Archive for the ‘Standardized Tests’ Category

The Great Divide Between Federal Education Policy and Our National Need for Bilingual Citizens

Thursday, November 4th, 2010

by Wayne E. Wright
University of Texas at San Antonio

In the United States, there is a great divide at the federal level between education policy and the national need for bilingual citizens. The federal government is painfully aware of its lack of bilingual employees. The National Security Education Program (NSEP) (2001a) in an analysis of federal language needs—conducted the same year as the passage of No Child Left Behind (NCLB)—found that difficulty in hiring bilingual candidates at 80 national-security-related federal agencies led to adverse impacts on operations. The NSEP also found unmet language needs in other agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control, Drug Enforcement Agency, the U.S. Customs Service, The National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the U.S. Coast Guard. We also lack bilingual citizens to fulfill the myriad jobs in the service, business, and education sectors to interact with immigrants, international tourists, and other visitors, and to help ensure American success in international relations and global business.

Later in 2001, at the NSEP National Briefing on Language and National Security, speaker after speaker across federal agencies testified of the urgency to increase the country’s foreign language expertise. Richard Brecht, the Director of the National Foreign Language Center, testified, “the U.S. government’s language capabilities remain grossly inadequate. …. We need more linguists in more languages at higher levels of proficiency than ever before.” He recommended a long-term strategy which included the mandate that “government language schools recruit from the education system and the U.S. heritage communities linguistically competent professionals with existing skills that can be enhanced and specialized to meet required federal tasks.” (p. 20)

Regarding Brecht’s comment on the need to recruit from K-12 schools and from heritage language communities in the United States, Stephanie Van Reigersberg, a former recruiter of interpreters for the State Department, made a telling comment about her frustrations trying to recruit “heritage speakers” in languages of great need. She testified:

I think that as I look back on the last 30 years of testing interpreter candidates, it’s very clear to me that the attempt made in our private and public schools to annihilate any knowledge of the language spoken at home has been very successful, and I think we’ve got to overcome that. (p. 29)

Over a decade later, little progress has been made. Ironically, at a time when these hearings on the need for bilingual citizens were taking place, federal education policy moved in the opposite direction with the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2000. Congress eliminated the Bilingual Education Act, and removed the word “bilingual” from the text of federal education law along with all recognitions of the individual and societal values of bilingualism.

While bilingual and other heritage language programs are still allowed, there is no longer any direct federal support or encouragement for these types of programs. Furthermore, NCLB’s focus on high-stakes testing as the sole measure of student achievement, and teacher and school quality, has discouraged schools from offering such programs (Wright, 2007, pp. 1-26). As the vast majority of language minority students are required to take these tests only in English, narrow test-preparation curriculum is focused on both the content and language of the test. When the top priority of schools is raising their average test scores to avoid harsh accountability penalties, school leaders may view heritage language programs as unnecessary and as diverting time and resources away from this goal.

When President Barack Obama was sworn into office in 2009, there was great hope among language minority advocates for change that would create more space for quality heritage language programs. The administration has appeared open and supportive of such programs. Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, in a May 2010 speech to the Council on Foreign Relations, made the following comments:

We also support innovative approaches to language learning and proficiency assessment through our network of Language Resource Centers. Just one example is the National Heritage Language Resource Center at UCLA. They sponsored their first international conference on heritage and community languages last February. The millions of heritage language speakers at varying levels of language proficiency in the U.S. represent a tremendous reserve of students and potential teachers who can put their skills to work improving our cultural understanding as well as our ability to compete, collaborate, preserve national security, and advance international peacekeeping efforts.

Statements such as these are a positive sign, as is the apparent support for bilingual education in an early draft of the Obama Administration’s proposals for the re-authorization of NCLB. However, the focus on accountability through high-stakes testing has not only remained, but has gotten worse. A key element of the administration’s school reform efforts through initiatives such as Race to the Top is tying teacher performance evaluation to their students’ test scores, thus making the stakes and the pressure to raise language minority student test scores higher than ever before.

