Talk:Bilingual education

From Academic Kids

From the article:

On the other side, linguists like Jim Cummins from Toronto and Stephen Krashen from the University of Southern California, both respected linguists in the field, argue for inclusion of bilingual education as beneficiary to the second language learner.

I'm not sure, but the above sounds like it's talking about something different, i.e., teaching English-speaking American schoolchildren to become bilingual. --Ed Poor

I just did a search on Krasehn, and this came up: [1] (http://www.humnet.ucla.edu/humnet/linguistics/people/grads/macswan/Krashen1.htm). It seems clear that Krashen was talking about using bilingual education in teaching immigrant children. Ithen checked Cummins, and I came up with this pdf file: [2] (http://www.dpb.dpu.dk/infodok/sprogforum/Espr19/CumminsENG.pdf). He is also talking about teaching immigrant children. soulpatch

Okay, then put it back. This time make it clear. "And don't call me chief!" (Perry White to Jimmy Olsen) --Ed Poor

Bilingual education for little kids are quite common all over the world. Why is the article concentrated on USA? -- Wshun

Because the majority of writers of the article are from there. You can certainly add more about bilingual education elsewhere. -- Taku 03:53 11 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Needs rewrite

• Intro sentence makes it sound as if "bilingual education teaches children to become bilingual"
• Most so-called bilingual education, in the U.S., places a higher priority on (a) preventing schoolchildren from falling behind their mainstream peers than on (b) helping them to become bilingual
• The article doesn't address the cultural assimilation issue: some educators want immigrants' children to assimilate into their host culture ("We are wonderful, you should become one of us!"); others actively oppose such assimilation ("Why should we give up our Hispanic (or fill in the blankian) heritage just to fit in?")
• Much terminology is unclear or ambiguous (this might be intentional on the part of advocates)

I began the native-language instruction article partly as a way of starting afresh. But much more work remains to be done. --user:Ed Poor (talk) 19:44, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)

US info

First of all, the second sentence of the first paragraph is a badly chopped version of the federal definition (http://www.helpforschools.com/ELLKBase/legal/Definition_LEP.shtml). Going by the definition in the article as long as a person's first language was other than English they would be considered LEP no matter how proficient they were in English. Wrong. A better definition would be:

The term ‘limited English proficient’, when used with respect to an individual, means an individual whose primary language is other than English and whose difficulties in speaking, reading, writing, or understanding the English language may be sufficient to deny the individual the ability to successfully achieve in classrooms where the language of instruction is English or the opportunity to participate fully in society.

I would also add that while the term used in the law is still "limited English proficient" in schools these students are more commonly referred to as "English language learners" or "language minority students"."

In the second paragraph "between immigrating and mastering English" assumes that the LEP child is an immigrant. Part of the official definition that was left out in the first paragraph is "who is a Native American or Alaska Native, or a native resident of the outlying areas." This reflects the fact that not all LEP students are immigrants. I would suggest the sentence be changed to "falling behind their peers while they master English." Also in the same paragraph the politicking isn't limited to California and if you're going to mention Proposition 227 at all a much clearer explanation is needed.

In the third paragraph what you are calling an 'immersion program' is really known as an 'English as a Second Language' or ESL program. An 'immersion program' throws the LEP child into a mainstream classroom with no help. By the way, it was also made illegal by the Supreme Court case Lau vs. Nichols in 1974. Jumping down to the fifth paragraph another type of program is described, but never named. A program where half the students are English speakers and half the students are LEP is called 'dual immersion' and the dual purpose is to teach both groups of children a new language and to let them learn about one another's cultures.

Is the final paragraph really talking about bilingual education at all as defined in the rest of the article? While I was unable to find the article on oregonlive.com that it refers to, it seems to me it is describing a second language program for English speakers and not a bilingual program for LEP students. While the goal of the program is to make the English speakers bilingual, it would still be considered a second language program and not a bilingual program as previously defined in the article. --TKeefer 13:01, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)