English-Only Debate Paper
English-Only Debate Paper
The information that the United States is one of the most popular places to move to for people from all over the world is not new. Thousands of people have been coming here for many years, and recently a considerable increase was witnessed. To be more specific, within the last 30 years the population that is foreign-born has tripled in the US and millions of immigrants are choosing the country for the place of their residence. In the view of such large number of foreigners, there are numerous reports on the emerging population of students, English language learners (ELLs), who are currently underserved.
First of all, it is necessary to mention that ELLs represent a heterogeneous population with diverse educational needs, gifts, goals and languages. There are different problems that they may face: some students have a deep sense of their native culture, while others can respect and follow different cultures and some identify themselves only with the
US culture. Some students live in a, so to say, cultural enclave, while others come from families that live in the US for many years already (Mora, 2009). Thus, it is clear that there is no single profile for ELL students, which is why it is impossible to find a single universal response to their needs. Today there are various laws and initiatives addressing the issues of ELLs, and I am going to describe the major ones of them so as to understand what ways there exist for foreign students to learn the language in a convenient and effective way.
The history of the ELL policies introduction started in the 1960s, when there was registered a growing number of English language minority students in public schools. In 1968 the Bilingual Education Act was passed (Title VII of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act), which united legal guidelines and requirements for transitional bilingual programs. Afterwards, a series of federal court decisions enhanced this act, broadening its scope considerably. In 1974 as a result of the Supreme Court decision in Lau v. Nichols schools were required to protect the rights of the language minorities, and the failure to provide foreign children with special programs was considered to limit their rights. This also became a foundation for development of effective bilingual learning programs.
Another block of initiatives, which is anti-bilingual, or English only, was developed more recently. Between 1998 and 2008 voters from five states were asked to develop their initiatives for ELLs. Such laws were passed in California in 1998, then in Arizona in 2000 and in Massachusets in 2002 (Mora, 2009). In Colorado and Oregon they were rejected. In particular, this set of initiatives state that ELLs have to learn for one year with the help of approach called sheltered English immersion, which presupposes teaching of all the subjects in English. In this way, the main advantage is seen in the actual English atmosphere that stimulates students for better learning. After this year ELLs are transferred to mainstream classrooms. Those people who support this initiative claim that teaching in the native student’s language hinders learning of English. Those who were against say that teaching in the native language supports acquisition of the English language.
If both sets of arguments are properly analyzed, it becomes clear that the conflicts on the ways foreign students should be educated have much deeper cultural and sociological issues (Mora, 2002). Proponents of anti-bilingual initiatives claim that with the help of the educational way they offer the process of cultural assimilation will be passing considerably quicker, owing to which academic achievements will also become better. Opponents have absolutely contrary point of view, stating that bilingualism facilitates better development, as students can in this way become proficient both in their native language and in English.
In fact, the research of Portes & Rumbaut (2001) shows that students in bilingual environment achieve better academically in the long run, than those who were forced to become monolinguals. Moll and Ruiz (2002) state that the English-only movement is nothing more than a struggle over educational sovereignty so as to define who is responsible for control programs for ELLs.
1. English immersion – when instruction is exclusively in English, at first in a simplified version so as to provide students an opportunity to learn both language and subjects.
2. English as a second language – similar to the immersion, but involves support in the native languages.
3. Transitional bilingual education – there are classes in the native languages and every day attention is paid to the English classes.
4. Two-way bilingual – when instruction is in two languages, and the goal is to achieve proficiency in both of them.
References
English Language Learners. (2004). Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/english-language-learners/
Moll, L.C., & Ruiz, R. (2002). The schooling of Latino children. In M. Suárez-Orozco & M. M. Páez (Eds.), Latinos: Remaking America (pp. 362–374). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Mora, J.K. (2002). Caught in a policy web: The impact of education reform on Latino education. Journal of Latinos and Education, 1(1), 29–44.
Mora, J.K. (2009). From the Ballot Box to the Classroom. Supporting English Language Learners, 66(7), 14-19.
Portes, A., & Rumbaut, R. G. (2001). Legacies: The story of the immigrant second generation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