As long as high-stakes tests remain the sole indicator of student achievement and school and teacher quality, there will be little incentive for schools to promote heritage language programs. A multiple-measurement system is needed where test scores are but one factor among many in determining school quality. Such a system could rectify the great divide at the federal level by recognizing and rewarding schools with quality heritage language programs—programs which ensure our nation will have the bilingual citizens it desperately needs.

Dr. Wayne E. Wright is an Associate Professor in the Department of Bicultural-Bilingual Studies in the College of Education and Human Development at the University of Texas, San Antonio and the author of Foundations for Teaching English Language Learners: Research, Theory, Policy, and Practice (http://caslonpublishing.com/publication/foundations-teaching-english-language-learners/)

A lengthier critique by Dr. Wright on the effects of NCLB and its emphasis on testing for English Language Learners can be found here in the publication Educational Leadership.

REFERENCES

Duncan, A. (2010). International Engagement Through Education: Remarks by Secretary Arne Duncan at the Council on Foreign Relations Meeting, May 26, 2010. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/news/speeches/2010/05/05262010.html
National Security Education Program. (2001). Analysis of federal language needs. Retrieved March 14, 2006, from http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2001_cr/s032201.html
National Security Education Program. (2002). National briefing on language and national security. Retrieved March 14, 2006, from http://www.ndu.edu/nsep/January16_Briefing.htm
Wright, W. E. (2007). Heritage language programs in the era of English-only and No Child Left Behind. Heritage Language Journal, 5(1), 1-26.

Share on Facebook

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Guest Blogs, Multilingual Education, Standardized Tests, Students, World Languages | No Comments »

Video Extras Offer More Food for Thought About Immersion Education

Thursday, October 28th, 2010

As a writer I know that plenty of what comes out of my pen (or keyboard) never sees the light of day. Sometimes I have to cut entire paragraphs or pages–even ones I really like–simply because they don’t serve the overall purpose of the story or article. In my case these get relegated to a file called “leftovers” and spend purgatory in my computer hoping to be called up another day. Sadly, I don’t think that day has come for any of my leftovers, but I still can’t bear to throw them away.

When people make a film, a similar thing happens, but on a much grander scale. Filmmakers spend hundreds of hours and many more dollars scouting locations, receiving permission, employing a crew, hiring equipment, and setting up lighting and sound gear to shoot many hours of footage, comparatively few minutes of which make it into the final version of their films. Those hours in the editing room letting go of great stuff that just won’t fit or that has to be sacrificed so other points can be made must be much more painful than my cutting and pasting into a ‘leftover’ file because that work represents so much effort and energy from so many people.

Fortunately, we now have the Internet, and some of those great scenes can now be seen and shared. Material that didn’t make the cut or caused the story to stray can now enhance viewers’ experience of the finished product–just like dvd extras do.  Speaking in Tongues filmmakers Marcia Jarmel and Ken Schneider have recently posted ten of these video extras on the Speaking in Tongues site.  (Make sure to use the scroll bar on the right of the screen so you can watch them all.)

The extras run the gamut from Mimi Met, Senior Research Associate at the National Foreign Language Center at the University of Maryland, discussing the importance of multilingualism in creating a more peaceful world to educator Laura Ringard expanding on the value of bilingualism for enhancing cognitive function. A Mandarin immersion kindergarten class joyfully sings a children’s song with their teacher, and a 3rd grade science class measures and discusses the progress of plants in their garden entirely in Cantonese. The extras also delve into more controversial topics such as the lag in standardized test scores of immersion students who are taught in the target language but tested in English before they have received as much instruction in that language as their monolingual peers. A touching episode on integration and immersion features a Spanish-speaking mother who decides to enroll her daughter in a Mandarin immersion program as well as insight from an African American mother and a school employee about how learning a second language can open new opportunities for children.

I hope you have a look and that these extras help answer some questions that Speaking in Tongues may have raised for you.  Spread the word to family and friends and let us know what you think about these videos in the comment section below.

And just for fun, check out this excellent audio extra in the form of a World in Words podcast from Public Radio International’s The World and Patrick Cox.  Cox devotes about half the show to Speaking in Tongues, interviewing Ken and Marcia as well as their younger son Jaden, who points out that it’s useful for he and his brother to be able to communicate in a language their parents can’t understand.  No doubt that’s true!

