How many of us here alone speak more than one language? In my paper I will discuss some of the benefits a bilingual education may provide. It will also include the programs available and the debate over their effectiveness or ineffectiveness over time. I will discuss the three readings I chose from class (Lu, Tan, and Rodriguez) and provide information on their experiences.
However, the way educators approach bilingual education is still an ongoing subject of debate, up to and including the terms used to describe students. As noted by Fránquiz, “The two labels, LEP [Limited English Proficient] and ELL[English Language Learner], that have been used in bilingual education in the United States contributed to a broader ideological discourse that persistently promoted "one nation, one territory, one language nationalism"” (32). Fránquiz goes on to explain that both terms eliminate the actual word “bilingual” and instead of focusing on the fact that these students can become articulate in two languages, focus instead on their deficiency in one language. She also noted that some educators now prefer the term “Emerging Bilingual students” (32). This disagreement about terminology reflects the disagreement about the entire purpose of bilingual education. Is the purpose simply to get students proficient in English, even if that means ignoring their other language skills? Or is the purpose to produce students who actually are bilingual, and who can read, speak, and write adequately in two languages? The reading by Lu mirrors this dilemma. Although she grew up speaking two languages, at various times she was taught to regard one of those languages as inferior to the other and unworthy of study except as a means to an end; which language was the supposedly inferior one depended on the political environment at the time (Lu 437-448). Rodriguez provides an interesting insight when he recounts his childhood experiences and his opposition to bilingual education; he says:
Supporters of bilingual education today imply that students like me miss a great deal by not being taught in their family’s language. What they seem not to recognize is that , as a socially disadvantaged child, I considered Spanish to be a private langauge. What I needed to learn in School is that I had the right—and the obligation—to speak the public language of los gringos. (197)
In the U.S., bilingual education generally falls into one of two major types, transitional bilingual and two-way (or dual) language immersion. Each primary method has specific features, benefits, and drawbacks. As described by Sheets and Torres, transitional bilingual education programs “disregard the maintenance and development of the home language and focus exclusively on English acquisition. The major goal is to transition students as quickly as possible into classroom with instruction only in English” (80). The expectation is that over a period of a few years, students will transition to working entirely in English. Singh provides specifics of this approach:
The program typically begins with 90% first-language use, reducing the percentage after 3 or 4 years to 0%, while the second language, English, begins at 10% and gradually increases to 100%. This type of program requires that teachers are proficient in the minority or primary language and the second language (English) or that there is a team teaching arrangement with a primary and second-language teacher. (854)
In contrast, dual language immersion functions differently by developing skills in two languages. As Sheets and Torres state, “[T]he ideal situation in this model is classrooms with half native English speakers and half native speakers of the same non-English language. In this model, both groups are immersed in a non-native language and both develop native and second-language knowledge, skills, and competencies” (81). In the transitional model, bilingual education is regarded as a means to an end, with the defined goal being getting students to function adequately in English-only settings. In the dual immersion model, bilingual education serves to develop students who are literate in two languages.
Many benefits of bilingual education in general have been identified. First, bilingual education enables students with limited English proficiency to attain working knowledge of English while still providing them content knowledge in other subjects. For example, if a student enters a U.S. school system without sufficient English skills to understand instruction in mathematics, social studies, science, and other subjects, without bilingual education the student must wait until he or she has acquired high enough English proficiency before receiving instruction in those subjects. On a practical level, that would mean students might spend a year taking only English instruction, until such time as the students would be able to comprehend what a teacher is saying about math, social studies, or science. That approach would delay the students’ graduation from school, and quite possibly frustrate the students so much they would drop out of school.
The benefits of the two specific approaches to bilingual education vary. The dual language immersion method promotes maintenance of what some call the “heritage” language (the language first acquired by the student). As Lee and Suarez point out, children who continue to learn in both their heritage language and English tend to have “higher grade point averages, higher standardized test scores in math and in English, [and] lower drop-out rates than do their counterparts who have lost proficiency in their heritage language” (54). One drawback to this model, as McField has documented, is the limited “number of available bilingual teachers and staff who can teach in the dual-language programs” (232). The transitional model, on the other hand, requires fewer resources and fits in better with the mainstream belief that English should be the primary language of the U.S. The drawback to this approach is obviously a loss or neglect of the student’s native language skills.
Regardless of which model is used, to have effective bilingual education, higher education institutions or school districts must adequately prepare teachers to work in a bilingual classroom setting. To accomplish this goal, it is necessary to have a curriculum that enables teachers to understand how bilingual education works and to become proficient in using appropriate pedagogical strategies with their students. Different states have different requirements for their teachers. It is worth examining California’s approach as a state with a significant number of both English language learners and teachers of those students. By state law, “[M]ultiple subject candidates must demonstrate subject matter competence via examinations aligned to state student content standards” (Olivos & Sarmiento 72). However, the curriculum used by California is not ideal, as Olivos and Sarmiento describe it, more time is spent on “technical terms and vocabulary connected to the RICA [a state-mandated standardized test] rather than in the practice of reading methods that will make teachers more capable of working with their students” (73).
