[NIFL-ESL:1515] RE: English Only Discussion

From: Heide Wrigley (hwrigley@aiweb.com)
Date: Mon Nov 17 1997 - 06:46:20 EST


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 GAA28379; Mon, 17 Nov 1997 06:46:20 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 06:46:20 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <81CAE71F61D4CF11A6DE00A0249640923ADCBC@EXCHANGE01>
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: Heide Wrigley <hwrigley@aiweb.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-ESL:1515] RE: English Only Discussion
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49)
Status: RO
Content-Length: 5606
Lines: 121

Andres, 

I am glad to see you and others lay out arguments in defense of dual
language instruction/bilingual education and it is no doubt important to
examine the ideologies that see bilingualism as a threat, rather than a
resource.  The literature is fairly clear on one point - *sound*
bilingual education programs are more effective than English only
programs in helping Latino kids learn.  Also, the proposition contained
in the Unz Intitiative to provide all bilingual kids with ONE YEAR of
English immersion and then mainstream them into regular classes is both
outrageous and unworkable, given what we know about second language
acquisition and literacy development. 

Having said that, I would, however, add one point to the discussion: 

I think we need to acknowledge the real concerns that Latino parents
have about the education that their children are receiving in our
schools.  Just as there are immersion programs that fail to help
children learn, there are bilingual programs (and it pains me to say
that), that are pretty awful and ought not to exists because they make a
mockery out of education (of any kind).  

The parents that I have talked to (as part of my work with family
literacy programs for language minority families) are much less
concerned about the language of instruction  (Spanish or English or
both);  they are, however, very upset if their children can't do their
homework or don't do well in classes.  Many of these parents were eager
to learn more about how bilingual children learn, yet very very few
family literacy programs ever talked with parents about issues of
bilingualism.  I believe that all teachers (ESL, bilingual, and
mainstream) need to be prepared to help children succeed, and the job of
mainstream teachers will be much much more difficult if  bilingual
disappear and there is no sound alternative.  -

At this point, many language minority families are supporting the Unz
intiative, largely because they know that their kids are not doing well
in school and` they feel that a strong English program will be their
ticket to success. 

Unless we form allies with parents and communities and demonstrate that
we care about their children and we want them to succeed and 

unless we support advocacy groups for parents that allow them to voice
their concerns and challenge the system to teach their children the
skills they need for academic success - unless that happens - 

we will be lost in rhetoric and the Unz Initiative will succeed, and not
just with xenophobic monolingual "Americans" 

I think the policy discussion around "English Only" should continue, but
at the same time, it would be good to hear from teachers who have
explored these issues with parents - 

Sincerely 

Heide Spruck Wrigley
Aguirre International 
hwrigley@aiweb.com


> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Andres Muro [SMTP:AndresM@NMAIL.EPCC.EDU]
> Sent:	Monday, November 10, 1997 3:17 PM
> To:	Multiple recipients of list
> Subject:	[NIFL-ESL:1484] English Only Discussion
> 
> The English Only movement is a movement of scapegoatism, designed to
> promote fear among uneducated voters. The rhetoric of the movement is
> similar to Hitler's "My Struggle". This movement, or variations of it,
> become popular with politicians who want to get votes based on a
> "reduction in spending" agenda. The argument is that we spent too much
> money on immigrants who are lazy, do not want to assimilate and refuse
> to learn English. If we vote for these politicians, they will reduce
> our
> taxes by not paying for bilingual education and other programs
> designed
> to aid immigrants and blah, blah, blah. 
> 
> The English Only movement is not based on any well researched 
> pedagogical approach, nor it is based on sound cultural studies. It
> is, as I
> said before, a movement designed to promote xenophobia. California's
> Pete Wilson, has been one of the masters at effectvely promoting
> xenophobia among voters. 
> 
> Regarding the pedagogical value of multilingual education vs. total
> immersion programs, the merits of these approaches depend on context
> and ideology. Street argues that literacy practices are rooted in
> ideology;
> and acquisition of literacies are often mediated by power struggles.
> Therefore, the effect of an immersion program, vs. a multilingual
> program
> can have different sociocultural and psychological effects, and may be
> received differently depending on the particular context. 
> 
> Populations who are resisting assimilation and acculturation efforts
> from
> a dominant culture will respond differently to pedagogical approaches
> from those populations who are not. Overall, Lambert argues that an
> "additive" pedagogical approach (one that adds to the existing
> cultural
> experience) is favorable to a "subtractive" approach (one that favors
> one cultural experience while trying to subtract another one). For
> oppressed immigrants with poor self esteem, a subtractive approach can
> be culturally devastating. This type of approach often can lead to
> passive resistance. 
> 
> In the anthology "Literacy as Praxis" Ogbu makes an analysis of
> minorities' status and the school experience. Ogbu identifies
> voluntary
> vs. involuntary minorities.  Voluntary minorities are those who came
> to
> the US voluntarily seeking economic well-being. Minorities who
> acquired
> such status by slavery, conquest or colonization are involuntary
> minorities. Involuntary minorities may see an immersion approach as a
> cultural threat while voluntary minorities may not perceive this. 
> 
> Good discussion,
> 
> Andres



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Apr 14 2005 - 14:09:42 EDT