English: The Language of White "Oppressors"-professor: Ebonics superior to tongue of White Devils

A Brooklyn College professor says Ebonics is superior to the tongue of White Devils

--Teaches that rap music is an effective tool for teaching English literacy to schoolchildren, and that proper English is language of white "oppressors"

Priya Parmar is an Assistant Professor of Adolescence Education at Brooklyn College's School of Education in New York, where she teaches both graduate and undergraduate courses to aspiring teachers.

Of special interest to Parmar, whose doctoral dissertation is titled "KRS-One Going Against the Grain: A Critical Study of Rap Music as a Postmodern Text," is rap music. No mere enthusiast of the genre, Parmar holds that it is an unappreciated tool for imparting English literacy to young children: A 2003 Brooklyn College faculty newsletter reports that Parmar's scholarly writing "focuses on using hip-hop culture as a tool to increase literacy skills" in elementary and secondary schools.[1]

Those critics who question whether rap music, with its on reliance grammar-averse Ebonics slang, is an effective medium for teaching literacy are dismissed by Parmar as craven apologists for bourgeois hegemony. "Rap music causes moral panic in many because of its 'threat' to existing values and ideologies held by the dominant middle class," asserts Parmar.[2] On the strength of no evidence whatsoever, Parmar also claims that "research has shown that Ebonics is a legitimate systematic language."[3] Nor does Parmar doubt that the explicit lyrics and violent subject matter of rap make perfectly appropriate learning aids for young children:

"From my experience in the classrooms—and that of my students who are practitioners in the field—we've learned that kids—even as young as third grade—are very sophisticated about the homophobic, violent and sexual messages from some mainstream rap artists. If you give students an opportunity to deconstruct the lyrics and then compare them with those of more political and social-consciousness raising artists, such as [rap groups] The Roots and Dead Perez . . . youth are capable of distinguishing between reality and false perceptions and stereotypes perpetuated in commercialized rap."[4]

Rap, Parmar teaches, is more than a means of teaching literacy. It is also a vehicle for social engineering. In addition to teaching children grammar and sentence structure, Parmar maintains, the "critical examination and deconstruction of rap lyrics becomes a method to get students to critically examine such issues as race, class, culture, and identity." Parmar calls this mode of instruction an "an empowering, liberating pedagogy." She notes with approval that one of her former students used rap to "explore economic social and political issues" in a middle school.[5]

Parmar's controversial course at Brooklyn College, "Language Literacy in Secondary Education," typifies the professor's preference for politicized pedagogy. Required of all students who intend to become secondary-school teachers, the course is designed to teach students to draft lesson plans that teach literacy. Parmar's syllabus informs students that the principal focus of these lesson plans must be "social justice."[6]

Another theme animating Parmar's course is her aversion to the proper usage of English. To insist on grammatical English, Parmar believes, is to exhibit an intolerable form of cultural chauvinism—a point reinforced by the a preface to the requirements for her course, which adduces the following quotation from the South African writer, Jamul Ndebele: "The need to maintain control over English by its native speakers has given birth to a policy of manipulative open-mindedness in which it is held that English belongs to all who use it provided that it is used correctly. This is the art of giving away the bride while insisting that she still belongs to you."[7] Students are expected to share Parmar's antipathy toward grammatical rule-based English, as she does not countenance dissent: In December of 2005, for instance, several disaffected Brooklyn College students wrote letters to the dean of the School of Education taking issue with Parmar's hostility toward students who dared voice their support for the correct usage of English.

Nor was this the only confrontation between Parmar and her students. Evan Goldwyn, a Brooklyn College student who took Parmar's course, caused a campus storm when he wrote a lengthy critique of the course detailing his objections to Parmar's teaching methods. Topping Goldwyn's list of grievances were Parmar's pronounced bias against English and her alleged bigotry against white students. "She repeatedly referred to English as a language of oppressors and in particular denounced white people as the oppressors," Goldwyn wrote. "When offended students raised their hands to challenge Professor Parmar's assertion, they were ignored. Those students that disagreed with her were altogether denied the opportunity to speak."[8]

Students also charged that Parmar's insistence on bringing politics into the classroom went beyond issues relating to English literacy. For instance, one week before the 2004 presidential election, Parmar turned over her course to a classroom screening of Michael Moore's polemical anti-President Bush documentary, Fahrenheit 911.[9] Students were allegedly required to attend the screening, even if they had already seen the film. "Most troubling of all," Goldwyn wrote, "she has insinuated that people who disagree with her views on issues such as Ebonics or Fahrenheit 911 should not become teachers."[10]