Share on Facebook

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Chinese, Language Immersion, Mandarin, Parents, Public Schools, Standardized Tests | 1 Comment »

Legislation Stands to Alter the Shape of Multilingual Education

Thursday, September 30th, 2010

It’s impossible to bring up any education-related topic without stirring up controversy.  Foreign language instruction in the public schools, whether immersion or another model, is certainly one of the hot-button issues.  Pair this debate with immigration reform, English-as-official-language, and school assessments, and you have a recipe for uproar.  Of course, that’s business as usual for politics, and these are some of the most pressing issues of the day, which is why legislation is popping up all over that could directly affect all of these things.

On the national level, H.R. 6036, or the Excellence and Innovation in Language Learning Act, cites a pervasive lack of foreign language capacity that threatens the security and economic well-being of the United States. Quietly introduced by Congressmen Rush Holt (D-NJ) and Paul Tonko (D-NY) on August 1, the last day of the 111th Congress, the bill would start language instruction in early childhood and ensure that students are able to build capacity throughout their elementary and secondary education until they gain proficiency.

The legislation proposes the U.S. Departments of State, Defense, and Commerce pool what they know about language and put together a synopsis of how to meet a variety of language-related needs.

The bill requests $200 million worth of funding each year, a pittance compared to the $2 billion the Committee on Economic Development estimates is lost each year by American businesses as a direct result of lacking cross-cultural skills. The military costs in Afghanistan total $200 million each day, and $200 million is nothing compared to the loss of human life should there be a serious national security breach due to lack of language capacity.

“I hope this bill will be considered as part of the reauthorization of ESEA,” said Tony Jackson, vice president at Asia Society.

The Elementary and Secondary School Act (ESEA) is a Congressional statute that provides federal funding for American elementary and secondary schools. Originally enacted in 1965, ESEA is reauthorized every five years. Congress is currently preparing the next reauthorization, expected in 2011. You can take action here in support of H.R. 6036.

And U.S. Rep. Judy Chu, D, Calif. writes recently on The Hill’s Congress Blog, in support of HR 3753, the PRIDE Act (Providing Resouces to Improve Dual-language Education), currently in committee along with H.R. 6036.

Chu, a co-sponsor of the bill, is  a member of the House Education and Labor Committee, which is reviewing both bills, and serves on the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary and Secondary Education.  The daughter of Chinese immigrants and the first Chinese American woman to serve in the United States Congress, she also plans to introduce yet another language bill called the Global Languages Early Education (GLEE) Act in the near future to focus funds on early education, which studies conclude is the best path to fluency.

In California, SB 930, (Ducheny), which awaits the governor’s signature, would provide for the scores of English language learners who take the California Standards Test (STAR test) in their primary language to be included in their school’s progress assessment.

Presently students may take the test in their primary language, but the scores in that language (usually Spanish) are not included at all in the accountability system known as  API, a school’s Academic Performance Index or in the calculation of AYP, the measure of schools’ Adequate Yearly Progress, as assessed in accordance with the No Child Left Behind law.

Former English learners who have been reclassified as Fluent English Proficient (R-FEP) are not currently permitted to take the assessment in their native language, though it may be their stronger language for testing. In these cases the tests reflect neither an accurate assessment of what the student knows nor of their English language skills since no accommodations are made to control for linguistic complexities that may affect even “former” English language learners in understanding the test questions, nor is the test designed to measure English language acquisition.

A future assessment or accountability system without research-based accommodations to demonstrate validity, reliability and accurate results of what English learners know and can do would continue to provide a flawed system because teachers and schools (especially schools with significant numbers of English learners) must make education decisions based on data that inaccurately measures the academic performance of these students.

The STAR program will be up for reauthorization in 2013 according to California’s education code, and the emphasis on improved academic achievement of all students, including English learners, continues to be a priority of the federal government and thus every state. It is critical that California reauthorize the program with adjustments to its accountability and assessment system so that the scores of English language learners and the APIs and AYPs of entire schools and school districts present an accurate reflection of students’ academic capabilities regardless of language.

You can read more about SB 930 and follow the links to get involved here thanks to our friends at www.mulitlingualmania.com.

