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.
1 response so far ↓
1
Jenny
// Dec 4, 2007 at 4:57 am
I liked reading about the candidates’ statements and your dissection of them. I don’t really follow politics, either. I think I’m waiting for an issue that I care about. My apathy might get in the way.
It seems like many of the candidates weren’t really saying anything. Typical.
Since you brought in doublespeak from your linguistics class, I am going to bring in the idea of “othering” that we are talking about as a part of Post-Colonial theory in my capstone class. Much of the discussion of bilingual education relates to fear (either blatant or implied) of “others” and their differences. Given the choice, many parents would want their kids to be in classrooms with other kids “like them.” This would indeed be familiar and comfortable, but it’s not practical, it’s not welcoming, (and it’s boring).
This issue was addressed in my high school, and that’s what actually made me think about it. You used the phrases “foreign language” and “foreign language education,” and so did my high school, until my sophomore year. The school board changed all “foreign language” speak to “world languages,” in order to eliminate the negative connotations of the word “foreign,” which increases the attitude that people who are different are “others” and that they are not like you.
Besides messing up my transcript, I think this change is an interesting way to think about the treatment of languages other than English in the United States.
Leave a Comment