs involved in work toward a more (linguistically) inclusive education system.