This is just a smattering of important legislation under consideration right now.  I have made no attempts to be comprehensive in my search for what’s going on, but I’d love to hear about things that may be happening in your city, state, or school district.  Please leave comments below.

Share on Facebook

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Public Schools, Standardized Tests | No Comments »

The Elephant in the Classroom: English Language Development in an Immersion Setting

Friday, September 17th, 2010

One of the most common criticisms of immersion education in the U.S. is that it prioritizes second-language acquisition above English-language development.  While studies have shown that being bilingual actually improves one’s understanding of his native language, it is true that children being taught in a language immersion school do experience some lag in English language proficiency as compared to their English-only peers in the early years of school.  Most English-speaking parents who opt to put their kids in immersion programs understand and accept this, but when test scores start to roll in that are lower than hoped for, or as English instruction time–with non-native English speakers–increases as kids get older, English-speaking parents start scratching their heads.  Moreover, when parents already speak the target language but either speak no English or speak English as a second language, getting adequate English instruction for their kids becomes a bigger issue.

My older son entered kindergarten reading English fluently, and I didn’t worry about the kind of English instruction he was getting at school that first year.  Kindergarten, while more academic than it used to be, is still a place where kids are getting used to school. He was having fun and learning–especially Chinese!  I was just so glad that he was in an immersion environment so that he wasn’t bored all day being taught to do things he had already mastered.  First grade was harder to get through as the English Language Arts curriculum is still very much focused on early literacy skills.  I tried to work with his teachers, native Chinese speakers, about varying his English assignments so that he will be more challenged and engaged, but despite acknowledging my son’s advanced reading skills, they haven’t seemed very comfortable experimenting with the curriculum.

Now we are working through year three, and the English portion of the day is twice as long as it had been in kindergarten and first grade.  My son is still ahead of most of his peers, though the gap is certainly narrowing as other students develop their literacy skills.  I have never felt that the excellent Chinese teachers at my sons’ school lack the basic ability to teach English Language Arts at the elementary level, but it now occurs to me that being charged with helping to develop native literacy in children in one’s second language is a daunting task.  It is no wonder the teachers stick closely to the curriculum: getting creative could mean making mistakes and teaching those to the kids.  This is not a risk such truly professional teachers would be willing to make.  I am frustrated that my child is not getting the level of challenge he needs in English–and I continue to work with the teachers and administration on alternatives–but I am heartened by how well he is learning Chinese and remain thrilled that he has this opportunity.  The fact remains that while he may be bored during English at school, his father and I can help supplement this part of his education at home.

But what if we couldn’t?  The Mandarin immersion program at my kids’ school is now in its fifth year.  It started as an underenrolled program in 2006, and has steadily grown to the point that it now has a waiting list.  The vast majority of students in the first three years of the program were native English speakers with highly educated parents who understood the concept of immersion and the value of bilingualism.  With the success of the program and the  increased interest in Chinese over the last few years, the program has grown significantly.  More children from Chinese-speaking families are attending school with my younger son (who just entered kindergarten), and several kids in his class attended a local Mandarin-immersion preschool that did not exist a few years ago.  Native Chinese-speaking parents have expressed concern that, while their children will be getting an excellent Mandarin education, they might not get all they need in terms of English-language instruction.  And, unlike me, they are less confident about their own abilities to supplement English instruction outside of school.

And then there is the matter of standardized testing.  In second grade, the students’ English teacher reads the test questions for the California STAR test aloud to the students, and there is no written copy available to the students to read on their own.  Most immersion students in San Francisco, whether in Spanish, Korean, or Chinese, have an English teacher for whom English is a second language–a language that is sometimes spoken with a fairly heavy accent.  Could this affect the children’s performance on the tests?  It’s a valid question.  Moreover, kids for whom English is a second language are given the test in English, leading to scores that reflect their ability to understand English regardless of the subject mater being tested.  The fairness of this is continually called into question, and there is even legislation to offer English language learners the opportunity to test in their native language currently sitting on the (non-native English-speaking) governor’s desk.

