Bilingual education refers to an educational program in which both a native language and a second language are taught as subject matter and used as media of instruction for academic subjects. In the United States the tradition of public bilingual education began during the 1840s as a response to the many children who spoke German, Dutch, French, Spanish, Swedish, and other languages. As a result of the nativism of World War I and the adverse popular reaction to the large number of non-English-speaking immigrants entering the country in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, restrictive laws prohibiting instruction in languages other than English brought this educational practice to a halt.

Renewed interest developed, however, with the civil rights movement of the 1960s. In 1968 Congress provided funding for bilingual programs in Title VII of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, also known as the Bilingual Education Act. In Lau v. Nichols (1974) the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that eighteen hundred Chinese students in the San Francisco School District were being denied a "meaningful education" when they received English-only instruction and that public schools had to provide special programs for students who spoke little or no English. The number of students fitting this description increased dramatically toward the end of the twentieth century. Since 1989, for example, they went from 2,030,451 to 4,148,997 at the end of the century, representing an increase from 5 percent to almost 9 percent of the school-age population. These children come from more than one hundred language groups. Of those served by special language programs, almost half are enrolled in bilingual education programs; the others are served by English-as-a-second-language or regular education programs. In the 1990s an increasing number of English-speaking children sought to learn a second language by enrolling in enrichment bilingual education programs. Title VII appropriation for special language programs for both minority language and mainstream groups rose from $7.5 million in 1969 to $117 million in 1995.

The effectiveness of such programs has been much debated. Opponents have claimed that promoting languages other than English would result in national dis-unity, inhibit children's social mobility, and work against the rise of English as a world language. Advocates propose that language is central to the intellectual and emotional growth of children. Rather than permitting children to languish in classrooms while developing their English, proponents claim that a more powerful long-term strategy consists of parallel development of intellectual and academic skills in the native language and the learning of English as a second language. Proponents also argue that immigrants and other non-English-speaking students have valuable resources to offer this multicultural nation and the polyglot world. While in 1999 forty-three states and the District of Columbia had legislative provisions for bilingual and English-as-a-second-language programs, the citizens of California and Arizona voted to restrict the use of languages other than English for instruction. The growing anti-bilingual-education movement had similar proposals on the ballot in other states at the beginning of the twenty-first century.

Bibliography

August, Diane, and Kenji Hakuta. Education of Language-minority Children. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1998.

Baker, Colin, and Sylvia Prys Jones. Encyclopedia of Bilingualism and Bilingual Education. Clevedon, U.K.: Multilingual Matters, 1998.

Brisk, Maria Estela. Bilingual Education: From Compensatory to Quality Schooling. 2d ed. Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum, 2001.

—Maria Emilia Torres-Guzman

Bilingual education is a broad term that refers to the presence of two languages in instructional settings. The term is, however, "a simple label for a complex phenomenon" (Cazden and Snow, p. 9) that depends upon many variables, including the native language of the students, the language of instruction, and the linguistic goal of the program, to determine which type of bilingual education is used. Students may be native speakers of the majority language or a minority language. The students' native language may or may not be used to teach content material. Bilingual education programs can be considered either additive or subtractive in terms of their linguistic goals, depending on whether students are encouraged to add to their linguistic repertoire or to replace their native language with the majority language (see Table 1 for a typology of bilingual education). Bilingual education is used here to refer to the use of two languages as media of instruction.

Need for Bilingual Education

At the beginning of the twenty-first century, proficiency in only one language is not enough for economic, societal, and educational success. Global interdependence and mass communication often require the ability to function in more than one language. According to the 2000 U.S. Census, more than 9.7 million children ages five to seventeen - one of every six school-age children - spoke a language other than English at home. These language-minority children are the fastest-growing segment of the U.S. school-age population. Between 1990 and 2000, the population of language-minority children increased by 55 percent, while the population of children living in homes where only English is spoken grew by only 11 percent.

Language-minority students in U.S. schools speak virtually all of the world's languages, including more than a hundred that are indigenous to the United States. Language-minority students may be monolingual in their native language, bilingual in their native language and English, or monolingual in English but from a home where a language other than English is spoken. Those who have not yet developed sufficient proficiency in English to learn content material in all-English-medium classrooms are known as limited English proficient (LEP) or English language learners (ELLs). Reliable estimates place the number of LEP students in American schools at close to four million.

Benefits of Bilingualism and Theoretical Foundations of Bilingual Education

Bilingual education is grounded in common sense, experience, and research. Common sense says that children will not learn academic subject material if they can't understand the language of instruction. Experience documents that students from minority-language backgrounds historically have higher dropout rates and lower achievement scores. Finally, there is a basis for bilingual education that draws upon research in language acquisition and education. Research done by Jim Cummins, of the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education at the University of Toronto, supports a basic tenet of bilingual education: children's first language skills must become well developed to ensure that their academic and linguistic performance in the second language is maximized. Cummins's developmental interdependencetheory suggests that growth in a second language is dependent upon a well-developed first language, and his thresholds theory suggests that a child must attain a certain level of proficiency in both the native and second language in order for the beneficial aspects of bilingualism to accrue. Cummins also introduced the concept of the common underlying proficiency

TABLE 1

model of bilingualism, which explains how concepts learned in one language can be transferred to another. Cummins is best known for his distinction between basic interpersonal communication skills (BICS) and cognitive academic language proficiency (CALP). BICS, or everyday conversational skills, are quickly acquired, whereas CALP, the highly decontextualized, abstract language skills used in classrooms, may take seven years or more to acquire.