What should the curriculum look like for teachers who will work in a bilingual education setting? Olivos and Sarmiento propose that bilingual teacher programs must produce teachers who can mediate multiple cultures, advocate for low-performing students, possess pedagogical skills related to second language acquisition, promote native language skills, and stay cognizant of the changing political and ideological issues surrounding bilingual education (74).
When considering the issues of bilingual education, it is also important to address their efficacy. In addition to the two primary models discussed earlier, a few other approaches exist. Prior to the 1970s, the sink or swim model was used, in which students are placed in full immersion classes with minimal or no instruction in their native language. Unfortunately, there is little data about how efficient this approach was, but it is a moot point since the law now requires a different approach. More recently studies have been conducted on bilingual education. During the 1980s, when President Reagan questioned the effectiveness of bilingual education, a study was commissioned:
[T]he National Advisory and Coordinating Council on Bi-Lingual Education undertook a comprehensive study of programs nationwide. Their report, which was not issued to Congress until 1988, stated that the instructional quality and comprehensiveness in meeting student needs was significantly more important that any particular method or philosophy. In some settings one approach was successful but the same approach elsewhere was not effective. The best programs were judged to be those taught by teachers linguistically and culturally sensitive who maintained high expectations of the students. (Bilingual)
Based on their findings, which method of bilingual education is used is less important than how well the particular method is executed.
Becoming bilingual has many advantages. In learning to speak English well, students can avoid the discrimination that their limited English parents experience and the embarrassment they may often have when they perceive that their parents do not speak English with the fluency of a native speaker. As Tan described, because of her mother’s grammatical errors and limited vocabulary, employees in retail stores, banks and so forth “did not take her seriously, did not give her good service, pretended not to understand her, or even acted as if they did not hear her” (488). Tan also believes that her mother’s limited English adversely affected her own performance in school (489).
But in addition to eliminating negative experiences, bilingual education has some positive benefits as well. Students who become proficient in two languages and learn about two different cultures can reasonably be expected to have better appreciation for cultural diversity than students who grow up in a monolingual environment. For example, students who appreciate both American and Mexican culture might be better able to appreciate political, religious or ethnic diversity among their colleagues when they enter the workforce. To them, different cultures and languages do not automatically imply inferior. This appreciation can give them better social skills, in that they are flexible and adaptable to numerous situations instead of being comfortable in only a homogenous environment.
With the dual language immersion method, there is the benefit of additive bilingualism. These students have not lost their native language skills; they have simply added a second language. This addition can prove beneficial, in that they can communicate better with colleagues who may not be fluent in English. If they reside in areas of the U.S. where there are significant numbers of non-English speakers, their native language may be required for certain jobs. For example, in a city such as Miami, which has a large Spanish-speaking population from Cuba and other Central and South American countries, being able to speak both Spanish and English fluently would be regarded as a necessity in many workplaces. Also, if these students desire to pursue employment outside of the U.S., their native language may be needed in some countries. Even if they go to a country whose language is neither English nor their own native language, their previous experience learning a second language will help them adapt to the new country and its language.
Today I spoke about the added benefits to a bilingual education. Many people believe there are benefits overall to slowly transitioning children from their native tongue to English in schools through bilingual programs. Others believe starting them cold turkey is better. Personally experiencing the benefits of a bilingual education in both kindergarten and first grade shows that these programs are desperately needed for these children.
Works Cited
"Bilingual Education." American Decades. Ed. Judith S. Baughman, et al. Vol. 9: 1980-1989. Detroit: Gale, 2001. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 24 Nov. 2012.
Fránquiz, María E. "Key Concepts In Bilingual Education: Identity Texts, Cultural Citizenship, And Humanizing Pedagogy." New England Reading Association Journal 48.1 (2012): 32-42. Education Research Complete. Web. 5 Dec. 2012.
Lu, Min-Zhan. “From Silence to words: Writing As Struggle”. College English, 437-446.
McField, Grace P. "Dual-Language Programs." Encyclopedia of Bilingual Education. Ed. Josué M. González. Vol. 1. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2008. 229-232. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 5 Dec. 2012.
Olivos, Edward M., and Lilia E. Sarmiento. "Is There Room For Biliteracy? Credentialing California's Future Bilingual Teachers." Issues In Teacher Education 15.1 (2006): 69-84. ERIC. Web. 5 Dec. 2012.
Rodriguez, Richard. “Public and Private Language,” by Richard Rodriguez, reprinted from Hunger of Memory (1982). Ed.Richard Rodriguez. David R.Godine, Publisher, Inc. Print.
Sheets, Rosa Hernández, and Ana Berta Torres. "Bilingual Curriculum." Encyclopedia of Curriculum Studies. Ed. Craig Kridel. Vol. 1. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Reference, 2010. 80-82. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 5 Dec. 2012.
Singh, Kathryn. "Transitional Bilingual Education Programs." Encyclopedia of Bilingual Education. Ed. Josué M. González. Vol. 2. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2008. 854-857. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 5 Dec. 2012.
Sook Lee, Jin, and Debra Suárez. "Benefits of Bilingualism and Heritage Languages." Encyclopedia of Bilingual Education. Ed. Josué M. González. Vol. 1. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2008. 53-56. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 5 Dec. 2012.
Tan, Amy. “Mother Tongue”. Norton Field Guide To Writing. 2nd ed. New York, NY:W.W. Norton and Company, 2010. Print.
