The History of Bilingual Education- Video

The History of Bilingual Education- Video Analysis

The overarching ideology present throughout this video is the notion of multicultural and multilingual education. This relates to greater society because America is by and large a multicultural and multilingual country although some people seem to believe there is a national language (which there is not!!). The video details the importance of accepting and embracing a students' cultural identity. It also highlights how long it can take a non-native speaker to fully acquire all the uses of a language. Academic language proficiency can take up to 7 years while conversational language proficiency many only take several years. This finding is significant now because with the proposition 227 students are excepted to become proficient because they are immersed fully with some language supports for a year. The video was in support of bilingual education because it helps students to acquire language through building on the skills and knowledge they already have in their L1. They work with the whole child and understand that language is interconnected and acquisition of English is not sped up by excluding the child's first language as well as their culture.

The one component which is often left out is that students who are english language learners are not all immigrants. Because public policy focuses greatly on immigrant populations children who are english language learners are often assumed to be immigrants.

Framing of Bilingual Education Past & Present

Past

Bilingual education was once grounded in the movement social justice and equity (Paez, 2008). Bilingual education was original designed to address the needs of children who were not receiving an equitable education (Paez, 2008). Accordingly to the Supreme court decision that mandated supports for ELL's (Lau v. Nichols, 1974), "there is not equality of treatment merely by providing students with the same facilities, textbooks, teachers, and curriculum; for students who do not understand English effectively foreclosed from any meaningful education". So for over 30 years students acquisition of the English language was supported by the use of their heritage language. Both their L1 (heritage language) and their L2(English) was taught inside classrooms across the nation. Students' native language was seen as an asset and as a resource that teachers could use to help them to master English as their second language. Students were encouraged to use both languages inside the classroom.

Present

In the last decade there has been a silencing of bilingualism and bilingual education. In 1998, California passed the Bill Proposition 227 which ended bilingual education in public schools (it is also known as English for the Children headed by Ron Unz)---The Unz initiative is notorious for creating a climate of xenophobia that has dominated politics in the recent years. It is the Unz initiative which is responsible for the recent state of bilingual education across the country. Bear in mind Unz has no educational background in teaching yet he decided what would be "best" for non-native speakers or immigrants as he would put it.

Soon after Massachusetts passed a similar bill known as question 2 on the 2002 ballot. In states like Massachusetts and California English only is welcomed in the classrooms and the only supports students are given are 1st year sheltered English classrooms in which the heritage language could be used to assist students language. Educational policy has gone from taking into account students' home languages and being flexible to emphasizing English-only. The stance that educational policy has taken is one that is "subtractive in nature and ignore[s] the linguistic resources [our students] bring into the classroom" (Paez, 2008). Educational policy goes against research which supports and continues to demonstrate that the use of a students heritage language and English is beneficial and aids in student academic success in English. English only classrooms depreciate what students bring with them into the classrooms. It also forces/enables educators to view their native language as a deficit instead of an asset. This view that we take regarding bilingual education excludes our students from an equitable education. It also shows our students that the only acceptable language is English and shows them that the educational system has power over the languages they use in their everyday lives. It tells them that their language is NOT good enough.

To view the academic article referenced click here.

Proposition 227- Initiative that becomes Question 2 in Mass.

Here is an archived article which talks about Proposition 227 the bill that Massachusetts follows on the 2002 ballot for "English Only Classrooms"

This article starts out by talking about how bilingual education was once seen as a humane and sound method used for immigrant assimilation. The words used in the very first sentence struck me as strong and the inappropriate use of words. It is highlights the issue of assimilation and how immigrants because they are in America should learn English immediately and become more American. Although the first sentence was meant to be an embracive statement regarding bilingual education is says a lot of how bilingual education was viewed. Instead, of highlighting how bilingual education helps students maintain their heritage and cultural language and that foundation in language has been shown to help in second language acquisition those against bilingual education believe that it does not help students because statistical evidence has backed up this instructional approach. Those who are against bilingualism typically highlight high latinos HS dropout rates. People have also expressed how they feel that bilingual education holds back student potential because students are learning two languages at the same time. They also argue that there is no REAL transition into English and the latinos/immigrant population never fully immerse themselves into the American culture. Another fault this article has is that it assumes the position that all bilingual students or English Language Learners are immigrant children when in fact, there are children who are English language learners who are citizens but have parents who are not native to America.

The overarching ideology presented throughout the article is this notion that bilingual education is unsuccessful with helping 'immigrant' children to assimilate into American culture through language.

The article also leaves out how bilingual education was viewed as beneficial and the importance of building on students prior knowledge. It also doesn't discuss how long it takes for anyone who is learning a second language to gain full use of the language conversational and academic.

When the Nations View on Bilingual Education took a Turn

The BEA was amended four times before it’s death in 2002. “The 1994 reauthorization was the strongest version of the Bilingual Education Act in promoting the goal of bilingualism for English language learners, rather than simply the transition to English.” (www.nabe.com)

But In 2002, the English Language Acquisition Act, or Title III, was passed as a part of No Child Left Behind Act, stating that bilingual education will now be determined on a State level, meaning an end to Federal funding. Title III states that it holds “State educational agencies, local educational agencies, and schools accountable for increases in English proficiency and core academic content knowledge of limited English proficient children” by requiring “demonstrated improvements in English proficiency” each year, and yearly progress reports on “limited English proficient children, including immigrant children and youth”. (All Quotes are from Title III, www.ed.com ) Basically, Title III focuses on teaching English to LEP [limited English proficient] students without supplementing it with native-language instruction for those who may need it. Of course the government expects the same, if not better results.


This post looks at bilingualism from the point of view that students are lacking in their English langauge skills, This is viewed from the deficit perspective. It also assumes that because a student is limited in English he or she must learn the language immediately. It does not take into account that students may have a lot of world knowledge already but it is the language that differs. Also, people assume that students who are non-native students don't want to learn the language instead of understanding the difficulty in learning a new language especially if your native language is significantly different than english such as Cantonese vs. English.