English for All: A Practical Approach to Learning - Essay Example

23 March 2007 English for All: A Practical Approach to Learning Prior to 1974, children in the United s without previous knowledge of the English language were not always given the opportunity to learn it and were therefore deprived of an equal education, since classes in public schools were conducted in English. In 1971, the San Francisco, California, school system was integrated as a result of a federal court decree (Beyond Brown). At that time, it was discovered that 1800 of the 2800 students of Chinese ancestry in the system were receiving no supplemental instruction in English. Needless to say, these students fell behind in their studies and were apt to be denied a high school diploma. The situation was then addressed in Lau v. Nichols, which was instituted in 1974 as a remedy, but the decision did not specify a teaching method, and the approach could be "bilingual instruction, English as a second language (ESL) classes or some other approach" (Crawford, para. 1). This broad interpretation has caused a great deal of controversy over the years. Lau was intended to give limited-English-proficient students (LEP) the opportunity to gain the proficiency they needed, but, unfortunately, according to Crawford, a symposium held twenty years after Lau indicates there has been little improvement in the effort to create equity for LEP students. Without one specific method of teaching LEP students, the effort becomes lost, with well-designed programs staffed by qualified teachers available to only a fraction of LEP students. The Multi-Instructional Approach The term "bilingual education" has come to mean a "range of instructional programs for children whose native language is not English," while the best way to accommodate such children has been and continues to be an area of debate. As noted in a research project by the Westchester Institute in New York, the debate centers on the "role of native language in instruction-whether it should be used and for how long" (Westchester, para. 3). Supporters of native language instruction recommend aggressive development of the primary language prior to introduction of English, while proponents of all-English instruction feel that the English curriculum should be introduced at the very beginning of the student's school experience with minimal use of the native language (Westchester). English Immersion in California Public Schools If the use of bilingual education actually meant learning two languages equally well, it might be a feasible program for all students, not just LEP students. Unfortunately, the concept has not been incorporated in public schools, and according to Ron Unz, advocate of English-only instruction, what is called bilingual education actually consists of mostly Spanish language instructions with little English incorporated into teaching. Since over half of America's LED students were born in the United States with most of the remainder coming here at a young age, the argument that older students have a more difficult time learning English covers only a small percentage of LED students (Sailer). Comparing the English immersion program with the bilingual program, English-only instruction would appear to be more successful, not because it is necessarily a better program but because the bilingual method is not being well utilized. Respected author Maxine Hong Kingston was born in California and in her biographical novel Woman Warrior: Memoirs of a Girlhood Among Ghosts, she recognizes the language and cultural barriers she faced during her childhood. She attended both public school and Chinese school, and her family mostly consisted of Chinese immigrants, who labeled anyone not Chinese as "ghosts." The idea of a bilingual education at that time did not exist, and Kingston had to learn English in order to communicate with English-speaking students, teachers, and business people. Even so, for her, the cultural barriers were far more difficult to overcome. Propositions 227 and 203 Proposition 227, passed in 1998, requires California Public Schools to teach LEP students in special classes taught almost entirely in English. Once they have acquired a good working knowledge of English (usually within a year), they can move to regular classes, negating the need for continuing special classes. There are exceptions to this requirement, where a child of at least 10 entering the program can be taught in another language if parents and teachers are in agreement that this is necessary (Legislative). The benefits of such a program have shown it to be successful so far. If total immersion in English language in California offers improvement in creating more equal opportunities in a state so overwhelmingly multi-racial, the success of Proposition 203 in Arizona, with its large Latino population, is a given, and other states would appear to be following in its footsteps. Prior to Proposition 227, an overview of Lau v. Nichols showed it had not offered the necessary remedy and in actual practice had failed for the following