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.