Published in the Arizona
Republic, December 22, 2007:
Yuma man 'fails' to
recognize English
I was at a restaurant the other day when a busload of
tourists came in. I asked a lady where they were from and
she said England.
I said, "You kind of have an accent," and she said, "It's
called English. Of course, over here you wouldn't know what
that is."
Hmm.
- Gene Lord, Yuma
Sent to the Boston Globe, 12/19/07
One gets the
impression from reading the headline “More
Maine High Schools Offer Chinese Language Courses” (Dec. 18)
that large numbers of students are studying Mandarin in Maine,
and that the number is growing at a rapid pace. But the article
itself tells us that only 214 high schoolers are studying
Chinese in Maine in only ten secondary schools, about 21 per
school, or one class, and two of the schools have been offering
Chinese for ten years or more.
These kinds of articles have been appearing in newspapers
throughout the country for the last few years. In every case,
the headline proclaims that Mandarin Fever is rampant in the US,
and in every case in turns out that only a few Mandarin programs
exist and they serve small numbers of students.
What is going on?
Stephen Krashen
Published in the Arizona Republic December 4,
2007
Is this really what ASU is about?
After the huge win over U of A, I thought I
would be celebrating a great win over a hated rival. Usually I
go home to Los Angeles for Thanksgiving weekend, when this game
is normally played, so I miss out. This was my first real
experience of the ASU/UA rivalry and let me say, I was
completely disgusted and disheartened by members of the ASU
student body.
I am a Mexican-AMERICAN. I was born and raised in East L.A. and
I have worked my butt off to get where I am today. I also BLEED
maroon and gold. After hearing the racist, and downright cruel,
comments that were directed towards the UA fans, I am ashamed to
call myself a Sun Devil. "F***ing minorities, go back to
Tucson", "Give Tucson back to Mexico" and "The UA fans can't
understand you because they only speak Spanish" were just a
start to the tasteless things that were said this past Saturday
night. I know some people might be laughing at the things I have
just written, and this is where the problem lies.
ASU advertises itself as the "New American University", but from
the sound of things, ASU has taken a step back into the 60's
rather than moving forward in trying to create a community of
tolerance and unity. Rather then priding itself on how there are
over 64,000 students that attend this university, ASU should
concentrate more on the quality of students they admit. Only
then will ignorance like this come to an end.
Sincerely,
Anthony Hernandez
President, Tau Psi Omega Fraternity
Published in the Arizona
Republic Dec. 13, 2007
Arizona should uphold Constitution
Regarding "Foes plan new suit against sanctions" (Republic,
Sunday):
It was reported that the district court's ruling regarding
the sanctions law "followed the filing of a ballot measure
to challenge part of the U.S. Constitution classifying
anyone born in the United States as a citizen."
Please note that the initiative referred to does not
challenge any part of the Constitution. Rather, it
challenges the state of Arizona to uphold that part of the
Constitution, namely the 14th Amendment written in 1866,
which states that all persons naturalized or born in the
United States "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" are
citizens of the United States.
The initiative would require that the state adhere to the
entire law, including the "subject to the jurisdiction
clause," when issuing citizenship documents. Even Native
Americans born in the United States, due to their being
subject to the jurisdiction of their respective tribes, were
not granted citizenship until Congress passed a law
specifically to grant them citizenship in 1924.
Thank you for the opportunity to clarify the intent of our
initiative. - Della Montgomery,Phoenix
The writer is member of the Birthright Citizenship Political
Committee.
Published in the Arizona Republic, Dec. 11,
2007
Illegal immigration
overblown
One would think when looking at the newspaper
headlines in the United States, and especially in Arizona,
that illegal immigration is the biggest problem plaguing our
nation.
Quite honestly, I could name about 20 things that are much
more important, yet this is the issue that is thrust in our
faces by The Republic and all those who think that
American culture is the center of the universe.
Instead of tackling the real issues, like civil-rights
abuses, health care, education and corporate greed, just to
name a few, our nation, thanks to our "liberal" media, is
reverting to 1950s-style racist policies and points of view,
akin to apartheid in South Africa or the Third Reich in Nazi
Germany.
It's funny that not all illegal immigrants are targeted; the
main target is Spanish-speaking "Brown" people. That's
right, I said "Brown" people, because that's the mentality
of Arizona: working to keep the Brown man down.
Fear and hysteria run this nation, which is en route to
becoming a police state (if we're not already there), where
people, most likely because of the color of their skin or
the language they speak or maybe even their religion, will
be targeted and asked to "show their papers" to prove
citizenship.
This country and this paper should be talking about the real
issues troubling our nation instead of patronizing us by
dangling a shiny object (racism) in the public's face.
- Matthew Lentz,Phoenix
Sent to the Chicago Sun-Times, Nov 30, 2007
Latino Immigrants and English
The Sun-Times, commenting on a recent report from the Pew
Hispanic Center, states that “only one in four Latino immigrants
speaks English very well” and advises immigrants to “learn
English.” (“Word
to the Wise: Learn English,” Nov 30). A close look at the
report, however, shows that Latino immigrants have been
following this advice already.
Low English ability is only a problem among adult newcomers with
little education: According to the Pew report, only five percent
of those here less than two years who are not high school
graduates speak English very well, but 82 percent of Latino
immigrants who have lived in the US 26 years or more who are
college graduates speak English very well. Also, three-quarters
of those who arrived before age 10 speak English very well.
As the Sun-Times points out, English competence among children
of immigrants is nearly universal. Studies show, in fact, that
by the time they are in middle school, most children of
immigrants are more comfortable in English than in their
heritage language.
