The nature of dual-language programs

Tue Oct 12 16:43:01 UTC 2004

In my experience in dual language education (90/10, 80/20, 50/50 one and
two-way immersion), RA is right that there is opportunity for
code-switching, but it seems to be done for one of the reasons that Dr.
Eisenstein describes - solidarity. My definitions of "dual language" seem to
align fairly consistently with Dr. Eisenstein's but I am also on the East
Coast (Philadelphia). In her 1991 article, "Extending enrichment bilingual
education...", (written in part because of a frustration with a lack fo
clear bi-ed definitions), Nancy Hornberger discusses bilingual education in
terms of goals or orientations and program types which is another good
resource.

In two way immersion classrooms, there are supposed to be native speakers of
English and native speakers of some other language (in Philly, that's
Spanish, Chinese, Khmer, Russian, and German); therefore, the students and
the teacher can serve as models for both languages. In my experience in a
1st grade two way immersion dual-language classroom, it is not true that the
students "would have to compete with the attention of each student's peer
group which would likely consist of monolingual cores with some bilingual
fluency and bilingual buffer groups with good fluency in each language."
Certainly, students sometimes compete for attention and the levels of
bilingualism vary, but a vast majority of the children have some level of
bilingual competence and many are already fairly competent in both
languages. I think, therefore, that when you add child creativity - which
engenders things like code-switching - what you get is the opportunity for
enriched linguistic development and content knowledge in 2 languages. Dr.
Eisenstein mentioned Collier's research (with Thomas for example) which
suggests that students that have been educated in dual language classrooms
get better test scores in/on ENGLISH than their native English-speaking
peers. Now, we can debate the validity of such test scores, but I think it's
reasonable to say that dual-language education, when done well, provides a
forum for learning linguistic and content knowledge in 2 languages, for
students with at least 2 different native languages (in a two-way program),
and the research suggests that students enrolled in one-way and two-way dual
language programs (from 1st to 11th grade) do better on tests of reading and
math in ENGLISH than those in transitional bilingual or ESL programs. As
Collier and Thomas argue (1997/2001), the more native language instruction
the students receive, the better their test scores in ENGLISH are at the end
of the road.

Therefore, I think the social ramifications are just what those who advocate
dual language education are thinking about since students can maintain their
native languages while developing linguistic and academic competence in
another language. I would emphasize, also, that in the U.S. these programs
sometimes provide the opportunity for native English speakers to become
bilingual, a skill which certainly has positive social ramifications.

I would add Lindholm-Leary's book "Dual Language Education" and Rebecca
Field's new book "Building on community bilingualism" as good resources for
studying dual language education and language planning and policy.
David

>From: "R. A. Stegemann" <moogoonghwa at mac.com>
>Reply-To: lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu
>To: lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu
>Subject: The nature of dual-language programs
>Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 19:52:06 +0800
>
>Hi everyone again!
>
>With the assumption that others besides Miriam and me are still interested
>in the subject I will push forward in my ignorance about dual-language
>programs.
>
>My interest is not about code switching per se, but the quality of the
>language that results from dual-language programs and the social
>ramification that eventually result.
>
>Miriam appears to think that peer discipline and role modeling together are
>enough to ensure the integrity of each language. For the moment, I remain
>skeptical. Certainly with properly selected teachers and native-speaking
>parents the children would have no dearth of role models for their own
>native tongue. In the classroom, however, they would only have teachers as
>models for their non-native tongue. Moreover, these latter would have to
>compete with the attention of each student's peer group which would likely
>consist of monolingual cores with some bilingual fluency and bilingual
>buffer groups with good fluency in each language -- well, at least for
>their level of educational development. Add to this the creativity of
>children and what is likely to result, if not linguistic invention and all
>of the problems associated with it as the child claims professional
>competency in his non-native language, when he grows up.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>R. A. Stegemann
>EARTH's Manager and HKLNA-Project Director
>EARTH - East Asian Research and Translation in Hong Kong
>http://homepage.mac.com/moogoonghwa/earth/hklna/
>Tel/Fax: 852 2630 0349
>
>By the way, my international nickname is Hamo, and you are welcome to use
>it as my first name on this mailing list. See
><http://homepage.mac.com/moogoonghwa/hamo/nick1.html>
>
>On 11 Oct 2004, at 21:24, Miriam E Ebsworth wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>Dear RA,
>>
>>I can appreciate your concerns.
>>It's certainly true that contact between language communities often
>>results in code switching/mixing. And extensive contact can lead to
>>borrowing, as you have noted. But just as non-natives benefit from
>>speaking L2 to each other- usually without learning each others' errors-
>>non-natives will benefit from native input both from teachers in the
>>classroom and from native peers.  In such situations, it's even more
>>unlikely that natives will learn non-native errors. And good programs will
>>provide lots of native models and input, in and out of the classroom.
>>
>>Most code switching is done by individuals who have a shared good command
>>of 2 languages, but know they are participating in a speech event in which
>>both languages are understood by fellow interlocutors.
>>Crutching- or using the alternate language due to lack of competence- does
>>happen, but is not the main reason for switching. Solidarity, humor,
>>capturing just the right nuance- are more frequent functions of switches.
>>
>>And allocating substantial dedicated time to each language is an important
>>part of any good bilingual program.
>>Not every dual language program does this in the same way. Some start off
>>with the 2 language groups sharing only a small number of classes while
>>they acquire the building blocks of the alternate language. Others have
>>everybody together all the time from the start. And there are intermediate
>>positions.
>>
>>You also touch on the issue of discourse domains. I can think of Chinese
>>English speakers who know the language of technology in English a lot
>>better than I do- in any language. So I would guess that each program
>>needs to ascertain what kinds of discourse and topics of discourse will be
>>needed by the learners in each language.  And of course, in any bilingual
>>program issues of language supremacy come into play.
>>
>>It's great to have this forum so that we can explore ideas, research and
>>terminology.
>>
>>Best,
>>Miriam
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
hthttp://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/