Friday, November 7, 2008

English Only

The chapter titled "English Only: The Tongue-Tying of America," presents an extremely important perspective. I always thought the argument that people who immigrate to the U.S. must make learning English their first priority. This is particularly true of students. The author is correct when he stated: "the persistent call for English language only in education smacks of backwardness in the present conjuncture of our ever-changing multicultural and multilingual society" (p 379). The reality is that if conservative policy makers and some educators continue to make this argument, they are taking a narrow-minded approach. If we force English Language Learners to learn material in English because, damn it, "they live here and need to learn to speak the language," we are not providing them with the best atmosphere to learn. For instance, a 10th grade Global Studies student may be able to understand the material if it is taught to her/him in their native language. But if we rigidly force them to try to learn not only the material, but also the language it is being taught in, that is a grave disservice.

In addition to the English only business, the chapter also discussed another pitfall that I am going to try desperately to avoid in the classroom. Peter McLaren argued that "minority students who 'populate urban settings...are more likely to be forced to learn about Eastern Europe in ways set forth by neo-conservative multiculturists than they are to learn about the Harlem Renaissance (which I personally find fascinating), Mexico, Africa, the Caribbean, or Aztec or Zulu culture,'" (p 377). Learning about Eastern Europe is important (if for no other reason than because the standards say it is), but I would argue that it is no more important the Harlem Renaissance or Aztec culture. My point is that teachers should know their audience and try to adapt the curriculum to make it interesting to their students. I understand that teaching about the really cool parts of let's say American History, is hard to fit into the standards driven curriculum, but teachers must try to be flexible in their delivery.

2 comments:

erinelz said...

Quoting you: "If we force English Language Learners to learn material in English because, damn it, "they live here and need to learn to speak the language," we are not providing them with the best atmosphere to learn."

I completely agree with you on this, and I felt necessary to respond with this. I am sooooo happy that in the NCTE (National Council of Teachers of English) standards, they FINALLY intoduced the standard number 10, that "Students whose first language is not English make use of their first language to develop competency in the English language arts and to develop understanding of content across the curriculum."

I find this to be the most forward-thinking standard in the whole of them, and I can't imagine in not being there in today's society. Diversity is such a wonderful thing for so many reasons, and those pushing for English-Only are impeding on the rights of others. It's about time our society and EDUCATION embrace what immigrants bring into our country, and into our schools...

Jenny M. said...

I agree with you when you write, "teachers should know their audience and try to adapt the curriculum to make it interesting to their students." I grew up in a predominately white, suburban neighborhood and diversity wasn't really an issue for me in school. However, after the experience of teaching in MPS, where I deal with diversity almost daily, I now am aware of how teachers truly need to know their students. It's not ok to make generalizations that everyone (for example) celebrates Christmas. Teachers need to educate themselves every time they get a new set of students. They need to know what issues or topics they may need to be more aware of, or sensitive to, and futhermore, ways to involve ALL students in the daily lessons.