Whether or not children receive their English instruction from a native speaker, research shows that immersion students not only catch up with their peers on standardized tests by fourth or fifth grade, they usually leap ahead of them (even in math) where standardized tests are concerned.  I have always explained away the minor errors in my sons’ teachers’ written English by letting my kids know that such mistakes are very common for people who didn’t learn their second language until they were much older.  “You are lucky,” I tell them, “to be learning Chinese when you are so young, because you will probably make fewer mistakes in Chinese when you grow up.”

I remain extraordinarily happy about my kids’ language immersion education.  I’d actually be more pleased if they could go to school 100% in Chinese and their English instruction were left entirely up to us, but I make this statement from a personal perspective.  I understand the importance of teaching English to all kids in the public schools, and I’m wondering what we could do in immersion programs to make the English teaching more effective for all the kids while still supporting our wonderful native-speaker teachers.  Please share your thoughts and ideas in the comment section below.

Share on Facebook

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Language Immersion, Mandarin, Multilingual Education, Public Schools, Research, Standardized Tests, Students | 3 Comments »

Ways of Speaking, Ways of Thinking

Thursday, July 29th, 2010

It has always seemed to me that once we start thinking in words, the shape of those words becomes the shape of our thoughts. More accurately, it is the language itself—how those words are put together and what they can convey—that shape our thinking. Following from this, it makes sense that different languages lend themselves more or less easily to different ways of thinking.

Stanford Psychologist Lera Boroditsky explores this very theory in a recent Wall Street Journal article, asserting that language itself influences culture. She backs up this theory with anecdotes from research, and her examples are fascinating.  What I find almost more interesting, however, is that many linguists have disregarded this theory, sometimes referred to as linguistic determinism, (though many believe that language’s effect on thought exists more on a continuum, which seems reasonable) for the last 40 or 50 years. None other than celebrated linguist Noam Chomsky asserts that all languages have a “universal grammar” and that each is, more or less, equal to the tasks for which human beings have created and used language. But decades of research, according to Boroditsky, have debunked this idea, and people are beginning to study, instead, just how language shapes the culture that creates it or, if you will, the culture it creates.

In his 2008 book Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell compares the counting system of English to that shared by certain Asian languages including Chinese, Japanese and Korean. The Asian system is very regular and consistent: what we know in English as twelve translates literally into Mandarin as ten-two. Thirteen is “ten-three” and so on. Twenty-two is “two tens-two”—the value is inherent in the way the number is stated. When we say “twenty-two” in English our minds actually have to translate that word into the number value associated with it, and, although we soon come to do this with ease, our brains must still take an extra step to internalize the number value.

Is it any wonder that Asian children consistently outperform their peers in the U.S., France, Germany, England and other Western industrialized nations on mathematics exams? Of course one can argue that factors beyond language influence the scores, but the discrepancy, as reported in US News & World Report is so dramatic, and the language studies so compelling, it is hard to deny that the math engines built into these languages facilitate math learning to some extent.

Many of us have had the beautiful experience of learning an untranslatable word from a friend who speaks another language. Once we are able to get our heads around the concept signified by this foreign word—a concept our own language and culture has not formally recognized with language—we are thrilled. We haven’t simply learned a new word, we’ve learned something new and even somewhat mysterious (it can’t be translated after all) about the people who use that word.

My personal favorite, the Portuguese word saudade, can be described as something akin to the English word nostalgia, but without the gloppy sentimentality or, if I understand it right, quite the same flavor of melancholy. While saudade does convey longing for a past that can never return (as well as a future that will never happen or a present that is not turning out as one had hoped), acceptance of this reality is somehow built into the word. Saudade embodies all that is positive of a time or feeling that is no longer, while also deeply acknowledging the sadness of this truth. It can be found all over grave markers in Brazil, (and probably Portugal, too, but I’ve never walked through a Portuguese cemetery, so I don’t know). Brazilians even have an official day devoted to commemorating saudade (January 30). It’s hard to deny that this untranslatable word has an influence on the culture.

One day after school last spring, my son’s teacher sent him off with a string of Chinese that, by nature of the delivery, seemed important and meaningful.

“What did she say?” I asked my six-year-old.

“I can’t tell you” was his reply.

“You didn’t understand?”

