Asha Parham
English Argument
5/1//97
Geoffrey Sauer

Ebonics: Pro's and Cons of the Argument

Ebonics is a combination of the two words ebony and phonics and it is also called black English or black venacular. It seems as though one cannot pick up a newspaper, open a magazine or turn on a television without hearing about the debate over Ebonics. There are people who are outraged by the proposal of teaching Ebonics as a second language in schools. There are also supporters of the other side of the debate who believe that Ebonics is not a bad thing and should be taught. The debate was fueled on December 18,1996 in Oakland, California. The Oakland school board declared " "It's 28,000 black students did not speak standard English, but a distinctive language spoken by American blacks."(Applebome,18) The Ebonics debate is really important because it affects the whole country not just California. The repercussions of the debate are being felt all over the country. Although the Ebonics debate has recently gained new popularity, the debate over Ebonics, also know as black vernacular is not a new debate. Administrators have tried unsuccessfully before to incorporate black English into the classroom. If this tactic has not worked before, why are California administrators so eager to try it again? There are also certain implications one can apply to the Ebonics argument. What does the fact that we are willing to teach Ebonics say about the way black American students are viewed? Examining the arguments and the supports for the Ebonics debate, will give insight into the Ebonics debate.

Since this argument about Ebonics is a current one many of the sources are from newspaper articles and magazines. These articles, which are not scholarly journals, are speculative but offers insight into the Ebonics debate. Many of the authors who write these articles either favor or are against the use of Ebonics in the classroom, but there are some authors who see negatives as well as positive side of the debate. In his article "Black Voice of the Streets Is Defended and Criticized," author Steven A. Holmes gives opinions of persons who stand at both sides of the argument. In the article "The Endorsement of Ebonics is Not a Mistake," Rossina Lippi-Green associate professor of linguistics, gives her opinions about black English and why it should be spoken. In his article "Among Linguist, Black English Gets Respect" , Rick Weiss a staff writer for the Washington Post gives the argument of linguist who believe that speaking Ebonics is not bad. In the article "Staunch Ebonics Supporters Urge Training of City's Teachers ," by Charrise Jones, she gives reasons why people think that Ebonics should be supported. On the con side of the Ebonics argument is author Patricia J. Williams. In her article " The Hidden Meanings of 'Black English',"she talks about the Ebonics and why it can't be treated as a second language. In the editorial "Ebonics: New Name, Old Problem,"Author Willam Raspberry gives some historical background about the negatives of using Ebonics. In"Ebonics: Empty Theories and Empty Promises,"T.J.Rodgers discusses the negative effects that teaching Ebonics will generate.

In Holmes article, "Black Voices of the Streets is defended and Criticized," he talks about reasons Ebonics should be implemented and reasons it should not. In his article he talks about Toni Cook, a member of the Oakland, CA board of education. He gives some of her reasoning as to why teaching Ebonics would be helpful. She believes that teaching Ebonics will "make better use of idiosyncratic speech patterns of many black children to help improve their reading, writing and speaking of standard English".(Holmes, 1) She also believes that instructing teachers in Ebonics will bridge the gap between teachers and black American students(Holmes, 1). Programs have been implemented in Los Angeles and Oakland to instruct teachers in Ebonics and Toni Cooks reports that there have been improvements in black students test scores. Although Toni Cook say that improvements have been made, there are no statistical studies to back that claim. Also, by treating Ebonics as another language and not just a dialect ,the school board would try to get funding for a dual language program. This program would allow schools more funding and the end result would be an improvement of black children's standard English. Unfortunately the bilingual program was not passed, and Ebonics was thought to be a dialect not a language. Critics of the Oakland school board argue that teaching Ebonics"legitimizes what is grammatically deficient English and will hamper black children in their mastery of standard English" (Holmes, 8). Like affirmative action, Ebonics is being attacked because it supports the argument of those who say that "blacks are seeking to lower the accepted standard of being qualified"( Holmes ,9). Linda Chavez, president of the Center for Equal Opportunity, argues that Ebonics stems from the need for administrators to experiment on black children. She feels as though black children are treated as subjects on pitri dishes(Holmes, 13). She believes that teaching Ebonics will not reinforce the need for black American children to succeed in school. (Holmes, 15).

The article by Charisse Jones is about a group of community activists who support the need to educate and train teachers in Ebonics. The support of this group was sparked because of the recent decision made by Rudy Crew, the New York City school chancellor. He decided that Ebonics should not be used in the classroom . The people in this small group, which consisted of parent's advocates, educators and clerics, believe that it is worth trying to use Ebonics in the classroom. In objection to the decision by Crew, Charles Baron, a co-founder of the coalition said "How could you throw out anything when you're doing such a horrible job with all the traditional methods that you use?" (Jones, 1997) It is reported that only thirty percent of black children in the school of New York read at or above their grade level (Jones, 1997) The coalition believes that Ebonics "will be used as a tool to help teachers communicate with students."(Jones, 1997). They believe that the integration of Ebonics in the classroom will improve the low rates of literacy.

