The role of language in American classrooms has become a particularly contentious and complicated issue. Especially in school districts, like many in Arizona, where there are large populations of ELL learners and where students come to school with many different levels of English and other language fluency.
Language policy in school has become an emotional rather than a logical debate. Data is largely missing from media forums and public dialogue on policy regarding language in schools.
A recent study in Urban Review provides a first step to understanding these reforms. This article concentrates on the perspectives of teachers. Specifically they review in-depth interviews with teachers of ELL learners in Massachusetts. These teachers were interviewed several years after the passage of Question 2. Question 2 was an English-only initiative that sought to significantly shrink bilingual programming and move all programming toward an English-only model. Under this legislation all ELL students (even those with no English language skills) must spend 30 days in Sheltered English Immersion (SEI) classes before being up for reassignment to a temporary bilingual program. Teachers perspectives on the effect of this policy in their own classrooms and within their schools were as follows:
Cons
- Children who recently migrated and had no English fluency had adverse emotional reactions to being in English-only classes where they could not participate in nor understand instruction.
- The 30 day rule wasted valuable instruction time and increased the
gap between ELLs and native English speakers. This period was often referred to as a "parking lot for these kids". - Teachers felt that school climate was effected with teachers policing teachers over using English-only. Teachers complained that for their newest students they sometimes needed to explain something in their native language and keep going but under the watch of colleagues felt like they could not, and had to move on with the student still not understanding.
- They saw children quickly losing fluency in their native language. Teachers worried about their lack of fluency in now not one, but two languages. Would they be able to talk to parents.
- SEI classes provided a better options for children who were fairly advanced in English but still required English instruction. Teachers felt that these children had been previously underserved by bilingual classes that had to cater to children with lower levels of English fluency.
- The SEI program segregated the children into same-native language groups. Teachers felt this helpful in communicating with children and building on shared experience.
This is a very interesting, and critically important topic right now, and education plays a major role in it.
ReplyDeleteThe method of "The SEI program segregated the children into same-native language groups. Teachers felt this was helpful in communicating with children and building on shared experience" is currently being considered, and beginning to be implemented to an extreme level, in a school district I have worked in.. the four middle schools have divided into a "primarily Cape Verdean school," and a "primarily Latino school," etc. Is this TOO extreme? Is this a form of desegregation? I'm curious what your take is on this.
Hi Andy, I have not heard of efforts to divide students by shared language at a school level. This is interesting indeed. I am not sure that there are added benefits to this school-wide approach vs just dividing students within the SEI program, as was done in the schools I discussed. That said, from what I have read segregation is most destructive when you are segregating students not by ethnicity but by class. Many of the most segregated schools in the US are also the poorest and this is the most problematic aspect of these schools. In other words, many times children in very segregated schools are not only cut off from children of other races/ethncities but from different levels of social capital. In my view, the most productive schools would be balanced both by class, ethnicity and language skills. Children learn from each other and empathy is raised when they are allowed to interact with many groups. When a child feels cut off from the rest of the school program (which was a major complaint about the "late-exit bilingual program) that child is at risk of failure. But at the same time a child with special language needs could be better served when with learners of the same language background. It is clear why this language is so complicated!
ReplyDelete