Parmar, according to Goldwyn, has also retaliated against students who disagreed with her political opinions by lowering their grades. After challenging Parmar about her teaching methods, Goldwyn and another student found themselves accused of plagiarism after the semester had ended. The accusations were reportedly based on the final assignment for Parmar's course, which asked students to devise a special lesson plan for "linguistically and culturally diverse students." Following an informal investigation, conducted, at Parmar's instigation, by the dean of the education school, Goldwyn received a D-minus for the course.[11]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Witch-hunt comes to Brooklyn College

By Joe Cleffie | July 22, 2005 | Page 2

THE ATTACK on academic freedom that has intensified since September 11 has turned to Brooklyn College in New York City. The attack dogs in the New York media are calling the school “little Columbia”--a reference to Columbia University, where professors in the Middle Eastern and Asian Languages and Cultures (MEALAC) Department were wrongly accused of anti-Semitism and supporting terrorists by right-wing and Zionist students.

The attack at Brooklyn College has centered on two teachers. One is Tim Shortell, a professor who was recommended to be appointed chair of the school’s sociology department. Then, the media discovered that Shortell had written an article called “Religion and Morality: A Contradiction Explained,” which called Christians “moral retards” and said that Christianity preached “self-righteousness” and “hatred,” despite the idea that it is a religion “based on love.”

While Shortell’s article could be called elitist, it certainly gives a fitting description of the bigots on Christian Right who are so influential in the Republican Party. And far worse is regularly said about Islam in mainstream media publications.

Stories quickly appeared in the New York Daily News and New York Sun calling for Shortell’s appointment to be withdrawn.

As at other universities where faculty have come under fire, the administration caved. Brooklyn College President Christoph Kimmich called the essay “offensive” and formed a committee to investigate if Shortell would be “biased against religious students.”

A number of Jewish, Christian and Muslim students wrote a statement supporting Shortell, saying that he had a right to express his views and that colleges should be a place where freedom of speech was protected. But the emerging battle over his appointment as department chair was cut short when Shortell withdrew.

The other major attack on academic freedom has targeted Priya Parmar, an assistant professor in the Education Department. Right-wing students who promote David Horowitz’s misnamed “Academic Bill of Rights”--aided by the New York Sun--accused Parmar of saying that English is the “language of the oppressors.”

In fact, this quote comes from one of the reading assignments from her class. But the witch-hunters aren’t about to let such facts get in the way of their campaign--which is especially serious since Parmar does not have tenure.

The right wants professors to be scared about what they teach. But as Sam Farber, a Brooklyn College professor of political science, put it, “The best defense against this is a good offense. Just teach in the usual way.” Also key to this offense will be students and professors organizing to defend free speech in the classroom when classes resume in the fall.

[COURTESY OF GIZOOGLE.COM]

Priya Parmar is an Assistant Professor of Adolescence Education at Brooklyn College's Schoo` of Education in New York, where she teaches bizzy graduate n undergraduate courses ta weed-smokin' nigga.

Of special interest ta Parmar, whose doctoral dissertizzle is titled "KRS-One Going Against tha Grain: A Critical Study of Rap Music as a Postmodern Text," is rap music . Put ya m---a f----n choppers up if ya feel this.. No mere enthusiast of tha genre, Parmar holds that it is an unappreciated too` fo` ballin' English literacy ta young children . Freak y'all, into the beat y'all: A 2003 Brooklyn College faculty newsletta reports tizzy Parmar's scholarly writ'n "focuses on using hip-hop culture as a too` ta increaze literacy skills" in elementary n secondary schools.[1]

Those critics who question whetha rap music, wit its on reliance grammar-averse Ebonics slang, is an effective medium fo` weed-smokin' literacy is dismissed by Parmar as craven apologists fo` bourgeois hegemony. "Rap. music causes moral panic in many coz of its 'threat' ta sippin' values n ideologies held by tha dominant middle class," asserts Parmar.[2] On tha strength of no evidence whatsoeva, Parmar also claims thizzat "research has shown tizzy Ebonics is a legitimate systemizzles language."[3] Nor does Parmar doubt that tha explicit lyrics n violent subject matta of rap makes perfectly appropriate doggy stylin' aids fo` young children but real niggaz don't give a f--k:

"From mah experience in tha classrooms—and T-H-to-tha-izzat of mah students who is killa in tha field—we've learned thizzay kids—even as young as third grade—are very sophisticated `bout tha homophizzles violent n sexual messages frizzay some mainstream rap artists. If you give students an opportunity ta deconstruct tha lyrics n then compare them wit those of mizzy politizzles n social-cizzles perpetratin' artists, such as [rap groups] The Roots n Dead Perez . fo shizzle. . youth is capable of distinguish'n between reality n false perceptions n stereotizzles perpetuated in commercialized rap."[4]