Stephen Krashen, of the School of Education at the University of Southern California, developed an overall theory of second language acquisition known as the monitor model. The core of this theory is the distinction between acquisition and learning - acquisition being a subconscious process occurring in authentic communicative situations and learning being the conscious process of knowing about a language. The monitor model also includes the natural order hypothesis, the input hypothesis, the monitor hypothesis, and the affective filter hypothesis. Together, these five hypotheses provide a structure for, and an understanding of how to best design and implement, educational programs for language-minority students. Krashen put his theory into practice with the creation of the natural approach and the gradual exit model, which are based on a second tenet of bilingual education - the concept of comprehensible input. In other words, language teaching must be designed so that language can be acquired easily, and this is done by using delivery methods and levels of language that can be understood by the student.

Bilingual Education Around the World

It is estimated that between 60 and 75 percent of the world is bilingual, and bilingual education is a common educational approach used throughout the world. It may be implemented in different ways for majority and/or minority language populations, and there may be different educational and linguistic goals in different countries. In Canada, immersion education programs are designed for native speakers of the majority language (English) to become proficient in a minority language (French), whereas heritage-language programs are implemented to assist native speakers of indigenous and immigrant languages become proficient in English.

In Israel, bilingual education programs not only help both the Arabic-and Hebrew-speaking populations become bilingual, they also teach Hebrew to immigrants from around the world. In Ireland, bilingual education is being implemented to restore the native language. In many South American countries, such as Peru and Ecuador, there are large populations of indigenous peoples who speak languages other than Spanish. Bilingual education programs there have the goal of bilingualism. Throughout Europe, bilingual education programs are serving immigrant children as well as promoting bilingualism for speakers of majority languages.

Bilingual Education in the United States

Since the first colonists arrived on American shores, education has been provided through languages other than English. As early as 1694, German-speaking Americans were operating schools in their mother tongue. As the country expanded, wherever language-minority groups had power, bilingual education was common. By the mid-1800s, there were schools throughout the country using German, Dutch, Czech, Spanish, Norwegian, French, and other languages, and many states had laws officially authorizing bilingual education. In the late 1800s, however, there was a rise in nativism, accompanied by a large wave of new immigrants at the turn of the century. As World War I began, the language restrictionist movement gained momentum, and schools were given the responsibility of replacing immigrant languages and cultures with those of the United States.

Despite myths to the contrary, non-native English speakers neither learned English very quickly nor succeeded in all-English schools. A comparison of the high-school entry rates based on a 1908 survey of public schools shows, for example, that in Boston, while 70 percent of the children of native whites entered high school, only 32 percent of the children of non-native English-speaking immigrants did so. However, at the beginning of the twentieth century one could easily find a good job that did not require proficiency in English.

By 1923, thirty-four states had passed laws mandating English as the language of instruction in public schools. For the next two decades, with significantly reduced immigration levels, bilingual education was virtually nonexistent in the public schools, although parochial and private schools continued to teach in languages other than English.

In the post - World War II period, however, a series of events - including increased immigration, the Brown vs. Board of Education Supreme Court decision, the civil rights movement, the Soviet launch of the Sputnik satellite, the National Defense Education Act, the War on Poverty, and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 - led to a rebirth of bilingual education in the United States. In 1963, in response to the educational needs of the large influx of Cuban refugees in Miami, Coral Way Elementary School began a two-way bilingual education program for English-speaking and Spanish-speaking students. In 1967, U.S. Senator Ralph Yarborough introduced a bill, the Bilingual Education Act, as Title VII of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, noting that children who enter schools not speaking English cannot understand instruction that is conducted in English. By the mid-1970s, states were funding bilingual education programs, and many passed laws mandating or permitting instruction though languages other than English.

In 1974, the Supreme Court heard the case of Lau v. Nichols, a class-action suit brought on behalf of Chinese students in the San Francisco schools, most of whom were receiving no special instruction despite the fact that they did not speak English. The Court decided that these students were not receiving equal educational opportunity because they did not understand the language of instruction and the schools were not doing anything to assist them. The Court noted that "imposition of a requirement that, before a child can effectively participate in the educational program, he must already have acquired those basic [English] skills is to make a mockery of public education."

While there has never been a federal mandate requiring bilingual education, the courts and federal legislation - including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in federally assisted programs and activities, and the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974, which defines a denial of educational opportunity as the failure of an educational agency to take appropriate action to overcome language barriers that impede equal participation by its students in its instructional programs - have attempted to guarantee that LEP students are provided with comprehensible instruction.

The population of the United States became more and more diverse as immigration levels reached record levels between the 1970s and the turn of the century, and bilingual education programs were implemented throughout the country. The Bilingual Education Act was reauthorized in 1974, 1978, 1984, 1988, 1994, and 2001, each time improving and expanding upon the opportunities for school districts and institutions of higher education to receive assistance from this discretionary, competitive grant program. The 2001 reauthorization significantly changed the program, replacing all references to bilingual education with the phrase "language instruction educational program" and turning it into a state-administered formula-grant program.

