The main blog entry here tries to take a stab at Wizbang, who are silly idiots, but actually are on the right track with this.
Many of the commenters on Kos actually get it too, like this one:
These kids watch TV right? And they understand it?
For the most part it is standard English. If they can understand the TV they don’t need a teacher to talk down to them.
Every post I’ve seen on this topic threads back to the same original article. I’d give anything to know what “incorporating Ebonics” means. The article doesn’t say anything more than there will be some supplemental readings available.
So far, the usual lineup of hysterics has sounded off: WorldNetDaily, Wizbang, and a few lesser rightwingers. None of them have any clue as to what’s actually being proposed here.
Why is it that when you give urban black English a name, suddenly everybody goes nuts about it?
I’m sorry but watching TV doesn’t mean you understand English. Let’s not pretend your average primetime lineup is comprised of ‘Masterpiece Theatre’ or ‘Rumpole of the Bailey.’
Go to a foreign country sometime; it’s generally pretty easy to pick up the gist of their primetime shows without understanding more than a handful of words.
QinaB is correct; I have a distinct suspicion what is being proposed isn’t a substitute for learning English. Instead, it’s a tool–or stepping stone–for involving the kid in the rest of the curriculum.
Quaker is right. One of the reactionaries over at Wizbang read the article’s lead (which for whatever reason fronted ebonics) and then started jabbering away.
Anyone who read on learned this:
“Len Cooper, who is coordinating the pilot program at the two city schools, said San Bernardino district officials do not plan to incorporate Ebonics into the program.
“Because Ebonics can have a negative stigma, we’re not focusing on that,’ Cooper said. “We are affirming and recognizing Ebonics through supplemental reading books (for students).’
Beginning in the 2005-06 school year, teachers will receive training on black culture and customs. District curriculum will now include information on the historical, cultural and social impact of blacks in society. Although the program is aimed at black students, other students can choose to participate.”
So the very same negative stigma that everyone has been going on and on about is exactly why ebonics is NOT a central part of what is only a limited pilot program. What is the central part of the program? Including more information about black history and culture in reading materials and instruction to keep black kids more engaged. Anyone have a problem with that?
Like Quaker says, mention ebonics and people go nuts. But why? Ebonics may not be a language but it isn’t a simplistic elevation of slang to Shakespeare. Linguists have identified a set of unique grammatical rules at work in African American Vernacular English, aka ebonics. The only time I have ever heard of ebonics being “taught” in the classroom is to use student’s understanding of those grammatical rules to teach them the grammatical rules of “proper” english.
I took a lot of French to get my graduate degree. The classes were immersive but when it came down to it the teachers always used my understanding of English usage to illustrate how French is similar or different. Same principle as far as I’m concerned. And guess what? This use of ebonics seems to work: http://www.stanford.edu/~rickford/papers/EbonicsInMyBackyard.html
And the idea that such an application of ebonics will keep people from getting jobs is equally overblown. We all use a variety of communication styles and formations depending on the settings were in. I may use all manner of slang and improper grammar at a bar-b-cue with my friends and family but that doesn’t mean I’ll never get a job. No. Why? Because I understand the difference between a bar-b-cue and a job interview.
Acknowledging the grammatical rules at work in ebonics to help a kid learn how to speak and read proper english does not erase that distinction. Any more than it would if a school district used comic books (not exactly a bastion of the King’s English) to get and keep kids of any race interested in reading long enough to move them on to Dickens or whoever. For that matter, going back to Shakespeare, I don’t use rhyming couplets on job interviews either.
Oliver, nawoods, etc.
If you can, please tell us your understanding of what, in fact, this proposal of “incorporating Ebonics” in San Bernardino consists?
Oliver, this is one of those areas you and I are in full agreement on. My beloved late grandmother the English professor would be appalled.
My understanding of the whole Ebonics thing is that it was an attempt to get ESL money to help teach kids who spoke English that was non-Standard enough to hinder their progress in mainstream classrooms. Which backfired spectacularly when the right-wing press got hold of it.
I wouldn’t be opposed to somewhere trying a pilot program where kids with non-standard English, of any sort, could take academic classes, math, science, etc. where they were not downgraded for their grammar and spoken style. And English class was taught in a non-judgemental way.
