Topic for 1/8/97:

Ebonics (ebony phonics) as a tool to enhance the learning capabilities of inner city African-American students is...

1. Ebonics is nothing but slang and profanity. It is gutter, garbage, lowlife language.
Here is an area where the Huxtables and the Limbaughs of our country can agree. Black English is disreputable. Though currently a largely urban phenomenon, it is associated with "country" folk, since it has its roots in the African American experience in the American South. Black English is a pattern of speech with its own deep grammatical structures, not merely a different vocabulary. From the point of view of most linguists, there is nothing inherently superior about one set of grammatical rules over another. The point of language is communication, after all, and the grammar of Black English is perfectly serviceable. In my opinion it is despised because of who it is who speaks it; African Americans, and poor ones at that.

2. Violation of the Implied Social Contract. In my opinion, the Oakland School Board' proposal to legitimize Black English violates what many see as a social contract, the terms of which are, either assume the cultural characteristics of the dominant culture, or remain economically and socially segregated. According to this view, the District has thrown in the towel, on the part of society, saying, "OK, you win. Talk how you like." Some feel this is a misrepresentation of society's intent, in that it implies employers will accept Black English, when they won't. Others oppose it on principle, arguing that we need, as a nation, a common culture to bind us together.
This implied social contract has foundered, to be sure, but I don't feel the Oakland School Board can take the blame. The kids themselves have been rejecting this deal for years, for a host of reasons.

3. This is America, the melting pot. Previous waves of immigrants have learned English and become assimilated. Blacks should too.
This argument compares African Americans to other immigrants, and points out the difference in the level of assimilation. Blacks seem to cling stubbornly to their culture and language, to a degree that prevents them from assimilating.
This argument fails, in my opinion, because the comparison to other immigrants is not valid or useful. Other immigrants arrived as a result of their own initiative, largely, not in the holds of slave ships. Other immigrants, albeit hampered temporarily by hostility to foreigners or language problems, were accepted into our culture after a few generations without overt discrimination. Other immigrants were not marked by a history of racism, and a dominant culture's need to justify their low status. Other immigrants did not have to wait until the 1960's for the right to vote, in many areas.

4. African Americans also perceive themselves as victims, which allows them to place the blame for their plight on others. They should get over this. We have a meritocracy, after all.
Faulting African Americans for perceiving themselves as hapless, helpless victims is, in my opinion, only useful in a limited way. It is important that African Americans not accept a passive role, not see themselves as helpless in the face of a powerful white majority. However, this argument implies, though it rarely states, that we have something approaching a meritocracy. The voters of California sent precisely this message recently with the repeal of affirmative action. Stop whining about discrimination. It is a thing of the past. As the recent Texaco tapes illustrated clearly, corporate racism is alive and well in boardrooms of America. There are indeed many people who would thwart the aspirations of African Americans, even well-spoken, polite ones. The students of Oakland are keenly aware of this, and do not buy the idea that racism and discrimination are dead.

5. Recognizing and legitimizing other cultures leads to "Balkanization." Here, our nation is being compared to a region of Europe, historically composed of a variety of states, united in modern times by force, but now coming apart at the seams, as historically distinct groups vie for control of their common territory.
In my opinion, this challenges us to look at the roots of disunity. This argument asserts that the distinct cultures are responsible for the disunity. If everyone gave up their culture and assumed the common culture, everything would be fine.
So what is the basis of our disunity? Is it African Americans clinging to their culture and speech? Why would they do this, if they could access all the goodies being offered in the social contract? In my opinion, the real basis for our disunity is the legacy of racism and slavery, and its ongoing manifestations. We keep wanting it to be over. We want to have dealt with it, to put it in our collective past. We thought we had done so more than a century ago, when we said "Enough" to Reconstruction. We thought we had done "enough" with the separate but equal decision of Plessy vs Ferguson in 1896. We thought we had done "enough" when we passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, implemented affirmative action in 1969. This issue hurts because it is a reminder that our long march to deal with the effects of racism is not over.
Cultures are bridges, not chasms. African American culture, in all its depth and beauty, is a bridge to the dominant culture. It is not the obstacle. For our students to understand the accomplishments, the traditions which have shaped them and their speech is to find a source of identity, a source of strength. Once this culture is understood by the students, they are able to relate on an equal basis to the mainstream culture. They can do so shoulder to shoulder, not as poor step-children. This is the basis of mutual respect, and mutual respect is, to me, the basis of principled unity.

6. How will our kids ever learn Standard English if we respect Black English? This argument says, if we legitimize Black English in the classroom, we will send a message of approval to these kids. This does them a disservice, because outside of our classrooms they will encounter a world not ready to accept their language. Our goal must be to eradicate Black English. To do less is to consign these kids to a lifetime of isolation.
In my opinion, this argument doesn't wash for several reasons. First of all, the stated goal of the Ebonics program is to improve student skills in Standard English. Use of an approach contrasting Black English to Standard English has been shown to be highly effective at raising student scores in Standard English. It is not as though we have not been trying to eradicate Black English in the classroom for the past forty years! We have -- and we have lousy results, in general. This argument also underestimates the intelligence of these kids. They are perfectly capable of understanding the need to "switch codes" to fit in with a dominant culture. Thus they can understand the need to learn Standard English to achieve success in the mainstream. They are as yet unconvinced that this offer is bona fide, and they are not sure that teachers are their allies in this journey.

We look foolish arguing over something so minor. Brothers and Sisters, take your arguements behind closed doors and work them out. Stop fighting in public. It's disgusting, and needs to stop. It's called "divide and conquor", and has been used too often against us.

Remove the beam from your own eye before criticizing the mote in your brother's eye!

Blacks parents ought to be outraged of this travesty and demand that if the public school system cannot improve itself, they should replace it with a private educational system.

Literacy Behind Prison Walls, a report from the U. S. Education Department's National Center for Education Statistics, indicates that two-thirds of America's prisoners, more than one million, are less literate than the general US population. Most are young male minorities. These findings are intriguing and tend to validate the inverse correlation between education and crime. The study also found that repeat offenders remained about as literate as those who are in prison for the first time. The study highlights the need to focus on education, in and out of prison, to reduce the rate of incarceration. Clearly, educational improvement in disadvantaged areas will curtail violence and recidivism.

Thus, the inability to educate central city students has affected the community. Perhaps, educators ought to examine themselves first and their own expectations, since models of excellent public teaching institutions exist within the community.

Education is the key. What are its advantages? Please give me moe info on this subject so I can make an intelligent decision.