Characteristics of Good Bilingual Education Programs

Good bilingual education programs recognize and build upon the knowledge and skills children bring to school. They are designed to be linguistically, culturally, and developmentally appropriate for the students and have the following characteristics:

1. High expectations for students and clear programmatic goals.
2. A curriculum that is comparable to the material covered in the English-only classroom.
3. Instruction through the native language for subject matter.
4. An English-language development component.
5. Multicultural instruction that recognizes and incorporates students' home cultures.
6. Administrative and instructional staff, and community support for the program.
7. Appropriately trained personnel.
8. Adequate resources and linguistically, culturally, and developmentally appropriate materials.
9. Frequent and appropriate monitoring of student performance.
10. Parental and family involvement.

Debate over Bilingual Education

The debate over bilingual education has two sources. Part of it is a reflection of societal attitudes towards immigrants. Since language is one of the most obvious identifiers of an immigrant, restrictions on the use of languages other than English have been imposed throughout the history of the United States, particularly in times of war and economic uncertainty. Despite claims that the English language is in danger, figures from the 2000 Census show that 96 percent of those over the age of five speak English well or very well. Rolf Kjolseth concluded that language is also closely associated with national identity, and Americans often display a double standard with regard to bilingualism. On the one hand, they applaud a native English-speaking student studying a foreign language and becoming bilingual, while on the other hand they insist that non-native English speakers give up their native languages and become monolingual in English.

Much of the debate over bilingual education stems from an unrealistic expectation of immediate results. Many people expect LEP students to accomplish a task that they themselves have been unable to do - become fully proficient in a new language. Furthermore, they expect these students to do so while also learning academic subjects like mathematics, science, and social studies at the same rate as their English-speaking peers in a language they do not yet fully command. While students in bilingual education programs maintain their academic progress by receiving content-matter instruction in their native language, they may initially lag behind students in all-English programs on measures of English language proficiency. But longitudinal studies show that not only do these students catch up, but they also often surpass their peers both academically and linguistically.

Proposition 227, a ballot initiative mandating instruction only in English for students who did not speak English, and passed by 63 percent of the 30 percent of the people in California who voted in 1998, is both a reflection of the public debate over bilingual education and an example of the impact of public opinion on education policy. Although only 30 percent of the LEP students in California were enrolled in bilingual education programs at the time (the other 70 percent were in all-English programs), bilingual education was identified as the cause of academic failure on the part of Hispanic students (many of whom were monolingual in English), and the public voted to prohibit bilingual education. Instead, LEP students were to be educated through sheltered English immersion during a temporary transition period not normally to exceed one year. Three years after the implementation of Proposition 227, the scores of LEP students on state tests were beginning to decline rather than increase.

Research Evidence on the Effectiveness of Bilingual Education

There are numerous studies that document the effectiveness of bilingual education. One of the most notable was the eight-year (1984-1991) Longitudinal Study of Structured English Immersion Strategy, Early-Exit and Late-Exit Programs for Language-Minority Children. The findings of this study were later validated by the National Academy of Sciences. The study compared three different approaches to educating LEP students where the language of instruction was radically different in grades one and two. One approach was structured immersion, where almost all instruction was provided in English. A second approach was early-exit transitional bilingualeducation, in which there is some initial instruction in the child's primary language (thirty to sixty minutes per day), and all other instruction in English, with the child's primary language used only as a support, for clarification. However, instruction in the primary language is phased out so that by grade two, virtually all instruction is in English. The third approach was late-exit transitional bilingual education, where students received 40 percent of their instruction in the primary language and would continue to do so through sixth grade, regardless of whether they were reclassified as fluent-English-proficient.

Although the outcomes were not significantly different for the three groups at the end of grade three, by the sixth grade late-exit transitional bilingual education students were performing higher on mathematics, English language, and English reading than students in the other two programs. The study concluded that those students who received more native language instruction for a longer period not only performed better academically, but also acquired English language skills at the same rate as those students who were taught only in English. Furthermore, by sixth grade, the late-exit transitional bilingual education students were the only group catching up academically, in all content areas, to their English-speaking peers; the other two groups were falling further behind.

Virginia Collier and Wayne Thomas, professors in the Graduate School of Education at George Mason University, have conducted one of the largest longitudinal studies ever, with more than 700,000 student records. Their findings document that when students who have had no schooling in their native language are taught exclusively in English, it takes from seven to ten years to reach the age and grade-level norms of their native English-speaking peers. Students who have been taught through both their native language and English, however, reach and surpass the performance of native English-speakers across all subject areas after only four to seven years when tested in English. Furthermore, when tested in their native language, these bilingual education students typically score at or above grade level in all subject areas.