But that would make too much sense, wouldn’t it?
Remember, always follow the money.
maureen, that doesn’t make sense. Why coddle these kids? Why not invest money and time to teach the kids proper English instead of condoning bad grammar. And how do you teach English without judgment? School is all about judgment. Everything kids do is judged in school. That’s the point, to see if they’ve progressed enough to enter the real world.
What will you do, just say, “Hey! What the hell, put that comma wherever you want! It’s all good! Yeah, aksing someone is just fine!”
That’s irresponsible and insulting to children.
I wish that someone had taught the writer who gave us the original San Bernardino article something about English. It’s a terrible article.
First, the Ebonics suggestion is attributed to a sociology professor. Does the professor have anything to do with the remedial studies program in the San Bernardino school system? If you can find an answer in the article, please let me know.
Second, the professor suggests “incorporating” Ebonics into the remedial learning program. What does that mean? Once again, holler if you find an answer in the article.
Third, the article focuses on the professors suggestion of adding a new element to an existing pilot program. What’s taught in the pilot program? Has it been successful? By what measure? If you can figure it out, then maybe the problem is mine, not the writer’s.
The article is a shambles. It’s entirely possible that the San Bernardino program is a good one. It might be horrible. The writer of the article doesn’t give us any way to tell. It’s nearly impossible to learn anything meaningful from her account. But that won’t stop the shouters on the right from going nuts about “teaching Ebonics.”
My prediction: this will turn up on O’Reilly within the next couple of weeks.
In general I agree that ebonics has no place in the classroom, but I just hate these stories because it gets all the racists fired up.
Kind of like when Bill Cosby comments on the state of the African-American, naturally wingnut racists latch on to it.
Good article frameone.
I’d like to direct everyone’s attention to this passage:
I’m still waiting … Are any of the detractors of the San Bernardino plan going to give any specifics as to what’s wrong with it?
Or is trumpeting one’s opposition to anything labelled “Ebonics” a badge of “rationality” so precious that one jumps at it without thought. All the while comforted by the knowledge that the issue is one upon which the press and the right will boldly mislead the public?
Why coddle these kids?
I shake my head at comments like these.
We ‘coddle’ kids all the time—and we should. We ‘coddle’ kids when they’re dyslexic or have speech impediments. We ‘coddle’ them when they have sight and/or hearing problems. We ‘coddle’them when they’re victims of abuse.
Yet it seems it’s wrong to ‘coddle’ them when the kids are victims of socio-economics and dysfunctional families.
I’d suggest very few kids would thrive in the Darwinist environment you seem to hold such great faith in.
The very mention of the word “Ebonics” seems to generate an astonishing outrage. If you prefer, we can refer to AAVE. That, I learned from the article frameone showed us, stands for African-American Vernacular English.
I don’t see any indication in the San Bernardino article (or anywhere else for that matter) that anyone wants to deny kids a fluency in standard English. There seems to be an assumption that children who use AAVE could speak, write, and understand standard English if they’d just stop being so lazy and try harder. Apparently, that strategy isn’t yielding results as reliably as some might pretend.
The wikipedia article on AAVE provides lots of info.
And now Project 21 heeds the call to arms.
Prediction: O’Reilly within 2 weeks.
Apparently the editors of the San Bernardino Sun felt some clarification was in order:
Google “ebonics” and you’ll find another place for more info:
http://www.cal.org/ebonics/
What’s the first site on the list?
http://www.joel.net/EBONICS/translator.asp
Here are the latest rightwing numbskulls to holler: “The liberals want to TEACH Ebonics!”
Michele Malkin, claiming that Ebonics is being treated as a “civil right” by the San Bernardino school board.
One of the clowns on the Corner who can’t distinguish between the remedial education pilot program that already exists and a suggestion to add another piece to it.
Hahahahahahahaha!
O’Reilly.
I promise, this is my last comment on the subject. At least until I get to gloat when O’Reilly mangles the story.
Here’s what the San Bernardino school board has to say:
The last, no foolin’, last word on the matter from CJR Daily.