Bilingual Education and the Cycle of Native Language

The original objective of multilingual teaching method was to ensure students would not fall behind academically because of a inadequate command of side of meat and to gradually teach them English as a second language. If language-minority students were taught some subjects in their native tongue, proponents insisted, they potentially could learn English without sacrificing content knowledge.But multilingual gentilitys critics argue that the progression keeps students in a cycle of native language dependency that at last inhibits significant progress in English language acquisition. Proponents counter that if students showtime learn to read in the language they are fluent in and then transfer the skills over to English-their second language-they will develop stronger literacy skills in the long term. Plus, they argue that in an increasingly global society, schools, far from deter native-language retention, should work to help students maintain their native tongues, even as t hey as well teach them English.Complicating the debate is the range of programs that, by some peoples definition, fall under the umbrella of bilingual education. Some use bilingual education to carry on only to transitional bilingual education or two-way bilingual programs while others consider any program designed for students with limited proficiency in English to be bilingual. For instance, they may refer to English-as-a-second-language programs, where students are typically taught solely in English, as bilingual education. habitual sentiment against transitional bilingual education has been growing. On June 2, 1998, California voters overpoweringly approved Proposition 227, an initiative that largely eliminated bilingual education from the lands public schools. Under the California initiative, most LEP students in that enjoin are now placed in English-immersion programs.Arizona voters followed suit by passing Proposition 203, a measure similar to the California initiative, on Nov. 7, 2000. While the California initiative reduced the percentage of LEP children in bilingual education from 29 percent to 12 percent, the Arizona initiative is pass judgment to end bilingual education because, unlike the California initiative, it makes it very knotty for parents to seek waivers from English immersion that would permit some bilingual education to continue. Arizona officials expect to implement the law by fall 2001. despite the English only message that Propositions 227 and 203 bear, the debate over how best to get word linguistically diverse students is far from decided nationwide.