Language is power, to teach language is to empower.

eins/uno/un

zwei/dos/deux

drei/tres/trois

vier/quatro/quatre

fünf/cinco/cinq

sechs/seis/six

sieben/siete/sept

acht/ocho/huit

neun/nueve/neuf

zehn/diez/ dix 

I have enjoyed this blogging experience more than I though I would. I’m am quite interested in foreign languages and their teaching methods. As I look back to my opening post, I realize that I concentrated not at all on the expression of complex ideas through writing in a second language as I said I would. (I also never put information in my about me section as I claimed I would soon do.) I also notice that I believed immersion to be when a class is taught only in the language being learned and the native language is not spoken at all. I’ve since learned better after writing my post about the article describing the types of immersion education.

Throughout writing this blog, I have found that I am very disappointed in America’s general attitude on foreign languages. In reading articles on America’s foreign language education, I was always glad to find an excuse to rant on this topic. My belief that we must put much more emphasis on learning foreign languages has only been strengthened by this blog.

I hope my love of Linguistics encourages me to read and write more about languages in the future. I look forward to a career involving languages and hope to one day inspire America to pick up the foreign language pace.

The quotes in this posts are from the article, “Learning the Language,” November 27th, 2007, by Mary Ann Zehr, found at http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/learning-the-language/2007/11/presidential_candidates_views.html on December 2nd, 2007.

Again I find myself writing about politics when I don’t put forth much effort to follow them. I would, however, like to study up before the next election. What better place to start than candidate views on bilingual education? The newsletter Hispanic Link Weekly Report “posed the following question to the staff of 17 politicians competing in the presidential primaries that begin Jan. 3:

What is your candidate’s position, if any, on bilingual education?

I was disappointed to discover that only 7 candidates responded in time to be included in the newsletter. Of these 7 candidates, 5 were democrats supporting bilingual education and 2 were Republicans against it. I shall comment on a few of the more interesting responses.

Senator Clinton supports the notion that children will learn more efficiently by being taught in their native language while learning English at the same time.

I’ve been learning about doublespeak in my linguistics class and I’d say this qualifies. All that is being said is that Clinton agrees that children learn better in bilingual classes. The response doesn’t say anything about what she plans to do with bilingual education or how she thinks it should be incorporated into our education system. I suppose it’s good that she supports “the notion” but I’d rather find out what she plans to do with bilingual education.

The response from Bill Richardson’s staff was as follows:

Bilingual education is a part of guaranteeing equal education for all American students.

True. This is implying that Bill Richardson wishes to guarantee equal education and thus will incorporate bilingual classes into the education system. Whether he will or not isn’t explicitly said, but that seems to be how politicians work.

Obama believes the federal government should be doing more to encourage transitional bilingual education.

This quote is quite a bit more direct than the previous two. Obama thinks that transitional bilingual education should be encouraged.

[Mitt Romney] believes immersion is the best method for learning the English Language.

I would agree with this statement as immersion leads to a greater oral competency in a foreign language and that, I believe, qualifies it as the best method. The kind of immersion I am speaking of also involves a great deal of instruction concentrating on the language paired with the other types of instruction that are also in the language. I do not think Romney has this type of immersion in mind. This statement alone doesn’t prove that Romney is against bilingual education, but the article explains that Romney

told his supporters in speeches that he fought for the end of bilingual education in Massachusetts

That definitely qualifies him for a candidate against bilingual education.

[Tom Tancredo] thinks that classes should be in English only. He thinks English should be the official language in the U.S. and everything should be printed in English.

Well, I definitely do not agree that classes should be in English only. This would make it quite difficult for students who can’t comprehend a word of English. I do, however, agree that English should be the official language of the U.S. I also agree that everything should be printed in English, with some also being printed in other languages in order to aid those who do not speak English, of course. If our nation is to claim English as the official language, we are going to need to step up our foreign language programs. At least now we can admit that many Americans don’t bother learning more languages than English while following it up saying that English isn’t our official language, we do have others. Keeping our current attitude about foreign language while making our official language English would push America over the edge from conceited to pompous. We, Tom Tancredo included, need to learn that there are a whole lot of people in the world who don’t speak English and it isn’t right for us to claim that it is their responsibility to learn to do so rather than our responsibility to learn their language in order for us to communicate.

The quotes in this posts are from the article, “Language immersion has many meanings,” December 1st, 2007, by Valerie Strauss, found at http://www.star-telegram.com/national_news/story/335111.html on December 2nd, 2007.