Ninety-eight percent of the children entering kindergarten in California's Calexico School District are LEP. In the early 1990s, the school district shifted the focus of its instructional program from student limitations to student strengths - from remedial programs emphasizing English language development to enriched programs emphasizing total academic development; from narrow English-as-a-second-language programs to comprehensive developmental bilingual education programs that provide dual-language instruction. In Calexico schools, LEP students receive as much as 80 percent of their early elementary instruction in their native language. After students achieve full English proficiency, they continue to have opportunities to study in, and further develop, their Spanish language skills. By the late 1990s, Calexico's dropout rate was half the state average for Hispanic students, and more than 90 percent of their graduates were continuing on to junior or four-year colleges and universities.

The evidence on the effectiveness of dual immersion (or two-way) bilingual education programs is even more compelling. In dual immersion programs, half of the students are native speakers of English and half are native speakers of another language. Instruction is provided through both languages and the goal of these programs is for all students to become proficient in both languages. In her research, Kathryn Lindholm-Leary, a professor of child development in the College of Education at San Jose State University, found that in developing proficiency in the English language, both English and Spanish speakers benefit equally from dual-language programs. Whether they spend 10 to 20 percent or 50 percent of their instructional day in English, students in such programs are equally proficient in English. Mathematics achievement was also found to be highly related across the two languages, demonstrating that content learned in one language is available in the other language. Despite limited English instruction and little or no mathematics instruction in English, students receiving 90 percent of their instruction in Spanish score at or close to grade level on mathematics achievement tests in English.

Bilingual education offers great opportunities to both language-majority and language-minority populations. It is an educational approach that not only allows students to master academic content material, but also become proficient in two languages - an increasingly valuable skill in the early twenty-first century.

Bibliography

Baker, Colin. 1995. A Parents' and Teachers' Guide to Bilingualism. Clevedon, Eng.: Multilingual Matters.

Baker, Colin. 1996. Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 2nd edition. Clevedon, Eng.: Multilingual Matters.

Baker, Colin. 2000. The Care and Education of Young Bilinguals: An Introduction for Professionals. Clevedon, Eng.: Multilingual Matters.

Baker, Colin, and Hornberger, Nancy H., eds. 2001. An Introductory Reader to the Writings of Jim Cummins. Clevedon, Eng.: Multilingual Matters.

Cazden, Courtney B., and Snow, Catherine E., eds. 1990. "English Plus: Issues in Bilingual Education." Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Volume 508. London:Sage.

Collier, Virginia P. 1992. "A Synthesis of Studies Examining Long-Term Language Minority Student Data on Academic Achievement." Bilingual Research Journal 16 (1&2) 187 - 212.

Collier, Virginia P., and Thomas, Wayne P. 1997. School Effectiveness for Language Minority Students, NCBE Resource Collection Number 9. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.

Collier, Virginia P., and Thomas, Wayne P. 2002. A National Survey of School Effectiveness for Language Minority Students' Long-Term Academic Achievement: Executive Summary. Santa Cruz, CA: Crede.

Crawford, James. 1991. Bilingual Education: History, Politics, Theory and Practice, 2nd edition. Los Angeles: Bilingual Educational Services.

Crawford, James. 1997. Best Evidence: Research Foundations of the Bilingual Education Act. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.

Cummins, James. 1979. "Linguistic Interdependence and the Educational Development of Bilingual Children." Review of Educational Research 49:222 - 251.

Cummins, James. 1980. "The Entry and Exit Fallacy in Bilingual Education." NABE Journal 4:25 - 60.

Cummins, James. 2000. Language, Power, and Pedagogy: Bilingual Children in the Crossfire. Clevedon, Eng., and Buffalo, NY: Multilingual Matters.

Kjolseth, Rolf. 1983. "Cultural Politics of Bilingualism." Society 20 (May/June):40 - 48.

Krashen, Stephen D. 1999. Condemned Without a Trial: Bogus Arguments Against Bilingual Education. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Lindholm-Leary, Kathryn. 2000. Biliteracy for a Global Society: An Idea Book on Dual LanguageEducation. Washington, DC: National Clearing-house for Bilingual Education.

Lindholm-Leary, Kathryn. 2001. Dual Language Education. Clevedon, Eng., and Buffalo, NY: Multilingual Matters.

National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education. 2000. The Growing Number of Limited English Proficient Students. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.

RAMÍREZ, J. David; Yuen, Sandra D.; and Ramey, Dena R. 1991. Final Report: Longitudinal Study of Structured English Immersion Strategy, Early-Exit and Late-Exit Programs for Language-Minority Children. Report Submitted to the U.S. Department of Education. San Mateo, CA: Aguirre International.

Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove. 1981. Bilingualism or Not: The Education of Minorities. Clevedon, Eng.: Multilingual Matters.

United States Government Accounting Office. 2001. Meeting the Needs of Students with Limited English Proficiency. Washington, DC: Government Accounting Office.

Zelasko, Nancy Faber. 1991. The Bilingual Double Standard: Mainstream Americans' Attitudes Towards Bilingualism. Ph.D. diss., Georgetown University.

