SACRAMENTO-Over the past few weeks, the ebonics debate has dominated an otherwise slow news season. Everyone has weighed in with their opinion. Jesse Jackson, in fact, has given several (his initial opinion was shockingly sensible, which no doubt dismayed himself and his allies, and he has been backtracking ever since).

First, the obvious: ebonics is a cruel joke. By validating slang and poor grammar, ebonics condemns African American children to a second class life with much more limited educational and job opportunities than children who have mastered the King's English. Regardless of what the Oakland school board thinks, Henry Higgins' observation remains correct: upward economic mobility is tied to one's command of standard English (imagine Prof. Higgins directing Eliza Doolittle to say, "Yo, the rain in Spain be fallin' on the plain, man.")

The ebonics controversy, however, is symptomatic of a much larger problem. The real issue regarding ebonics has to do with the wisdom of bilingual education in general. Indeed, a key reason the Oakland school board approved its ebonics policy in the first place was to get additional bilingual education money from the state and federal governments. If ebonics is recognized as an official second language, then taxpayer dollars would flow into Oakland's coffers.

The trouble is that bilingual education in California continues to be a huge failure. Today there are more than a million students in the state's public education system who are limited English proficient (LEP) i.e., English isn't their first language. Yet, less than 10 percent of these children are transitioned into English proficiency every year. The government school system is therefore producing hundreds of thousands of students who will never be able to speak English well enough to function optimally in a modern technological economy.

Why is this? Much of the reason has to do with the bias of the public education establishment in favor of so-called "native language" instruction. Under this method, LEP students' native language (e.g., Spanish) is used to instruct students in academic courses, while they take separate classes in the English language. According to Professor Christina Rossell of Boston University, "native language" instruction is less effective than methods where academic courses for LEP students are taught in standard English (the latter technique is often called English "immersion"). Rather than being culturally insensitive (a capital offense in today's politically correct world), English "immersion" gives students incentives to make English learning a top priority. That it works makes sense since students learn English only as fast as required by the incentive structure under which they must operate.

How would ebonics be introduced or taught in the classroom? Would Oakland conduct academic courses in ebonics and have separate standard English classes for students? The Oakland school board is still not saying, but if they want bilingual education money, then that's what could happen.

Combining ebonics with bilingual education, therefore, grafts a silly idea onto an ineffective program. Unfortunately, poor African American children have no other option but to attend Oakland's public schools. Vouchers, anyone?

„By Lance T. Izumi