This article describes what, exactly, immersion programs are and what different types exist. It is important to note that these programs are not merely throwing students in an environment where only the foreign language they are to learn is spoken. There are actually different types of immersion, total, partial and two-way. Two-way is my personal favorite since it helps students to become used to interacting with native speakers of a different language. It involves one to two-thirds of the class being native speakers of a certain foreign language and the rest of the class being native speakers of the language used in the country in which the class is taught. This type of classroom has numerous cultural and linguistic benefits, most importantly to me being that it helps students to develop a pronunciation in their foreign language that is more near to that of native speakers than students who learn in a different style of language classroom.

Language immersion programs are the best way for students to become better at spoken language. Not only to achieve better pronunciation and the ability to call to mind the words that you wish to say, but also to become confident in their abilities and able to carry on casual conversations. They are a great way to learn the language in a way that will be the most useful.

Immersion programs mean getting away from your typical magical phrases that are never really used to more useful content-based literacy language that students can use in life.

I experienced this when I took classes in Germany. The things I learned in class were completely practical and I found myself using them in casual conversation outside of class. This made it quite a bit easier for me to remember and keep using these things.

Immersion programs often involve teaching other subjects in the language being learned. The author of this article describes how most programs operate with regards to this,

The reason some programs use science and math is because they are very hands-on, and that motivates the kids to learn the language through the content, whereas if you go with language arts, then you are going to focus on the language.

I found this to be a very good point. If you concentrate on a language itself, you will actively think about using it. If you use a language to learn other things, such as math and science, you we be concentrating on the concepts themselves rather than the language you are using. This will greatly improve language skills and help students to think in that language automatically instead of paying too much attention to what they are saying and translating from their native language. This is a vital skill for foreign language speakers to achieve fluency. I can only hope that I someday work at a school where classes are taught in this way.

The quotes in this post are from the article, “Busy Week for World Languages,” October 15th, 2007, by Michele Anciaux Aoki, found at http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/educationforaglobalage/archives/123668.asp?from=blog_last3 on October 21^st, 2007.

I found this article quite interesting and informative. I’m not one to follow politics, but I’m glad to learn a bit about the current legislature of language education. The first bill discussed is a House Bill titled “Enhancing public school world language instruction.”

Its focus was on reinstating the position of Worlds Languages Supervisor at the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction.

This would be a great help to language education. It would cause a greater emphasis on it’s importance in schools. It was sent as an amendment to a larger bill which was vetoed. I don’t know what was on the rest of the amendment, but I’m disappointed in America’s lack of caring about languages.

The article also describes a Senate Bill, “creating a pilot program of Spanish and Chinese language instruction.” This requested about $1 million,

a rather modest amount compared to the $30-$40 million dollars requested for math and science.

It didn’t make it out of the Legislature. Again, I am quite sad with this result. That foreign language education for two very important languages in our world today can’t even get a thirtieth of what math and science get shows that America doesn’t feel the need to make any effort to increase communication with other countries. As the author of this article says,

It’s great that the Chinese are learning English, but what does that say about us that we’re either unwilling or unable to show the respect due by making some effort to learn Chinese?

Do we honestly believe that everyone else should learn English and we shouldn’t have to bother learning their languages? That sounds pretty egotistic and self-centered to me.

I did find some good news at the end of the article. “World Languages and International Competencies” is prioritized #12 out of 28 this year. Doesn’t really sound that great, but, as the article says, all 28 are quite important. Being in the upper half of a group of priorities seems pretty good to me. Even better than that, #1 is K-12 Education Funding, which “entails a new definition of basic education that includes World Language.” It would make me quite happy to see more languages incorporated in Elementary school. I just hope this inclusion of World Languages into basic education isn’t just a class or two of foreign language. That’s more like an introduction to one World language. I would much prefer that students reach at least basic proficiency in a Foreign language and also have the option to continue further in this language and/or take another language.

On October 5th, 2007, I attended the MCTE Fall Conference in Lansing. I found some of the things I learned there to be somewhat beneficial, but other things didn’t seem to apply to me. Overall I am glad that I went. I started out with strong doubts when the welcome speech began with a hearty “Are you ready to RUMBLE!” (reminiscent of the ever so annoying Michael Scott style from the Office). This welcome was followed by the sound keynote address delivered by Kathleen Blake Yancey. The heart of this keynote was changes in technology and how they have impacted literacy and how we write. I found this to be quite appropriate as it brought the focus of the conference not only onto technology as it is now but also technology of the future. This theme wasn’t exactly carried on in my breakout sessions, but I still thought it a good thing to focus on and thus a good way to begin the conference.