— NANCY F. ZELASKO

Bilingual education involves teaching all subjects in school through two different languages - in the United States, instruction occurs in English and a minority language, such as Spanish or Chinese, with varying amounts of each language used in accordance with the program model. The following are several different types of bilingual education program models:

• Transitional Bilingual Education. This involves education in a child's native language, typically for no more than three years, to ensure that students do not fall behind in content areas like math, science, and social studies while they are learning English. The goal is to help students transition to mainstream, English-only classrooms as quickly as possible, and the linguistic goal of such programs is English acquisition only. The overwhelming majority of bilingual programs in the U.S. are transitional. ^{[citation needed]}

• Two-Way or Dual Language Bilingual Education. These programs are designed to help native and non-native English speakers become bilingual and biliterate. Ideally in such programs in a U.S. context, half of the students will be native speakers of English and half of the students will be native speakers of a minority language such as Spanish. Dual Language programs are less commonly permitted in US schools, although research indicates they are extremely effective in helping students learn English well and aiding the long-term performance of English learners in school (Center for Applied Linguistics, 2005; Thomas & Collier, 1997; Lindholm-Leary, 2000).

• One of the most effective forms of Bilingual Education is a type of Dual Language program that has students study in two different ways: 1) A variety of academic subjects are taught in the students' second language, with specially trained bilingual teachers who can understand students when they ask questions in their native language, but always answer in the second language; and 2) Native language literacy classes improve students' writing and higher-order language skills in their first language. Research has shown that many of the skills learned in the native language can be transferred easily to the second language later. In this type of program, the native language classes do not teach academic subjects. The second-language classes are content-based, rather than grammar-based, so students learn all of their academic subjects in the second language. ^{[citation needed]}

• Late-Exit or Developmental Bilingual Education. Education is in the child's native language for an extended duration, accompanied by education in English. The goal is to develop bilingualism and biliteracy in both languages. This program is available to students whose native language is not English, and also less common than transitional programs.

Examples across the world

Andalusia

In Andalusia (Iberia's southernmost region) things have changed drastically concerning bilingual education since the introduction of the Plurilingualism Promotion Plan by the autonomous government. The plan was born as the realization for the Andalusian territory of the European language policies regarding the teaching and learning of languages. With special strength in the past ten years, the Council of Europe have been encouraging governments and education authorities to design new schemes on the teaching and learning of languages, inclusive of the mother tongue, which enhance communication targets, rather than descriptive or reflexive knowledge, as well as the promotion of language diversity, inter-cultural values and democratic citizenship.

In addition to this new European scene, the Scheme for the Promotion of Plurilingualism has learned a lot from the first experimental bilingual sections set up in some schools by the Andalusian government in 1998. Following the content-based approach, French and German were used to partly teach other subjects. This successful experience, as show the international tests that the students have been given, is the starting point for a more ambitious scene, where 400 schools will be involved in the next four years, more languages, especially English, will take part, and a lot of investigation and implementation of the Integrated Curriculum of languages must be carried out.

Being aware of the necessity of the Andalusian people to adapt to the new scenario, a major government plan, called “strategies for the second modernization of Andalusia”, was designed in 2003. The document also underlined language diversity as a source of richness and a valuable heritage of humankind which needs to be looked after.

It was then clear that a scheme was needed to carry out this new language policy in our territory, especially affecting education, with clear goals, timing and funding.

Therefore, the major goal of the Scheme for the Promotion of Plurilingualism is to design a new language policy for Andalusia, according to the principles of the European Council, in order to provide the citizens with the plurilingual and multicultural competence to respond to the new economic, technological and social challenges, based on an Integrated Curriculum for all languages and key stages.

The scheme is to be developed through 5 major programmes and also an organisation and assessment plan.

The programmes are:

- Bilingual schools - Official Schools of Languages - Plurilingualism and teachers - Plurilingualism and society - Organization and assessment plan.

Full version in English of the Plurilingualism Promotion Plan [2]PDF (497 KiB)

Australia

In Australia there are some schools with bilingual programs which cater for children speaking community languages other than English. Baldauf (2005) explains that these programs are now beginning to benefit from more government support. Bilingual education for Indigenous students, however, has only received intermittent official backing. In the Northern Territory, for example, bilingual programs for Indigenous students were begun with Federal Government support in the early 1970s but by December 1998 the Northern Territory Government had announced its decision to shift $3 million away from the 21 bilingual programs to a Territory-wide program teaching English as a second language. Within 12 months though the government had softened its position. Most bilingual programs were allowed to continue under the guise of two-way education. Then on 24 August 2005 the Minister for Employment, Education and Training announced that the government would be "revitalising bi-lingual education" at 15 Community Education Centres: Alekerange, Angurugu, Borroloola, Gapuwiyak, Gunbalunya, Kalkaringi, Lajamanu, Maningrida, Milingimbi, Ramingining, Ngkurr, Shepherdson College, Numbulwar, Yirrkala and Yuendumu. This revitalisation is conceived as part of an effort aimed at "providing effective education from pre-school through to senior secondary at each of the Territory’s 15 Community Education Centres". As Harris & Devlin (1986) observe, “Aboriginal bilingual education in Australia represents much more than a range of education programs. It has been a measure of non-Aboriginal commitment to either assimilation or cultural pluralism”.

