Can you remember a time in high school--middle school, even--that you were bored in class? The teacher was saying words and waving his hands back in forth in seemingly meaningful ways, and you were watching the second hand on the clock creep painstakingly slowly towards the twelve. The teacher's lesson was certain to be important, something you would need to know in the future, especially on the test--and, yet, you simply could not keep focused.
Now, imagine the same situation, with one difference: every paragraph or so, the teacher would stop and speak a paragraph or so in Scandinavian, repeating himself in a foreign language. Not only would the teacher's lesson time be struck in half, but the teacher would also have further trouble maintaining students' attention.
This is the argument of many opposed to bilingual education and, just like the method it describes, is flawed. This is not, however, the only available option for bilingual education. For example, there is Pull-Out English Language Development (ELD), which is set up roughly like a Gifted and Talented program, in which students are pulled out of their regular class schedule for x number of minutes per day in order to receive instruction. Sometimes a class period is worked into an English learner's schedule as an official class, but which receives no college entrance credit. Additionally, there are well-designed courses, taught by well-certified educators, that teach English Language Development to students for college-applicable credit.
As a student going into Foreign Language Education, I will also be certified to teach English as a Second Language (ESL). In my decision upon which school I wish to teach at, a number of factors will come into play--among them, the type of ESL program available for language learners. The method outlined in the second paragraph of this entry has been proven to be inefficient, and, should I be expected to comply with such a program, I would try rather hard not to teach in that district. However, if another program--such as the college credit-worthy ELD courses--I would try rather hard to teach in that district.
Unfortunately, the latter is more expensive and more of a "hassle" to school districts, to the extent that perhaps none exist in Arkansas--at least to my knowledge. Larger schools, especially in larger states such as California, have access to more ELD resources. But should a student's access to effecting instruction--both in English and in content--be limited by their geographic location?
Bilingual education is staring at us with a straight face. It isn't bluffing. It's our move.
Now, imagine the same situation, with one difference: every paragraph or so, the teacher would stop and speak a paragraph or so in Scandinavian, repeating himself in a foreign language. Not only would the teacher's lesson time be struck in half, but the teacher would also have further trouble maintaining students' attention.
This is the argument of many opposed to bilingual education and, just like the method it describes, is flawed. This is not, however, the only available option for bilingual education. For example, there is Pull-Out English Language Development (ELD), which is set up roughly like a Gifted and Talented program, in which students are pulled out of their regular class schedule for x number of minutes per day in order to receive instruction. Sometimes a class period is worked into an English learner's schedule as an official class, but which receives no college entrance credit. Additionally, there are well-designed courses, taught by well-certified educators, that teach English Language Development to students for college-applicable credit.
As a student going into Foreign Language Education, I will also be certified to teach English as a Second Language (ESL). In my decision upon which school I wish to teach at, a number of factors will come into play--among them, the type of ESL program available for language learners. The method outlined in the second paragraph of this entry has been proven to be inefficient, and, should I be expected to comply with such a program, I would try rather hard not to teach in that district. However, if another program--such as the college credit-worthy ELD courses--I would try rather hard to teach in that district.
Unfortunately, the latter is more expensive and more of a "hassle" to school districts, to the extent that perhaps none exist in Arkansas--at least to my knowledge. Larger schools, especially in larger states such as California, have access to more ELD resources. But should a student's access to effecting instruction--both in English and in content--be limited by their geographic location?
Bilingual education is staring at us with a straight face. It isn't bluffing. It's our move.
(Chapter 6)
ReplyDelete