My first breakout session was titled “Hanging on by your Fingernails until you gain a Toehold: Advice for Future Teachers from New Teachers.” This session was quite applicable to me, being a future teacher, and I enjoyed it. The information seemed like it would be beneficial, especially the advice about finding a second year teacher as a mentor. This seems to me to be sound advice. Though the information given was pertinent, it’ll be a while before I can actually use it. I only hope that I will be able to find my notes from this session at that time. Judging by my abysmal organization skills, that scenario isn’t likely.

The other breakout session I attended was “Preparing and Inviting Teachers into Leadership and Scholarship.” I found this title to be misleading. I suppose I was hoping to learn more about leadership, but what they meant by leadership was leading the field through publishing in English journals. Being a German major with hopes to attain a masters in Linguistics, I’m not really worried about being published in English journals yet. Or maybe even ever. Not that it wouldn’t be neat, but I think it would take up a lot of time that I’d rather spend on other things. The session also had new teachers discussing their experiences presenting at conferences. I found this interesting, but I’ve always enjoyed public speaking and didn’t exactly find the information to be exceedingly beneficial.

Overall I enjoyed the conference, but I would have preferred something more along the linguistic or foreign language lines. For an English minor, such as myself, it wasn’t quite as beneficial as it would have been for a major.

The quotes in this post are from the article, “Bilingual Preschool Offers Best of Both Worlds,” October 20^th, 2007, by Dawn Neuses, found at http://qconline.com/archives/qco/display.php?id=359227 on October 21^st, 2007.

This article describes a preschool that teaches Spanish speaking students with an ESL component.  It is an early start on second language acquisition, but starting early is a good way to help students better master English.  By learning early on, students will be better able to communicate with both students and teachers later in their school career.  One thing I like very much about this particular preschool is the emphasis on learning in the native language before learning in the target language.

Students are taught in their native language, in this case Spanish. The preschool includes an English-as-a-Second-Language component where the children also are learning English.

This is a good way to teach English in addition to teaching other concepts.  If the new concepts were introduced in English, the students would learn the language more but not be as able to comprehend the concepts. 

Principal Pat Alexander said research shows how important it is for bilingual students to grasp concepts completely in their own language first before transitioning to English.

This transitioning between the two languages will help the students learn to transition fluidly between the two.  It also keeps the student’s native Spanish from being de-emphasized.  This is important to keep the students from feeling inferior to their fellow English speaking students when they are further along in their education.  It is also important to teach the students partially in Spanish because preschool is fairly important for language development.  They must develop their native language skills in addition to their second language skills. 

This preschool program also emphasizes parental involvement.  Parents who learn early on to be supportive of their bilingual children will be more likely to do so later on.  Parental support is important to a student’s success in school.   The head teacher of the district’s English Language Learners program describes the parental focus:

“This is a program where children can walk with their parents to get here,” Ms. Jordan said, “and because there is a parent education component, we can help parents understand how they can help their child be successful, not just in preschool, but throughout their educational career.”

More preschools such as this one across the country would be very beneficial for non-English speaking students.  To be educated this way early on helps the students better learn English and helps their future ESL classes to be easier or possibly even unnecessary.  This school is a good example of successful early second language education.

The quotes in this post are from the article, “Parents say school misread son’s ethnicity” Wednesday, October 17^th, 2007, by Esmeralda Bermudez, found at http://www.oregonlive.com/education/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/1192591534232800.xml&coll=7 on October 21^st, 2007.

This article showed me an interesting aspect of bilingual education that I have not yet thought about. The article is summarized well by the following quote:

For more than a year, a Latino boy who speaks only English sat in his classroom confused by what his Spanish-speaking classmates were saying and falling behind in his work.

His mother complained to school officials, but they insisted he belonged in the English as a Second Language program.

I don’t understand how the school could have possibly made this mistake. If a student speaks no Spanish at all and his parents claim that he speaks English, how could they place him in an ESL classroom. It is noted that the student has a learning disability and that educators “are not fully trained in distinguishing learning disabilities from limited English speaking skills,” but it seems to me that they should have been able to figure out that he didn’t speak any Spanish at all. This mistake put the child at a huge disadvantage. The same disadvantage that ESL classes are meant to avoid.

While Alek was in the ESL program, his grades plummeted, putting him at the bottom of his class, and he dreaded going to school, his parents said.