Canada

Main article: Bilingualism in Canada

In Canada, education is under provincial jurisdiction. However, the federal government has been a strong supporter of establishing Canada as a bilingual country and has helped pioneer the French immersion programs in the public education systems throughout Canada. In French immersion students with no previous French language training, usually beginning in Kindergarten or grade 1, do all of their school work in French. Regular English programs provide Core French in later grades, usually in grade 4. Depending on provincial jurisdiction, some provinces also offer an Extended French program that begins in grade 7 which offers relatively more courses in French. There are also some private schools and preschools that do immersion programs in other languages.

European Union

Near most of the various European Union institution sites, European Schools have been created to allow staff to have their children receive their education in their mother tongue, and at the same time to foster European spirit by (among other things) teaching at least two other European languages.

Basic instruction is given in the eleven official languages of the European Union: Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Italian, Portuguese, Spanish and Swedish. In the expansion of the Union with 10 countries in 2004 and two more in 2007, the new official languages of the EU are added. The pupil's mother tongue (L I) therefore remains his/her first language throughout the School.

Consequently, each School comprises several language sections. The curricula and syllabuses (except in the case of mother tongue) are the same in all sections.

In the Schools where the creation of a separate language section cannot be justified based on the number of students, teaching of the mother tongue and possibly mathematics is provided.

To foster the unity of the School and encourage genuine multicultural education, there is a strong emphasis on the learning, understanding and use of foreign languages. This is developed in a variety of ways:

The study of a first foreign language (English, French, or German, known as L II) is compulsory throughout the school, from first year primary up to the Baccalaureate. In secondary school, some classes will be taught in L II.

All pupils must study a second foreign language (L III), starting in the second year of secondary school. Any language available in the School may be chosen.

Pupils may choose to study a third foreign language (L IV) from the fourth year of secondary school.

Language classes are composed of mixed nationalities and taught by a native speaker.

A weekly "European Hour" in the primary school brings together children from all sections for cultural and artistic activities and games.

In the secondary school, classes in art, music and sport are always composed of mixed nationalities.

From the third year of secondary school, history and geography are studied in the pupil's first foreign language, also called the "working language" (English, French, or German). Economics, which may be taken as an option from the fourth year of the secondary school, is also studied in a working language. From the third year, therefore, all social science subjects are taught to groups of mixed nationalities.

Hong Kong

In Hong Kong where both English and Chinese are official, both languages are taught in school and are mandatory subjects. Either English or Chinese is used as the medium of instruction for other subjects.

Japan

In Japan, the need for bilingualism (mostly Japanese and English) has been pointed out, and there are some scholars who advocate teaching children subjects such as mathematics using English rather than Japanese. As part of this proposal, subjects such as history, however, would be taught solely in Japanese.

Middle East

Schools in the Middle East follow the Dual or Triple Language Program. The Triple Language Program is most commonly found in Lebanon. History, grammar, literature and the arabic language are taught in the native language(Arabic). Math and Science are taught in English. In Lebanon, however, the Sciences and Math are taught in either French or English, but it mostly depends on the school's administration or the grade level. It is not uncommon in the Middle East where you could find a French-only school or an English-only school.

Most Arab countries have required mastery in Arabic and English, and some require three. Armenians and other non-Arab minorities are polyglots, especially in Lebanon. Many Armenians can speak 4 languages.

Most Arabs are bilingual or trilingual^{[citation needed]}. There is a sizable minority of illiterate Arabs but most of these people are bilingual or trilingual but because of vast differences in proper Arabic and colluqial Arabic, many Arabs are unable to differentiate between the two, which is also very common in Western nations too.

South-east Asia

Since the mid-1990s bilingual approaches to schooling and higher education have become popular in parts of South-east Asia, especially in Thailand and Malaysia where different models have been applied, from L2 immersion (content taught in a non-native language) to parallel immersion, where core subjects are taught in both the mother-tongue and a second language (usually English). Malaysian government policy mandates the phased introduction of English immersion for Math, Science and IT. The Sarasas model, pioneered by the Sarasas schools affiliation in Thailand, is an exemplar of parallel immersion. And the EISP (English for Integrated Studies Project) model at Sunthonphu Pittaya Secondary School, Rayong, Thailand, is an exemplar of the use of English for integrated study in Math, Science and IT, taught by non-native English speaking Thai teachers. This project is under the auspices of the International Study Program of Burapha University .

The difficulties and disputes characteristic of the US experience have not been replicated in these Asian countries, though they are not without controversy. Generally, it can be said that there is widespread acknowledgement of the need to improve English competence in the population, and bilingual approaches, where language is taught through subject content, are seen to be the most effective means of attaining this. The most significant limiting factors are the shortage of teachers linguistically competent to teach in a second language and the costs involved in use of expatriate native speakers for this purpose.

The Netherlands

In the Netherlands, there are around 100 bilingual schools. In these schools, some subjects are taught in English, some in Dutch. Most schools are TVWO (Bilingual Preparatory Scientific Education), but there is THAVO (Bilingual Higher General Secondary Education), too. The following subjects are taught in English: Arts, Chemistry, Physics, Biology, Geography, Economics, Physical Education, Drama, English, Mathematics, History and Religious Studies.

The Philippines

Having two official languages, the Philippine constitution provides a clear guideline for the use of both English and Filipino in classrooms.