“No, I understood, but I don’t know how to tell you.”

“Is it something you don’t want me to know about?” I pressed.

“No. It’s something good. I just don’t know how to say it in English.”

Perhaps as his abilities in both languages improve, once he learns more about nuance and increases his vocabulary, he can try to make me understand, just as my bilingual Brazilian friends have helped me with saudade. In the meantime, I will enjoy watching him learn how to speak–and to think–in more than one language.

Share on Facebook

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Brain, Chinese, Critical Thinking, Language Immersion, Mandarin, Math, Multilingual Education, Parents, Portuguese, Standardized Tests, Students, World Languages | 2 Comments »

“Speaking in Tongues” Helps Save Successful Spanish Immersion Program

Saturday, July 24th, 2010

Guest Blog
by Sara Shorin

When confusion and misinformation threatened the future of the highly successful Spanish immersion program my daughters attend in the Tahoe Truckee Unified School District, parents set out to share their own stories and provide accurate information about immersion education.  It was unimaginable to me that the program, which began in 1998 with a single Kindergarten class and has grown to serve children in two schools through 8th grade, might be terminated.

A budget crisis required the district to maximize staffing and facilities, stirring up emotion and vocal opposition among local critics of immersion education. The towns where the schools are located, Kings Beach and Tahoe City, are now 85% Latino and 99.9% White, respectively.  The school board realized it could save money by making Kings Beach all immersion and shifting the English mainstream program to Tahoe City. This would maximize district resources while also resulting in better integration, and therefore, better language outcomes among English- and Spanish-speaking  students in both programs. But loud and angry voices continued to suggest that the district consider dismantling the immersion program altogether.

I attended school board meetings as part of an effort to save the program and soon realized that many of the critics did not fully understand the immersion program goals, methods, and benefits.  Most of the opponents I spoke to did not know:

  • how a second language is acquired,
  • the overall benefit of becoming bilingual for both English and Spanish speakers,
  • that Spanish speakers learn English in the immersion program,
  • that it is not a remedial program for Spanish speakers and an enrichment program for English speakers,
  • that both English and Spanish speakers score higher on state tests than English mainstream students

I had long wanted to create an outreach program to explain immersion education to both English- and Spanish-speaking parents so that they could better understand their choices. Unexpectedly, this controversy launched what would become our Parent-to-Parent Immersion Outreach group. Immersion parents realized that we needed to enter the conversation to dispel the myths and misinformation that threatened to end this valuable program. Speaking in Tongues became the foundation for our outreach and enabled us to share information in a way that did not come across as defensive or self-serving.

First, we showed the film to immersion parents to solidify our message and formulate a plan for  sharing information that would include research articles, FAQs about our program, a film checkout from the school office (we purchased 6 copies), a Google group, a link to an immersion website from the main district site (still under construction), and program tours.

Next, we arranged a bilingual “Immersion Information Night” that included a public screening of Speaking In Tongues. We also introduced our teachers who led a PowerPoint presentation of  the program and translated for the attendees.   This was a great opportunity for parents and teachers to collaborate and reinforce how and why the program works.  Parents enjoyed having the opportunity to hear from other parents and ask specific questions of the teachers.   The successful evening (with 70 attending, including local media) provided immersion teachers and parents a forum to speak openly in a positive environment. With the film as a backdrop, we didn’t appear to be simply defending our own interests.

After the Info Night, we showed the film to a smaller, Spanish-speaking parent group with a translator so that we could explain how and why the program works for Spanish-speaking children.  A few immersion parents in this group helped reinforce the fact that immersion is not only an effective route to bilingualism for English-speaking children, but equally important to Spanish speakers and other English Language Learners (ELLs), who wish to become bilingual on an academic level. Maintaining native languages helps people stay connected to their heritage and families, yet many Spanish-speaking parents do not understand how their kids would learn English in a Spanish immersion program.  This lack of understanding often leads Spanish-speaking parents to opt for the English mainstream program because they believe, like many English and Spanish-speaking parents, that to learn English, children can only be in an English mainstream classroom. At the English mainstream program in Kings Beach, however, their children were surrounded by other ELLs and few, if any, native English-speaking peers until this year when the reconfiguration went into effect. Meanwhile, Spanish-speakers (and English-speakers) in the immersion program have consistently achieved at higher levels than their peers in the English mainstream on California state testing in both English Language Arts and Math.