In an editorial called "Endorsement of Black English is Not a Mistake". Rossini Lippi-Green argues that Ebonics is not necessarily a bad thing. She make the argument that black English has an old historical tradition and should not be shunned but accepted(Lippi-Green, 2). In her letter to the New York Times she criticizes the paper for only talking about those who are opposed to Ebonics and not printing articles about those who are for it. The new legitimacy of Ebonics, she believes, will make black children no longer have to be ashamed of how they speak. She believes that the reason that the public perceives Ebonics as negative is because of the media. In the media they are always showing the negatives of the argument or making light of Ebonics.

In the article "Among Linguists, Black English Gets Respect," Weiss gives the arguments of linguists who believe that the attack on black English is not warranted. The idea of teaching Ebonics in schools has been attached because black English is seen as inferior. Many linguists believe that Ebonics should not be attacked because it is different from standard English( Weiss, 1997). The linguists also believe that Ebonics should not be seen as inferior:

People used to believe that African American English was illogical, poorly constructed and inadequate for any cognitive or linguistic growth. This is the same view we are hearing now from the same white people who are upset that this should get in any quarter in the schools. But while it is certainly different from standard English, it is not inferior.(Weiss, 1997).

John J. Rickford, believes that because black English is "systematic, regular and complex and insofar as it involved vocabulary or lexicon, a phonology or sound system and grammar,"it deserves respect( Weiss, 1997). Although people argue that black English is not understandable, the linguists argue that this is not true. They argue that because of the commonality of standard English and Ebonics, speakers of standard English understand up to eighty percent of black English, and this shows that black English is comprehensible. Although these linguists do believe that there is nothing wrong, they believe that teaching Ebonics does present a problem. There is a bias against those who speak black English because it is perceived as inferior to other people (Wiess, 1997) People's negative perceptions of black dialect leads to discrimination. Members of the linguistic society believe that teaching Ebonics should be integrated into the classroom (Weiss, 1997). They believe that the integration of Ebonics will help black Americans master standard English.

In the articles of those who agree that Ebonics should be used in the classroom there are common threads, but there are also differences. The articles by Jones and Holmes are similar. In both articles the reasons for the use of Ebonics are the same. Both articles believe that using Ebonics in the classroom will improve the test scores of black American students. Also, they state that educating teachers in Ebonics will bridge the gap between teachers and students. Both articles also state that Ebonics should be seen as another language, in order to receive funding from the government. There are also differences between the two articles. The two articles focus on different issues. The article by Holmes is focusing on the schools in California, primarily Oakland, and the article by Jones focuses on the schools in New York City. The editorial by Lippi-Green and the article by Rick Weiss have common arguments for why Ebonics should be used. Both articles discuss that black English should not be a source of embarrassment for black children and should not be seen as inferior to standard English. The two articles both state that the use of Ebonics often leads to discrimination in different social settings.

"Ebonics: New Name, Old Problem,",is an editorial written by Willam Raspberry. In his editorial he explains that the argument about Ebonics has been debated before over the past thirty years ( Raspberry, 1997). He states that the method of using Ebonics has been used before, but the outcomes have not been positive. An example of a failed attempt at integrating Ebonics occured during the 1970's. During the seventies, Joan Baratz of the Educational Study Center wanted to test her theory. Her theory was that by teaching black student in their native language, black English, would help them improve test scores. ( Raspberry, 1997). This project met much objection and failed to improve the test scores of black students(Raspberry, 1997) Raspberry thinks that Ebonics should not be integrated in classrooms because it is a method that has failed in the past. He believes that it is not realistic to think that using Ebonics in the classroom will work.

Is it really realistic to expect English-speaking teachers who have failed to educate children in English to first learn Ebonics ( for no grammar texts or other aids) and then use their knowledge to teach the children English in English? ( If they already know Ebonics - as virtually all adult African Americans do -doesn't the whole exercise lose its point.)( Raspberry, 1997)

Raspberry also believes that instructing students in Ebonics will not narrow the gap of understanding between teachers and students(Raspberry, 1997). He states that teachers don't respect the use of Ebonics in the classroom, and instructing teachers in Ebonics will probably not make them more sympathetic. He believes that Ebonics is being used as a mechanism for schools to receive more funding for smaller class sizes and more specialized attention (Raspberry, 1997). Raspberry thinks administrators should be direct and not try to use Ebonics.