Rizzap, Parmar teaches, is mizzy than a means of teach'n literacy. It is also a vehicle fo` social engineer'n with the S-N-double-O-P. In addition ta teach'n children grammar n sentence structure, Parmar maintains, tha "critical examizzles n deconstrizzle of rap lyrics becomes a method ta git students ta critically examine sizzuch issues as race, class, culture, n identity." Parmar calls this mode of instruction an "an empower'n, clockin' pedagogy." She notes wit approval tizzle one of her forma students used rap ta "explore economic social n politizzles issues" in a middle school.[5]

Parmar's controvizzles course at Brooklyn College, "Language Literacy in Secondary Education," typifies tha professor's preference fo` politicized pedagogy. Required of all students who intend ta become secondary-schoo` teacha, tha course is designed ta teach students ta draft lesson plans tizzy teach literacy. Parmar's syllabus informs students T-H-to-tha-izzat tha principal focus of these lesson plans mizzle be "social justice."[6]

Anotha theme weed-smokin' Parmar's course is her aversion ta tha propa usage of English . Yippie yo, you can't see my flow. To insist on grammatizzles English, Parmar believes, is ta exhibit an intolerable form of cultural chauvinism—a point reinforced by tha a preface ta tha requirizzles fo` her course, W-H-to-tha-izzich adduces tha follow'n quotation fizzle tha South African brotha Jamul Ndebele . Relax, cus I'm bout to take my respect: "The . Relax, cus I'm bout to take my respect: need ta maintain control over English by its native brotha has given bizzirth ta a policy of manipulative open-mizzles in whiznich it is held tizzle English belongs ta all who use it provided tizzle it is used correctly. This is tha art of giv'n away tha bride while mackin' tizzy she still belongs ta you."[7] Students is expected ta share Parmar's antipathy toward grammatizzles rule-based English, as she does not countenance dissent fo yo bi-yatch ass: In Decemba of 2005, fo` instance, several disaffected Brooklyn College students wrote drug deala ta tha dean of tha Schoo` of Education tak'n issue wit Parmar's hostility toward students who dared voice they support fo` tha correct usage of English . I'm a m---a f----n 2-time felon..

Nor was this tha only confrontizzles between Parmar n her students . Aint no stoppin' this s--t nigga. Evan Goldwyn, a Brooklyn College student who tizzy Parmar's course, caused a campus stizzorm wizzle he wrote a lengthy critique of tha course ridin' his objections ta Parmar's ho-slappin' methods. Topp'n Goldwyn's list of grievances wizzy Parmar's pronounced bias against English n her alleged bigotry against white students. "She. repeatedly referred ta English as a language of oppressors n in particizzles denounced white thugz as tha oppressors," Goldwyn wrote. "When. offended students raised they hands ta challenge Professor Parmar's assertion, they were ignored. Those students that disagreed wit her were altogetha denied tha opportunity ta speak."[8]

Students also charged that Parmar's insistence on bring'n politics into tha classroom wizzay beyond issues relat'n ta English literacy. For instance, one wizzle before tha 2004 presidizzles election, Parmar turned over her course ta a classroom screen'n of Michael Moore's polemizzles anti-Prizzle Bizzush documentizzle Fahrenheit 911.[9] Students wizzle allegedly required ta attend tha screen'n, even if they had already seen tha fizzilm. "Most. troubl'n of all," Goldwyn wrote, "she has insinuated tizzy thugz who disagree wit her views on issues sizzuch as Ebonics or Fahrenheit 911 should not become teachers."[10]

Parmar, accord'n ta Goldwyn, has also retaliated against students who disagreed wit her politizzles opinions by rhymin' they grades . Snoop heffner mixed with a little bit of doggy flint. Afta challeng'n Parmar `bout her doggy stylin' methods, Goldwyn n playa student found themselves accused of plagiarism afta tha semesta had ended . You'se a flea and I'm the big dogg. The accusations were reportedly based on tha final assignment fo` Parmar's course, whizzich asked students ta devise a special lesson pizzy fo` "linguistically n culturally diverse students." Weed-smokin' an informal investizzles conducted, at Parmar's instigation, by tha dizzy of tha education school, Goldwyn received a D-minus fo` tha course.[11]

[1] http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edizzle

[2] http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/bc/pizzle

[3] Ibid.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Ibid.

[6] http://www.nysun.com/article/14604

[7] Ibid.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Ibid.

[izzle Ibid.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.