Finally, we showed the film in a community center in Tahoe City, where many opponents live, hoping to reach the parents who were still reachable and wanted information.

Speaking in Tongues is the foundation of our outreach program, and I’ve been told that this outreach definitely had a positive impact. The film helped us educate all parents about immersion education, which has reduced the threat to our program.  A few of the former immersion opponents have even enrolled their children in the program, and some of the most vocal critics have softened their tone.  The film gave us focus and was the springboard that we needed in a time of anger, confusion, and misinformation.  It gave us an opportunity to start a friendly, informative conversation with all parents, creating an accurate understanding of the immersion program that would naturally lead to acceptance throughout the community.

In 2010, our first immersion students graduated from high school.  Many of them, including the valedictorian, were among the top 10 graduates.  Also in 2010, the district’s first Spanish-speaking ELL students enrolled in AP English.  I think these facts alone, as well as the testing data, reflect the quality of our program, but Speaking In Tongues will continue to be an important part of our Parent-to-Parent Immersion Outreach.  In time, we believe the community will understand the immersion model and come to accept it as simply another education choice and possibly the best one for many students.

Sara Shorin has an 8th grader who went through the Spanish Immersion program in the Tahoe Truckee Unified School District, and a 3rd grader currently in the program.  Since studying abroad in Germany and completing her senior thesis on bilingual education in the United States 25 years ago, Sara has remained interested in bilingual education and second language acquisition.  It is her goal to expose her children to as many languages as possible.

Share on Facebook

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Community Screenings, Guest Blogs, Language Immersion, Multilingual Education, Outreach, Parents, Public Schools, Standardized Tests, Students, World Languages | 6 Comments »

How ‘Submersion’ Differs from Immersion

Tuesday, July 20th, 2010

When English speaking children enter language immersion programs in this country they typically find that their teacher speaks to them in a language they don’t understand between 50% and 100% of the day. Immersion teachers use a variety of techniques, most notably exaggerated speaking styles and animated body language, to make themselves understood. About half of the class are native English speakers, and it’s not uncommon for students to hear English spoken in the halls by parents, other teachers, and school administrators. English-speaking immersion students know they are learning a second language at school and that their native language dominates everywhere else.

It is common to compare English speaking students’ experience in an immersion program to that of an immigrant thrust into an English-only classroom, but the comparison does not hold up. An immersion teacher’s job is to get the students to understand the language so that they can also teach the content—math, reading, social studies—as effectively as possible. Mainstream teachers were hired and trained to teach content in English, not to teach English as a second language. Whereas my kids’ teachers could make up their own language and effectively use it to teach math concepts, mainstream English teachers teach, by and large, from an assumption of fluency.

When most non-English-speaking immigrant children come to the US and enroll in school, they are simply placed in a mainstream English classroom, and English is spoken all day and everywhere. They may find common language peers in their same situation, and it’s likely those kids will stick together whenever possible rather than integrate with their English-speaking classmates. This type of instruction has been dubbed “submersion” because it is akin to pushing people into water without teaching them to swim.

Unfortunately, submersion instruction happens all over the world and is one of the main reasons heritage languages such as those spoken by Native Americans and minority tribes elsewhere are dying out altogether. Children may eventually become literate in the dominant language, but not in their mother tongue. In fact, depending on circumstances, they may lose their native language altogether, thereby losing ties with their family and culture and never having the benefit of full linguistic proficiency that comes with native fluency.

Of course many talented mainstream English teachers do their best to reach every student (and do so with success) regardless of their own formal training and experience, but even the most sensitive, well-intentioned teacher may fall into habits borne of teaching in an all-English environment. In a monolingual environment, for instance, there is nothing wrong with lecturing with one’s back to the class while writing on the whiteboard, but such practices cannot help ELLs get up to speed either in language or academic subjects. By the time these students get a handle on the dominant language, they are often so far behind in the content that achieving academic proficiency has become a formidable struggle.

