Talk:Bilingual education

Initial comment

From the article:

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

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

I just did a search on Krasehn, and this came up: [1]. It seems clear that Krashen was talking about using bilingual education in teaching immigrant children. Ithen checked Cummins, and I came up with this pdf file: [2]. He is also talking about teaching immigrant children. soulpatch

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

Needs rewrite

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

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

US info

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

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

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

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

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

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

The article has been extended and re-organized

I have added a few lines about bilingual education in Australia, added to the list of references, included a few more external web links, and put the various country examples in alphabetical order. --BDevlin, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

The first sentence under United States is unsubstantiated. The only source is a preschool! There needs to be more hard facts. Until they are provided, the first sentance and the source shall be eliminated.

--jps, 6 August 2006

Comments on bilingual education in other countries

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

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

I have added a few lines to summarise the Southeast Asian situation as I know it, focussing on Thailand and Malaysia. I would be pleased to know if there are any inaccuracies and for additional information to be provided.

-- A M Jones 9 August 2006

Multiple languages are taught in other countries, e.g., Catalan and Spanish taught in Spain. Does anyone know further about this, and want to add to this discussion? How is French imparted to its sizable Arabic speaking population? Dogru144 00:38, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A *lot* of examples from around the world could be added. Noting for instance the absence of mention of Africa, India, and China, a large proportion of the world is omitted. Discussions of bilingual ed in the US have become highly politicized (relating to issues sometimes far from education), and discussions there might seem to the outsider to be rather self-contained. This article could help expand the consideration - perhaps including more comparative references, or even spawning a section of articles. --A12n 13:43, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from Africa, India, China, Singapore could be added to your observation. English is its lingua franca. Dogru144 15:01, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Changes to the article

As I did last November, I have added a small section on Austraia and put all the countries in alphabetical order. Bdevlin August 24, 2006

Andalusia material is repeated elsewhere on Wikipedia

This paragraph is repeated elsewhere on Wikipedia at Plurilingualism Promotion Plan and Plan for the promotion of plurilingualism in Andalusia; also the style is rather too personal. I have just recommended that the other two pages be deleted. Jsteph 08:34, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy

The Controversy section is very US centric and not related to bilingual education in general. Should it perhaps be moved to Bilingual education in the United States? -Adjusting 07:46, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Globalize

I put the {{globalize}} template in, because the entire article is written from a U.S. viewpoint. It starts out with examples and information about bilingual education in the U.S., then has a section "Around the world", which further emphasizes the viewpoint of "U.S. and the rest of the world". The article needs to be rewritten from scratch, or heavily restructured. Jon Harald Søby 17:10, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That would be a very good idea to rewrite this article from an international point of view. CrZTgR 01:42, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the article has been tagged since february. it's one thing to suggest that the article needs to be improved; it's another to actually do the hard work of improving it. since february, the article has been restructured, and as of this date, rather than "the entire article is written from a U.S. viewpoint", barely one-fourth of the article specifically discusses bilingual education in the united states. Most of the article discusses bilingual education in countries other than the united states. i'm removing the tag. Anastrophe 19:53, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and I did not have time to do the hard work for many months. I probably will not be able to find time for many months to come. Unfortunately until someone does "the hard work" and puts the entire (!) Introduction into the United States section, and than writes the "international" Introduction from scratch, the globalize tag needs to stay. CrZTgR 03:46, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Remember that this is the English Wikipedia page, the majority of the native english speaking writers are either American or British. Saying it should be globalized to someone who doesnt know the global situation personally is just asking for misinformation —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.28.228.112 (talk) 19:21, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

California Prop 227

I tried to make the purple prose of the section on Prop 227 a bit more even-handed and included a link to the follow-up report on 227 that the legislature mandated. Whoever wrote the section did considerable violence to what the research report actually said and then avoided linking it. I just hate it when people do things like that. They also mischaracterised what 227 actually did, which was not to abolish bilingual education programs but rather to abolish kids being automatically assigned to bilingual programs on the basis of their family surname, a practice that I found barbaric in a state like California where you can find families with Spanish surnames who have spoken English in the home for generations and other families with English surnames who have spoken Spanish in their homes for equally long times.

It looks to me like similar violence was done to the little section on Arizona's Prop 203. I don't know enough of the detail there to do a proper job of giving that section a wash and brush up. Plaasjaapie 18:16, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've modified the text of the California section regarding pay enhancements for California's bilingually certified teachers to include the possibility mentioned by Clineclan that some districts don't offer such incentives. Plaasjaapie 15:50, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw this...

17:27, 19 July 2007 171.66.61.9 (Talk) (28,195 bytes) (→California - I am one of the authors of the five years evaluation of Proposition 227. The information that was included under this proposition was incorrect.) (undo)

Am I the only one to think it a bit odd that an anonymous editor could make such claims to justify a complete rewrite of the section in a manner which makes claims for authority for the study which the data used really can't justify? Indeed, if the editor is who he or she claims to be the rewrite of the section represents a clear Conflict of Interest by Wikipedia guidelines. Plaasjaapie 18:31, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tagalog

Don't Filipinos speak Tagalog not Filipino or was this done on purpose? (unattributed comment)

Most Filipinos do indeed speak Tagalog those, iirc, a number of other languages besides English and Spanish are common in the country as well. Plaasjaapie 18:33, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Southeast Asia

I've taken the liberty to make some small grammatical changes in the sentences referring to the model used at Sunthornphu school in Rayong. I hope these are acceptable. Adrian Jones 6 September 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adrianmjones44 (talk • contribs) 03:09, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I should have signed the previous comment.Adrianmjones44 03:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

English as the Second Language only

I do not understand why the article assumes that the persons enrolled in the bilingual program speak something other than English. Where is the information about programs trying to teach, say, Spanish to English native speakers immersively? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.28.228.112 (talk) 19:28, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion of material twice on page

The material below has been reverted twice from the BE page.

Two-way developmental bilingual education programs in elementary school have the most success in language minority students' long term academic achievement. This is shown as measured by standardized tests across all subject areas. These students will maintain their academic performance at secondary level in academic classes taught all in English (from the Ramirez 1991 dataset, c Thomas and Collier, 1995). Some people make the mistake that once a student can converse in English (Basic interpersonal communication skills - BICS), they will naturally perform well academically (cognitive academic language proficiency - CALP) in English. It has been postulated that BICS and CALP are two different sets of skills. (Language Minority Students in the Mainstream Classroom, Carrasquillo and Rodriguez, Multilingual Matters Ltd., c 1996)

The first time because "I'm afraid this has been discredited, also"

and the second time because "It's not a reliable source..."

Both of the above points are backed by research, including in the sources cited. Comments are welcome. abuse t (talk) 03:13, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The material has been restored to the page in an edited form with full citations. abuse t (talk) 02:42, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bilingual education in Scandinavia

Added links to the two main websites for bilingual education in Scandinavia (Norway and Sweden). Actually I am very surprised that there is no section about multilingual education in those two countries, because bilingual education is very common in those two states for over 100 languages! Will add these two sections when I get some time. --און 20:53, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

removal of external links

Please read WP:EL, in particular what to link and Links normally to be avoided. If you have a website with relevant content, then link directly to the content, and not to the mainpage. If the material is useful to support the text on the article, then add it directly as a reference on the proper place.

See WP:NOTLINK: "Wikipedia articles are not (...) mere collections of external links or Internet directories" --Enric Naval (talk) 18:33, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]