Artifact 7.5

Ashleigh L’Heureux

April 25, 2007

EDU 307

Slice of History: Bilingual Education

 

            In 1998, Californians voted in favor of a proposition regarding bilingual education that ignited and changed bilingual education across the country. Politician Ron Unz wanted to replace all native language instruction with English-only instruction. This was a significant moment in the history of bilingual education because it dismantled more of California’s bilingual education programs and threw bilingual programs across the country into turmoil. In many states, including Arizona, Colorado, Washington and Massachusetts, traditional bilingual programs do not exist. Uns saw bilingual education programs as “an alternative, not a means to teaching English” (Crawford 2002).

Summary

            According to an article by James Crawford, “Agenda for Inaction: A Critique of the National Research Council Report Improving Schooling for Language-Minority Children”, the main reason why bilingual education programs are non-existent is because decisions are made in the legislative chambers and voting booths, and not in the classrooms. When Proposition 227 was presented to the public, very little research evidence was given to voters. Therefore, decisions were not made based on education research data but on the basis of public opinion, which as Crawford stated, “was often very passionate, but rarely informed” (Crawford 2002). This implies that if the public was more informed about the benefits and logistics of bilingual education they may have made a different decision. The result of the vote also reveals why things are not done differently regarding bilingual education in public schools. Politics and ideologies have control of this issue.

            James Crawford’s main point was that programs like bilingual education are federally funded and only focused on program results. He stated, “virtually all research, especially educational research is supported by tax dollars and therefore takes place in a political context” (Crawford 2002). Politicians are only concerned with whether the governement was getting good value for its money. Crawford mentioned that researchers should work with a “knowledge base” of “best practices” that produce long-term benefits for bilingual children. They should think about program components and not politically motivated labels. However, Crawford revealed that the National Research Council (NRC) in 1997 found evaluations to be inconclusive about which teaching strategies work best. Lastly, Crawford talked about what will happen to bilingual students and programs without political change. He sat that now more and more Language English Proficient (LEP) students are denied the opportunity to develop their first languages. Also, quick-exit programs are likely to become popular, which limits the development of native languages.

Point of View

            James Crawford is a writer and lecturer who specializes in the politics of language, and he served as the executive director of the National Association for Bilingual Education. In this article his point of view is that “bilingualism in American schools has often addressed the preoccupations of policymakers instead of the needs of students, parents, and educators” (Crawford 2002). He feels that the people who this is effecting the most, should have the most say in how it is handled.

Summary

            Crawford wrote another article in Rethinking Schools that also captured more important events in the recent history of bilingual education. In his article, “Obituary: The Bilingual Ed. Act, 1968-2002”, Crawford discussed the elimination of Title VII also known as The Bilingual Education Act. This act was developed in 1968 and transformed the way language-minority students were taught in the United States. However, with the development of the No Child Left Behind Act in 2001, The Bilingual Education Act was transformed into the English Language Acquisition Act in 2002. This was part of the school reform for the No Child Left Behind Act. He mentioned the benefits of the act that are now lost, such as the promotion of equal access to the curriculum, trained generations of educators, and fostered achievement among students.

            With the new act, Title III, the word bilingual is not even used by the law. Even more devastating is the increased lack of funding. States are now granted control over funding decisions, including the power to implement new instructive methods to bilingual education. Districts now receive federal funding based on their enrollments of ELLs and immigrant students. Another important point Crawford noted were the new standards in education that resulted from this new act. Schools are now judged by the percentage of ELLs; they are expected to discourage the use of native-language instruction, annual English assessments are mandated, and failure to show academic progress in English is punished. The people who are in charge of this matter simply look at the underachievement of bilingual students, but not the reasons why they are underachieving. They are quick to make assumptions that low academic success is due to bilingual education programs, when in reality it has more to do with social-class and upbringing. This assumption helps to explain why things are done this way and why bilingual education programs around the country are deceased, as the title of the article implies. This article also explained that things are not done differently because of the failure of bilingual educators to explain their mission to the public, and also because of a rise of anti-immigrant passion that continues to weaken the standing of this issue even further.

Point of View

            In his article, James Crawford takes the point of view of someone who is devastated by the loss of The Bilingual Education Act. He is trying to create an awareness of all the benefits of bilingual education. He is a firm believer in its benefits and takes the point of view of someone who is angry at the change that has been made and wants people to know his frustrations.

Personal Response

            I found both of these articles very useful, because I will encounter students who speak other languages in my future career as a teacher. It is very helpful for me to understand the current procedures and methods as well as how bilingual education has transformed over the years. I chose these sources because I felt they really gave me insight into the issues behind bilingual education and why in most states transitional bilingual programs can no longer be found. They addressed the process that took place which banned these programs and explained the politics behind these decisions. From reading these articles, I learned that the issue of bilingual education has been a problem since the founding of our country when immigrants were first arriving in America. I was also informed that English Language Learners (ELLs) are the fastest growing segment of U.S. student population, which makes this issue very important. I also learned that bilingual education addresses state, district, and school-level administrators, policymakers, national and international researchers, teachers, parents, and community leaders. They all are connected to bilingual education in some way. I also learned that it was an issue for these stakeholders, because one of the more important challenges confronted by schools in the United States is educating to high standards, students from diverse language, culture, and social-class groups. Without bilingual education how would these stakeholders make this goal possible?

            After researching the history of bilingual education and understand why it is done the way it is and why it is not done differently, I still wonder what children going through these programs and their families prefer. Most of my research focused on the politics of bilingual education and did not really touch upon the feelings and beliefs of the people it directly affects. I would also like to learn about the social skills of bilingual education students. It was suggested that it takes the majority of elementary years to bridge the gap between languages for bilingual students. What happens with peers and friendships once they are mainstreamed after being isolated fro so long? This research has given me great insight into the world of bilingual education and I plan to continue on with my education.