Two-way immersion programs, when implemented properly, create bilingual students from distinct native language backgrounds. ELLs do not receive specialized or remedial instruction (unless it is otherwise indicated, in the case of learning disabilities, for example). Both English language instruction and content instruction in English are increased as the students progress, and the dominant language, English, is supported in commerce, the media, and in the community at large. Native English speakers enrolled in immersion do not suffer from a lack of guidance in the use of their mother tongue. Indeed, both ELLs and native English speakers tend to outpace their peers in monolingual programs before middle school.

When children of different language backgrounds are combined in classrooms led by effective, bilingual teachers, multilingual adults with greater cross-cultural understanding and deeper knowledge of most academic subjects are the end product, and these individuals can speak for themselves–in more than one language.

Share on Facebook

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Brain, Cognitive Benefits, Creativity, Critical Thinking, Heritage Languages, Intelligence, Language Immersion, Math, Multilingual Education, Parents, Public Schools, Research, Standardized Tests, Students, World Languages | No Comments »

Multilingualism Offers Benefits to the Brain that go Beyond the Obvious

Thursday, July 15th, 2010

While I personally espouse the obvious benefits of multilingualism, some people just don’t see the point in learning a second language. They have no plans to travel or work outside their home country, and they find memorizing vocabulary and working their way through foreign grammar a mind-numbing waste of time. They also feel that their kids can decide for themselves whether or not to pursue another language when they’re old enough. Some people are certain that even if they do learn to communicate in a second language, they will never use that skill. So why bother?

Well, it turns out that studying foreign languages is a lot like eating your vegetables: it’s good for you, even if you don’t like it (or won’t use it). And, also like the vegetables, the earlier you start, the more beneficial it is.

Researchers are making huge gains in neuroscience and cognitive psychology, and one of the most exciting things they have learned is that, in addition to broadening horizons, increasing job opportunities, and the just plain cool factor of being able to communicate in more than one language, being multilingual offers tremendous benefits to the brain.

Speech and Language Pathologist Robert Kurtz lists the following seven cognitive advantages of bilingualism:

1. better metalinguistic awareness (ability to identify and describe characteristics and features of language);

2. better classification skills;

3. better concept formation;

4. better analogical reasoning;

5. better visual-spatial skills;

6. better storytelling skills;

7. better semantic development.

In a well-cited article for the ERIC Review , Kathleen M. Marcos discusses research suggesting that students who receive second language instruction are more creative and better at solving complex problems than those who do not (Bamford and Mizokawa, 1991). And in an era in which Americans have been shown to be declining in creativity, developing this type of intelligence is essential.

Other studies suggest that persons with full proficiency in more than one language (bilinguals) outperform similar monolingual persons on both verbal and nonverbal (math, critical thinking) tests of intelligence.  In another study, multilingual children of average intelligence learned to read in their native language earlier  than their monolingual peers.

It has long been observed that individuals proficient in a second language generally have an easier time learning subsequent languages.  While such individuals are often regarded as having a talent for languages (which, to some extent, may be the case), the truth is that learning more than one language establishes the brain circuitry for language acquisition, making it easier to learn third fourth and fifth languages as well.

The advantages can play out later in life, too.  For instance, multilingual stroke victims rarely lose ability in all of their languages because these languages are stored in different parts of the brain.  if a stroke hits the language center of a monolingual person, her entire ability to communicate is affected, whereas multilinguals may have damage to an area in which one of their languages is stored but not in another. And as if that weren’t enough, studies on multilingual Alzheimer’s patients indicate that multilingualism can delay the onset of symptoms by as much as five years!

Yet, despite all these benefits, as well as improved performance on standardized tests (even in non-verbal subject areas) and all the obvious advantages, language instruction continuously lands on the chopping block when school districts face tight budget decisions. Perhaps if more decision makers had become multilingual at an early age, enhanced brain function would enable them to recognize that such sacrifices are foolish at best.

Share on Facebook

Tags: , ,
Posted in Brain, Cognitive Benefits, Creativity, Critical Thinking, Intelligence, Language Immersion, Math, Multilingual Education, Parents, Research, Standardized Tests, Students | 5 Comments »