Return-Path: <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost.nifl.gov [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA01935; Mon, 10 Nov 1997 18:56:07 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 18:56:07 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <Pine.A41.3.96a.971110153444.38046A-100000@dante09.u.washington.edu> Errors-To: lmann@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: Carl Grove <cdgrove@u.washington.edu> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-ESL:1485] Re: The issue of English Only X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO Content-Length: 2810 Lines: 54 Paul, I believe I ran across a new book in the Cambridge catalog in the last week that is talking about dual language immersion programs. I can't find it in Books in Print, but I will try to locate it again in the catalog. I too am opposed to the English Only Movement and am currently in the process of writing a dissertation related to the topic. I belive it is Cummins who argues that immersion is a good method, *BUT* only in the case where a student who speaks the majority language at home is immersed voluntarily in a language other than the majority at school. This type of program, if I recall correctly (please set me straight if I don't) was originally called "bilingual education" in Canada; English speaking students in English majority areas were learning French. I believe it has also been termed "additive bilingual education" as opposed to "subtractive bilingual education" (in which the native (minority) language is suppressed in favor of the majority language, as is the case in many "bilingual" programs in the U.S. today). One of the grave difficulties in this whole public debate is that the term "bilingual education" is impossibly ambiguous in the U.S. as the type of program which is called "bilingual" varies remarkably from place to place. I think one lesson to be learned by those of us who want to be involved in the debate is the importance of clearly defining what is being discussed when people start using terms like immersion, dual language immersion, bilingual education, etc. I've rambled on nearly enough. I'll just restate that I think the main problem with immersion language education in the U.S. is the negative psychological and cognitive results of suppressing one language (the native and usually minority language) in favor of another language (the second and usually majority language). If politicians wanted to take my English speaking son and place him in a Spanish immersion program, I would be on the doorstep in a second (given that I was satisfied with the quality of the program, of course). Please keep the dialogue going. I'll send the reference as soon as I find it. Carl Grove On Fri, 7 Nov 1997, Grupo Primavera wrote: > There is throughout this country a "movement" to establish English > as the official language and to institute English Only instruction in > elementary schools. > I personally am very opposed to this "movement" and would like to > know the opinions of others, especially of those who can offer solid > arguments destroying the so called "research" touting English Immersion. > On the other hand, research on Dual Language or Two Way Immersion > programs indicates that such an approach is vastly superior to all > others. And I would like to hear from people on this program. > Paul Rogers > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Apr 14 2005 - 14:09:40 EDT