There is intense political polarization over immigration in border states like Arizona and California, and public schools are a major battleground in the cultural war. Most elected officials and the pressure groups that court them piously claim that their particular agenda has no motive beyond doing what is best for the children, and likewise share the goal of teaching English to students who have little or no faculty with it. There has been a plethora of academic studies about the relative merits of both bilingual and immersion strategies, though like the political debate that inspires them they tend to generate more heat than light. Beyond the heated rhetoric and nativist passion, it seems that both styles of language instruction can be successful if they are girded by the things all students need: quality instruction and learning materials, patience, and individual attention.
Table of Contents
1. ELL Instruction: Politics and Performance
Objectives and Topics
The primary objective of this work is to examine the political and educational challenges surrounding English Language Learner (ELL) instruction in the United States, specifically focusing on the debate between immersion and bilingual strategies, the impact of standardized testing, and the systemic barriers to achieving educational equity for immigrant students.
- Political polarization and legislative initiatives like Propositions 203 and 227.
- Pedagogical strategies: Comparing immersion vs. bilingual education models.
- The critique of standardized testing and its cultural bias against ELL students.
- Systemic issues including funding disparities and legal class-action lawsuits.
- The role of socioeconomic status and school environment in student success.
Excerpt from the Book
ELL Instruction: Politics and Performance
There is intense political polarization over immigration in border states like Arizona and California, and public schools are a major battleground in the cultural war. Most elected officials and the pressure groups that court them piously claim that their particular agenda has no motive beyond doing what is best for the children, and likewise share the goal of teaching English to students who have little or no faculty with it. The crux of the debate concerns whether an additive or subtractive approach is better, and each side has fierce partisans in its favor. Though California and, in particular, Arizona are epicenters of this debate, the issue has national implications: According to a 2007 report from the U.S. Census Bureau, fully 20% of children in the United Sates live in a household that lacks a native speaker of English. (O’Neal 2010)
In Arizona, the current method of English language immersion for non-native speaking students dates back to the 2000 passage of Proposition 203, an English-only initiative based on Proposition 227, which had passed in neighboring California two years earlier and with financing from the same organization. Both propositions drew better than 60% of the vote, and contained expectations that sounded wonderful, such as teaching children to speak English fluently in a single school year, but had never before been achieved. In this instance, a small minority of language researchers gave the subtractive theory a new spin with their ardent hypothesis that language acquisition is a zero-sum proposition: that whatever energy students expended on their native language detracted from their acquisition of the new language: hence, deleting Spanish (or any other non-English language) entirely from the curriculum would result in dramatic gains in English proficiency.
Summary of Chapters
1. ELL Instruction: Politics and Performance: This chapter analyzes the historical and political context of English Language Learner policies in the U.S., critiquing the efficacy of immersion versus bilingual programs and the detrimental impact of standardized high-stakes testing on linguistic development.
Keywords
English Language Learners, Bilingual Education, Immersion Strategies, Proposition 203, Proposition 227, Standardized Testing, Educational Equity, Language Acquisition, Miriam Flores, Socioeconomic Factors, Cultural Bias, Dade County, Differentiated Instruction, Immigration Policy, Linguistic Diversity.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this work?
The work examines the political landscape and educational methodologies surrounding the instruction of English Language Learners in the United States, specifically within the states of Arizona and California.
What are the central themes discussed?
Central themes include the tension between bilingual and immersion instruction models, the role of political ideology in education policy, systemic funding failures, and the cultural bias inherent in current standardized assessment practices.
What is the primary objective of this research?
The primary goal is to critically evaluate why current language instruction policies have failed to yield optimal success and to suggest that quality of instruction and socioeconomic support are more vital than the specific instructional label used.
Which scientific or research methods were employed?
The author employs a comprehensive literature review, analysis of legislative history, examination of federal court cases, and evaluation of existing academic studies on language acquisition efficacy.
What is covered in the main body of the text?
The text covers the legislative history of Propositions 203 and 227, the limitations of standardized testing like DIBELS, the outcomes of various language programs in Florida and California, and the legal challenges regarding state funding for ELL programs.
Which keywords define this publication?
Key terms include English Language Learners (ELL), immersion, bilingual education, language acquisition, standardized testing, and educational policy.
How did the Dade County bilingual model influence later programs?
The Dade County program served as a benchmark for success in the 1960s, demonstrating that well-funded bilingual initiatives could achieve stellar results, though subsequent programs rarely received the same level of political and financial support.
What significance does the Miriam Flores case hold?
The Miriam Flores case highlights the long-standing legal battle regarding the failure of the state of Arizona to provide adequate funding and assistance for ELL students to overcome language barriers as mandated by federal law.
What does the author conclude regarding standardized testing?
The author concludes that current standardized tests are inappropriate for language learners, often biased, and ineffective at measuring the incremental progress necessary for true language proficiency.
- Quote paper
- Mark Schauer (Author), 2011, ELL Instruction. Politics and Performance, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/230262