Presently, the Department of Education is already implementing a rule wherein subjects like English and the Sciences (including Maths) are taught in English while History and Civics are being taught in Filipino.

United States

Bilingual education in the U.S. focuses on English language learners. According to the U.S. Department of Education website a bilingual education program is “an educational program for limited English proficient students”. ^{[citation needed]} The term "limited English proficiency" remains in use by the federal government, but has fallen out of favor elsewhere for its negative connotations, so the term "English language learner" (or ELL) is now preferred in schools and educational research. An English language learner is a student who comes from a home where a language other than English is spoken, and who needs language support services in order to succeed in school. Because such students are learning English, they may be denied the opportunity to successfully achieve in classrooms where the language of instruction is English. They may also be unable to participate fully in society.

In the 50 states of the United States, proponents of the practice argue that it will not only help to keep non-English-speaking children from falling behind their peers in math, science, and social studies while they master English, but such programs teach English better than English-only programs. For many students, the process of learning literacy and a new language simultaneously is simply an overwhelming task, so bilingual programs began as a way to help such students develop native language literacy first - research by Cummins (1997), a central researcher in the field, shows that skills such as literacy developed in a first language will transfer to English. Opponents of bilingual education argue that it delays students' mastery of English, thereby retarding the learning of other subjects as well. In California there has been considerable politicking for and against bilingual education.

In 1968 U.S., with Title VII of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, or, informally, the Bilingual Education Act, Congress first mandated bilingual education in order to give immigrants access to education in their “first” language. (The Act was amended in 1988).

A 1974 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Lau v. Nichols gave further momentum to bilingual education. Here, the Court held that California schools violated minority language students' rights when they educated students without special provisions.[3]

Taken together, the Bilingual Education Act and the Lau v. Nichols ruling mandated that schools needed to at least provide some type of services to support English language learners, though neither specified what type of educational program needed to be provided. As such both bilingual and English-only programs flourished after the law's passage.

Most recently, however, the Bilingual Education Act was terminated in 2001 by new federal education policy, with the passage of No Child Left Behind by U.S. Congress. This law offers no support for native language learning, but rather emphasized accountability in English only, and mandates that all students, including ELLs, are tested yearly in English.

The majority of U.S. high school students in the United States are required to take at least 1 to 2 years of a second language. The vast majority of these classes are either French or Spanish. In a large number of schools this is taught in a manner known as FLES, in which students learn about the second language in a manner similar to other subjects such as Math or Science. Some schools use an additional method known as FLEX in which the "nature of the language" and culture are also taught. High school education almost never uses "immersion" techniques.

Controversy in the United States

There has been much debate over bilingual education in recent times.

Proponents of bilingual education say that it is not only easier for students to learn English if they are literate in their first language, but that such students will learn English better and become bilingual and biliterate (there is ample research for this, see Krashen, 2002; August & Hakuta, 1997; Crawford, 2000; Cummins, 2000). Effective bilingual programs strive to achieve proficiency in both English and the students' home language. Dual language or Two-Way bilingual programs are one such approach, whereby half of the students speak English and half are considered English language learners (ELLs). The teacher instructs in English and in the ELLs' home language. The dual purpose of this type of classroom is to teach the children a new language and culture, and language diversity in such classrooms is seen as a resource. Programs in English only eradicate the native languages immigrants bring to this country, while dual language bilingual programs serve to maintain such languages in an "additive" context, where a new language is added without the first being lost.

Opponents of bilingual education claim that many bilingual education programs fail to teach students English. Critics of bilingual education have claimed that studies supporting bilingual education tend to have poor methodologies and that there is little empirical support in favor of it. And often, the "supporting research" is decades old. Results of more recent studies refute earlier claims and instead encourage simultaneous bilingualism (see "External Links" below, "Adults and Children...") .

The controversy over bilingual education is often enmeshed in a larger political and cultural context. Opponents of bilingual education are sometimes accused of racism and xenophobia. This is especially so in the case of such groups as English First which is a conservative organization that promotes the stance that English should be the official language of the United States.

Proponents of bilingual education are frequently accused of practicing identity politics to the detriment of children and of immigrants.

California

California is the state with the highest number of English Learners (ELs) in the nation. One every four students is an EL in California. In June of 1998 Proposition 227 was passed by 61 percent of the California electorate. This proposition mandates that ELs be placed in structured English immersion for a period "not normally to exceed one year", then be transferred to mainstream classrooms taught "overwhelmingly in English"[4]. This proposition also gave parents the possibility to request alternative programs for their children, however, the availability of waivers and information to parents have been a challenge in the implementation of this proposition^[1]

In 2000, the California Department of Education contracted with the American Institutes for Research (AIR) and WestEd to conduct a five-year evaluation of the effects of Proposition 227[5]. The study methodology focused on "A combination of student achievement analysis, phone interviews, case study site visits, and written surveys was used to examine such questions as how the proposition was implemented, which EL services are most and least effective, and what unintended consequences resulted from Proposition 227’s implementation."