reasons (Callaghan, Unz & Vega): For the first 4 to 7 years in California schools, bilingual meant Spanish only. Only 6.7 percent of limited-English students in California learned enough English to be moved into mainstream classes. Latino immigrant children had the highest dropout rate and lowest scores of any immigrant group. California's school children speak 140 languages. To teach each group in their native language before teaching them English was educationally and fiscally impossible. The rebuttal intended to show why Proposition 227 should not be passed offers reasons that are so generic, they have and apparently had little impact. For instance, according to D'Amelio, Bergan & Looney, the proposed method has not been tested. (It can hardly be tested until it is put into effect.) It puts LEP students into one classroom. (Isn't this the most practical method) It takes away the parents' right to choose what is best for their children. (Not true. There are exceptions included that give parents different options.) California should return more decisions to parents, teachers, principals, and local school boards. (Why Wouldn't this create the same problems previously noted) Conclusion The bottom line in the controversy over bilingual education is that students without adequate English skills will have difficulty in college and in the workplace where only English is used (Westchester). Many LED students enter American public schools from an immigrant family where they have learned to speak in their native language. Instruction in English with an ESL component quickly offers them better communication skills with the English-speaking public. They, in turn, can bring these skills into the home. The key to any successful academic program is quality, and studies have shown that many bilingual programs fail to meet standards with high demands on teachers, especially following the "No Child Left Behind" legislature put into place in 2001. In addition, according to the Westchester study, over the past 10 years, the number of LEP students in the nation's schools has increased by 50 percent to 3 million students and is expected to double in the next decade. It would appear, according to recent polls, that the American public favors intensive instruction in English over instruction in both English and native language (Krashen). A 2002 study of the effects of Proposition 227 on education (Parrish et al) shows an increase in focus on how to educate English-language (EL) students, with more clarity needed to best utilize the proposition. In terms of parental exception waivers, much confusion continues to exist, and more programs for adult English learners are recommended. Also, there are still various school districts that continue to use bilingual methods. By developing and utilizing one program that offers English-only instruction to LEP students, research shows that by addressing the concerns, a standard can be developed throughout the nation to advance educational equity. Works Cited Beyond Brown. "Summary of Lau v. Nichols. 1974. Online. 16 March 2007. http://www.pbs.org/beyondbrown/brownpdfs/launichols.pdf Callaghan, A. Unz, R. & Vega, F. "Argument in Favor of Proposition 227. CA Secretary of State. 1998. 16 March 2007. http://primary98.ss.ca.gov/VoterGuide/Propositions/227yesarg.htm Crawford, James. "Summing Up the Lau Decision: Justice is Never Simple." Revisiting the Lau Decision-20 Years After: Proceedings of a National Commemorative Symposium Held on November 3-4, 1994, in San Francisco, California (Oakland, Calif.: ARC Associates, 1996. 16 March 2007. http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/JWCrawford/summing.htm D'Amelio, J. Bergan, M. & Looney, J.J. "Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 227." CA Secretary of State. 1998. 16 March 2007. http://primary98.ss.ca.gov/VoterGuide/Propositions/227yesrbt.htm Kingston, Maxine Hong. Woman Warrior: Memoirs of a Girlhood Among Ghosts. New York: Vintage Books, 1989. Krashen, Stephen. "Evidence Suggesting That Public Opinion Is Becoming More Negative: A Discussion of the Reasons, and What We Can Do About It." University of Southern California. 2002. 16 March 2007. http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/JWCRAWFORD/Krash11.htm Legislative Analyst. "Proposition 227: Analysis." CA Secretary of State. 1998. 20 March 2007. http://primary98.ss.ca.gov/VoterGuide/Propositions/227analysis.htm Parrish, T. Perez, M. Merickel, A. & Linquanti, R. "Effects of the Implementation of Proposition 227 on the Education of English Learners, K-12." American Institutes for Research and WestEd, California Department of Education. 28 June 2002. 16 March 2007. http://www.wested.org/online_pubs/year2finalrpt.pdf Sailer, Steve. "Q & A with Ron Unz: Enemy of Bilingual Education." UPI. 25 September 2002. 16 March 2007. http://www.isteve.com/2002_QA_Ron_Unz.htm. Westchester Institute For Human Services Research. "Bilingual Education." The Balanced View, Vol. 1, No. 3, June 1997. Online. 16 March 2007. http://www.sharingsuccess.org/code/bv/bilingualeducation.pdf Read More