In her article the "Hidden Meanings of ' Black English'," Patricia Williams talks about Ebonics and gives criticism. She states that this debate is over whether Ebonics is 'good' West African traditionalism or ' bad' English (Williams, 2). She feels that that generalization is outlandish because there are many variations of Black American speech(Williams, 2). She states that black English ranges from true dialects, like Gullah, to regional accents and slang(Williams, 2). She thinks it is ridiculous to try to group the speech patterns of blacks into one group. She argues that there are few people in the United States that speak standard English, and this goes for all races, not just black Americans. She argues that their is a double standard for slang. When white Americans use slang it is considered to be a phase, but if black Americans use slang it is considered a social disability(Williams, 4). She states that there is also a double standard for which blacks using slang is considered acceptable. She argues that for black Americans in the entertainment industry it is fine. In the working world or when trying to get a job there is a problem with it(Williams , 9). She is angered by this double standard that Ebonics is bad in some contexts, and fine in others.

T.D. Rodgers, author of the editorial, "Ebonics: Empty Theories and Empty Promises," has a vested interest in the Ebonics argument. As a chief executive of the Cypress Semiconductor Corporation, he is concern about Ebonics is how it will effect the black children in the job market. He calls the embrace of Ebonics a " human and economic tragedy."( Rodgers, 14) He believe that using Ebonics in the classroom will hurt America's ability to compete globally by teaching children that it is okay to accept mediocrity( Rodgers, 1997). He believes that the California school board should be able to recognize that Ebonics will not work because of its already failed bilingual program(Rodgers, 1997). He states that concentrating on Ebonics is a waste of time for black students. He believe that a consequence of teaching Ebonics is that "while low level jobs and may remain available to the Ebonics generation, many high quality jobs will not be available to those students in the future"( Rodgers, 1997). To Rodgers, endorsing Ebonics means that black children will not obtain the necessary skills to communicate effectively in the business world. He does not consider the ability to speak black English a marketable skill. He believes that there is a way to remedy the problem of using Ebonics in school. He believes that in order to remedy the problem the power of decision making need to be given to parent not "utopian bureaucrats (Rodgers, 1997).

These articles all agree that Ebonics should not be in the classroom, but they all have different reasons as to why. The articles by Rodgers and Holmes state that Ebonics will give black American children a false confidence because it is not accepted as standard English. Although both articles believe that using Ebonics is inferior to using standard English, Rodgers carries this argument further. Rodgers believes that if Ebonics, which is inferior to standard English, is integrated into the school system, it will hurt our country economically( Rodgers, 1997). Unlike Rodgers and Holmes, Raspberry uses historical inferences to make his argument. He states integrating black English into the school system has been tried before and has not worked. He believes that based on historical background it would be foolish not to learn from the past. Willams states that using Ebonics will reinforce a double standard. Using Ebonics in classrooms will send the message to black children that it is fine to speak black English, but in many social contexts this is not true.

These few articles and editorial about the pro's and con's of Ebonics offer some insight to the debate on a larger scale. Although the debate over Ebonics started because of the decision made in Oakland, it affects the whole country. It has made people sit up and take notice that there are major problems with many of our schools and some rethinking may be needed. But is Ebonics the answer? Using Ebonics in the classroom is a solution, but it is not the best one. Ebonics will probably hinder more than it helps. There have been arguments that say that Ebonics is not inferior to standard English and it is fine if it is taught. That argument may give black American children a false sense of security that how they are speaking is fine, when in many contexts it is not. Ebonics in the classroom might give some children the impression that they can go out into the job market and get a job speaking Ebonics. Teaching Ebonics will give a false sense of confidence. It would be nice if black English was not perceived as inferior, but unfortunately it is, so educators must teach black children properly. What is the solution to this problem? It would seem that specialization is the key. It is necessary to give black children more personalized attention to help improve test scores. Unfortunately, there is the problem of funding, and with out answering this question, debates about Ebonics will continue for years to come.

Works Cited

Applebome, Peter. " Dispute Over Ebonics Reflected a Volatile Mix Thats Roils Urban Education." New York Times 1 March 1997 A 10: 1 +.

Holmes, Steven. " Black Voices of the Streets Is Defended and Criticized." New York Times 30 Dec 1996, late ed., sec A p.9.

Jones, Charrise. " Staunch Ebonics Supporters Urge Training of City's Teachers." New York Times 11 Jan 1997, 1 29:2 .

Lippi-Green, Rossina. Letter. New York Times 26, 1996 p.26

Raspberry, William . " Ebonics: New Name, Old Problem . Boston Globe 2 Mar 1997 3 14:1 .

Weiss, Rick . " Among Linguist, Black English Gets Respect" Washington Post 6 Jan 1997 A 10 : 1.

Williams, Patricia ." The Hidden Meanings of 'Black English' ."New York Times 29 Dec 1996 sec 4 p.9.