<p>Could this work for Native Languages?</p>
<p>I am betting my life on it!</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mar 25, 2012 5:36 AM, "Dr. MJ Hardman" <<a href="mailto:hardman@ufl.edu">hardman@ufl.edu</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I remember way back when, after we from UF had helped install a genuinely<br>
bi-lingual program in Miami schools, it was destroyed by exactly the same<br>
logic. In that program English-speaking students went to Spanish class<br>
while Spanish-speaking students went to English class. The children loved<br>
it; they learned about language itself (very helpful for English-speaking<br>
students who spoke a discriminated variety of their own language), and they<br>
ended up bilingual in a city where it is necessary to be bilingual to get a<br>
job. It's gone. MJ<br>
<br>
On 3/25/12 1:42 AM, "Rudy Troike" <<a href="mailto:rtroike@EMAIL.ARIZONA.EDU">rtroike@EMAIL.ARIZONA.EDU</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> Re Andrew's question:<br>
><br>
> Yes, dual language instruction would surely work, IF Native-language<br>
> curricula were developed paralleling usual content in regular English-only<br>
> classes. The situation vis-a-vis Spanish/English is that a weird backlash<br>
> against 'bilingual education' developed, with opponents convincing the<br>
> public that it was monolingual instruction in Spanish, dooming students<br>
> to isolation from access to English (even a Yale professor of literature<br>
> denounced bilingual education on these grounds, ignoring the obvious<br>
> meaning of 'bi-', which was distorted to be interpreted as 'mono-').<br>
> Ronald Reagan campaigned against bilingual education on these grounds,<br>
> and part of the legacy of the Reagan Revolution was to pervert support<br>
> for bilingual education into support for English as a Second Language<br>
> (ESL) support. In California, even native Spanish-speaking voters were<br>
> intimidated into supporting a referendum funded by a zealous businessman<br>
> named Unz, who later brought the same initiative to Arizona, to outlaw<br>
> bilingual instruction. The label 'dual language' was developed as a<br>
> workaround to avoid the taint of the perversion of 'bi-' to mean 'mono-'.<br>
> Also, critically, it more actively sought to recruit native English-<br>
> speaking children into classes, and was often installed in magnet schools,<br>
> where dual language instruction was made attractive, rather than treated<br>
> as a ghettoizing program designed as remedial instruction for immigrants.<br>
> (The educationally preposterous nature of the Arizona law is that if a<br>
> child enters school unable to comprehend English adequately, he/she is<br>
> denied placement in a program utilizing the child's native language, and<br>
> is can only be admitted into bi-/dual language instruction once his/her<br>
> competence in English is deemed adequate.) I think the same irrational<br>
> and discriminatory provision applies in California, so except in schools<br>
> on a reservation, this absurdity would have to be factored -- Native<br>
> language could NOT be used until a child had demonstrated an adequate<br>
> level of proficiency in English, by which time it might be too late to<br>
> take maximum advantage of children's natural language learning ability.<br>
><br>
> Rudy<br>
><br>
<br>
Dr. MJ Hardman<br>
Professor of Linguistics and Anthropology<br>
Department of Linguistics<br>
University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida<br>
Doctora Honoris Causa UNMSM, Lima, Perú<br>
website: <a href="http://grove.ufl.edu/~hardman/" target="_blank">http://grove.ufl.edu/~hardman/</a><br>
</blockquote></div>