Alek was proficient in English and knew no Spanish, as is usually the case with American students, and yet, “solely because he was Latino,” he was placed in a Spanish speaking classroom. It seems to me that this, putting a student in a special education program based on his race, is a very racist move by the school. Alek’s parents even told the school that he spoke English.

The district’s bilingual report lists Alek’s primary language as Spanish, but Villaraldo said she indicated her son communicated in English

I can’t comprehend how the ESL teacher did not figure out that Alek could not understand Spanish. It seems to me that his proficiency in English communication and complete failure at Spanish communication would prove that. They should have been specifically on the lookout for this based on the parent’s claim that Alek spoke English. The article explains why this claim may have been ignored:

“Some parents will put ‘English’ if they don’t want the child to be stigmatized, even if the child would be entitled to ESL, and some schools don’t necessarily believe what parents say,” she said.

If there is suspicion that the parents aren’t being truthful, can’t the child be tested to find out if he speaks Spanish or English? Even if he has a learning disability that may be mistaken for poor English skills, can’t it be determined that these seemingly poor English skills are far more advanced than the nonexistent Spanish skills? I don’t see how a school could have made a mistake like this. It could have been easily avoided if officials were not putting so much stock in Alek’s race and concentrated more on his skills.

The quotes from this post are from the article titled, Lessons learnt from languages, by Mike Baker, from the BBC News website Education section. http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/uk_news/education/4535364.stm

There is a growing idea that people who speak English need not learn other languages. It’s not just in the US, but in the UK as well. The percentage of students in the UK taking foreign languages has been falling in the past couple of years.

 “In 2003, 73% of 15-year-olds did so. In 2004, that fell to 68% and provisional figures for 2005 show it has slumped to 58%.”

The decline began after the law requiring foreign language to be taught to students from the age of 11 to 16. After seeing the impact of this legislation change, it is now “expected” that a minimum of 50% of students in each school complete a language program. This may seem like a huge deal to us Americans, but it’s quite abnormal in Europe.

“In almost all of the other European countries, it is compulsory to begin learning a foreign language in primary schools.”

Set to this standard, the UK seems to be falling behind. Is this a problem? The article brings up the point that lots of people know English. Travel is made easy by the amount of Europeans who have learned English.

“In 13 countries it is compulsory to learn English. Yet even when pupils are given a free choice of other languages, 90% still opt for English.”

So many English speakers seems to make our learning another language impractical. Having traveled a bit in Germany, I don’t believe this to be true. Most of the signs are still not in English, and the language generally used by everyone is German, not English. Also, even though so many people learn English, many of the adults have lost the ability to communicate with it due to not needing to use it often enough. Foreign languages are still very important, and the UK, with requirements far beyond those in the US, is falling behind. I shudder to think what this means for the US.

The quotes from this post are from the article titled, English is foreign to more pupils, from the BBC News website Education section. http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/uk_news/education/5391960.stm

In thinking of ESL students, I usually think of them in a context of American schools. Because of that, I found this article particularly interesting. It appears that the UK also seems to have the challenge of teaching ESL students. About 9.5% of students in England’s secondary schools don’t have English as their first language. This number continues to increase. The percentage of students in the county of Suffolk who do not speak English as their first language increased by 45% from 2004 to 2006. That’s a very large amount of ESL students. Not only are there so many, but they speak a large variety of languages.

“Twenty-one languages, other than English, are spoken by Suffolk pupils, including Polish, Estonian, Malayalam and Icelandic.”

How does a teacher even go about starting to teach such a varied class? One teacher can’t know all of these different languages. In this case, the students have to be fully immersed in English. One school can’t have individual classes for each and every group of students that speaks a different language. It is important that these students master English in order for them to avoid struggling through school. As the article states,

“Research suggests that pupils in the early stages of fluency in English perform at very low levels in school assessments, while fully bilingual pupils perform significantly above the average of their English-only peers.”

So being an ESL student can be an advantage if early mastery of English is achieved, but can be a disadvantage if it is not. I thought this was a very interesting point. It does a good job demonstrating the importance of a good ESL curriculum. The article gave a brief description of some good ways to teach such a class. “Visual material and language” are important, as is “lots of talking.” My favorite point that was brought up here is that it is important to value the language skills that the students already have.

“We try to make languages really valued in the classroom and get the other children involved for example by teaching them to count to five in Polish or by learning songs.”

I had never thought about it before, but concentrating so hard on teaching English to ESL students could make them and other students feel like their language isn’t as important. This would not be good because we would be teaching students that English is the only language that matters, which isn’t the case. We must stress the importance of all languages to young students. Which leads into my next post, so I shall continue there.