The authors caution about the limitations in the statewide data. California does not have the capacity to link student academic progress over time across years, however, using student-level linked data over time from the Los Angeles Unified School District, and complementing that analysis with surveys, site visits and interviews, the study found "no conclusive evidence favoring one instructional program over another". Students who remained in bilingual education have similar academic growth trajectories when compared with students that switched to English Immersion.[6]

Arizona

California was followed by Arizona in the passage of similar legislation Arizona Proposition 203 which ended several programs previously available to ESL students. The Arizona law is even more restrictive, particularly under the implementation of Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne.^{[citation needed]}

See also

• Bilingualism in Canada
• Bilingual Education Act
• Lau v. Nichols
• English language learning and teaching
• National Association for Bilingual Education
• EISP English for Integrated Studies in Thailand
• Multilingual Education

References

1. ^ Parrish et al., (2002). "Proposition 227 and Instruction of English Learners in California: Evaluation Update"[1],

 Education by subject   (Portal)  

Agricultural · Art · Bilingual · Chemistry · Language · Legal · Mathematics · Medical · Military · Music · Peace · Performing arts · Physics · Reading · Religious · Science · Sex · Technology · Vocational · More...

Further reading

• Baldauf, R.B. (2005). Coordinating government and community support for community language teaching in Australia: Overview with special attention to New South Wales. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,8 (2&3): 132–144
• Carter, Steven. (November 2004). “Oui! They’re only 3.” Oregon Live.com
• Crawford, J. (2004). Educating English Learners: Language Diversity in the Classroom (5th edition). Los Angeles: Bilingual Educational Services (BES).
• Dean, Bartholomew (Ed.) (2004) “Indigenous Education and the Prospects for Cultural Survival”, Cultural Survival Quarterly,(27)4.
• del Mazo, Pilar (2006) "The Multicultural Schoolbus: Is Bilingual Education Driving Our Children, and Our Nation, Towards Failure?" [2006 Education Law Consortium]. The article is available at: http://www.educationlawconsortium.org/forum/2006/papers/delMazo2006_1.pdf
• Dutcher, N., in collaboration with Tucker, G.R. (1994). The use of first and second languages in education: A review of educational experience. Washington, DC: World Bank, East Asia and the Pacific Region, Country Department III.
• Gao, Helen. (November 2004). “Fight over bilingual education continues.” The San Diego Union-Tribune.
• Gonzalez, A. (1998). Teaching in two or more languages in the Philippine context. In J. Cenoz & F. Genesee (Eds.),Beyond bilingualism: Multilingualism and multilingual education (pp. 192-205). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
• Grimes, B.F. (1992). Ethnologue: Languages of the world Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics.
• Hakuta, K. (1986).Mirror of language: The debate on bilingualism. New York: Basic Books.
• Harris, S.G. & Devlin, B.C. (1996). "Bilingual programs involving Aboriginal languages in Australia". In Jim Cummins and David Corso (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education, vol 5, pp. 1–14. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
• Kalist, David E. (2005). "Registered Nurses and the Value of Bilingualism." Industrial & Labor Relations Review, 59(1): 101-118.(http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/ilrreview/vol59/iss1/6/)
• Kloss, Heinz (1977, reprinted 1998). The American Bilingual Tradition. (Language in Education; 88) McHenry, IL: Center for Applied Linguistics and Delta Systems. ISBN 1-887744-02-9
• Krashen, S.D. (1999). Bilingual Education: Arguments for and (Bogus) Arguments Against [sic] University of Southern California professor's article is available online at [7]PDF (201 KiB)
• Parrish, T.; Perez, M; Merickel, A.; and Linquanti, R.(2006). "Effects of the Implementation of Proposition 227 on the Education of English Learners, K-12, Findings from a Five-Year Evaluation: Final Report." Washington, DC: AIR and San Francisco: WestEd. The complete report is available free at http://www.WestEd.org/cs/we/view/rs/804. An abbreviated, more accessible summary of the findings is available at http://www.WestEd.org/cs/we/view/rs/825
• Summer Institute of Linguistics. (1995). A survey of vernacular education programming at the provincial level within Papua New Guinea. Ukarumpa, Papua New Guinea: Author.
• Swain, M. (1996). Discovering successful second language teaching strategies and practices: From program evaluation to classroom experimentation." Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 17," 89-104.

External links

• U.S. Department of Education Office of English Language Acquisition
• National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition
• National Association for Bilingual Education
• Twisted Tongues: The Failure of Bilingual Education
• Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages
• Center for Multilingual, Multicultural Research
• Germany-USA Career Center, Bilingual & Multilingual Resources
• Language Policy Website
• The English Language Learner KnowledgeBase
• Resources for Spanish Speakers Looking to Learn English
• Bilingual Education Tools
• Bilingual Education Resources
• Bilingual pre-school speech and language info
• Raising children bilingual
• [8] Sarasas Ektra School
• Bilingual European School

Spanish Bilingual Resources Plurilingualism Promotion Plan in Andalusia

• [9]PDF (497 KiB)
• [10]

 Education by subject   (Portal)  

Agricultural · Art · Bilingual · Chemistry · Language · Legal · Mathematics · Medical · Military · Music · Peace · Performing arts · Physics · Reading · Religious · Science · Sex · Technology · Vocational · More...

This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)