Of course, we still need to be concerned about less educated
newcomers who do not speak English well, and the Sun-Times’ call
for restoring funding for ESL classes is right on target. There
are always long waiting lines to get into English classes, a
sure sign that immigrants are eager for English.
Stephen Krashen
Sent
to the Arizona Daily Start
November 20, 2007
Dear
Mr. Horne,
I read about your intent
to investigate the
Tucson Unified School District’s Ethnic Studies Programs and
I would like to provide you with some background information on
this issue. The TUSD Governing Board authorized a review of the
its Hispanic Studies Department in the spring of 1997. The TUSD
Superintendent assembled a group of thirty-seven individuals
representing many district constituencies: educators, parents,
students, college professors, and a slew of community members.
The outstanding diversity, high caliber, and dedication of the
Committee were reflected in the fifteeen recommendations that
were unanimously approved and presented to the TUSD school board
in March of 1998.
The Committee Charge was
five-fold:
-
Review the Hispanic Studies Department in terms of existing
programs as they relate to multi-cultural education;
-
Review existing national research and programming related to
multi-cultural education and Hispanic Studies;
-
Coordinate with curriculum development and support service
committees when appointed;
-
Hold several community hearings; and
-
Make recommendations to the Governing Board and
Superintendent.
As the Committee undertook
its charge, it became evident that it was imperative to get
community input and determine the community sentiment on the
issues at hand. A series of three public hearings were held at
east, west and centrally located venues in order to give the
public an opportunity to voice comments. There was an
overwhelming response at each site. The community input and
reflections became the foundation of the Committee’s final
recommendations.
The Committee spent
countless hours studying data and information from various
departments and a plethora of documents generated therein. Of
utmost importance was the TUSD Diversity Appreciation Policy
which provides the rationale and framework for the
implementation of ethnic studies in TUSD. In fact, the TUSD
Diversity Appreciation Policy, when it was first approved by the
board, was a groundbreaking document that reflected the mood of
the TUSD community regarding the very important issue of
multicultural, non-sexist education.
More specifically, the
Committee analyzed and used TUSD Policy 6112 as the springboard
for developing its recommendations. Excerpts from this policy
state that TUSD intents “…
to develop staff and student understanding and appreciation of
diverse cultural and ethnic heritages….” “Learning produces an
understanding of diverse values, history and achievement of
identifiable groups in society.” “All students have the
opportunity to learn their cultural heritage and appreciate its
uniqueness as well as that of others.”
It was deduced by the
Committee that, through its recommendations, the Mexican
American Studies Program would put into action the curricular
intents of Board policy as outlined above. Among some of the
recommendations that were sent to the Board addressing Hispanic
studies were the following:
-
The title of Mexican American Studies will be used.
-
A Mexican American Studies Program will be developed.
-
The Mexican American Studies Program will have academics as
its primary focus.
-
The Mexican American Studies Program curriculum will
include:
-
At the high school
level
-
History of
Mexico
-
Literature/Humanities/Fine Arts of people of Mexican
descent
-
History of
Mexican Americans in the Southwest
-
Contemporary
issues affecting Mexican Americans
-
At the middle
school level
-
A course
entitled Introduction of Mexican American Studies
-
At the elementary
school level
-
The
Multicultural Education Program curriculum
-
The District should provide funding and staff development
for the new department.
-
The District implement ethnic studies courses throughout the
curriculum
As
you can tell, the Committee was proactively visionary. Their
recommendations demonstrated a sense of urgency in getting TUSD
to address the diversity issue of its diverse student population
in the dawn of a new century. Furthermore, the plan submitted to
the board was the Tucson community’s dreams for its students.
The unanimity of the vote on each one of the recommendations is
a reflection of the cohesiveness of the Tucson community on its
path to achieving total inclusiveness.
As a
member of the Committee, I am asking you to reconsider your
probe and whatever hidden political intent there might be in
your actions. You would be doing a disservice to the many hours
of work that an illustrious body of Tucson community
professionals diligently put forth to produce a document to
cherish by future generations.
Dr.
Conrado L. Gómez, Clinical
Assistant Professor
Arizona State
University at the Polytechnic Campus
Submitted the Arizona Republic. November 13, 2007
This
week the independent Center for Education Policy released an
important study which gave yet another reminder that we need
good information rather than political ideology to solve hard
problems (“Report: State must boost English learning,” November
13).
The
study reports that the state’s immersion program is not working,
and that the English Language Learner Task Force appointed to
chart a new course is giving us a ramped up version of the same
failed policies that got us into trouble in the first place.
According to the report, the Task Force recommendations are not
supported by educational research.
The
problem is not that the Task Force can’t refer us to published
studies, but rather that it offers unusual and inappropriate
interpretations of the research.
Michael Long, a well respected researcher at the University of
Maryland, reported that a Task Force member contacted him for
help via email last summer.
Long
said the Task Force recommendations were “outdated, and
especially unsuitable for school-age children.”
The
research cited appears to attempt to “marshal evidence
supportive of an already prescribed curriculum,” Long told the
Task Force member.
The
Task Force is charged with crafting models which follow from
sound, up-to-date research, but it appears to be casting its own
ideological perspective as the law of the land.
“(Research) literature that disagrees with our models is of no
significance to us because we are restricted to following
Arizona law,” the Task Force member reported to Long.
Each
of us incurs a heavy moral cost for sitting idly by while the
state’s schools chief and members of the Legislature politicize
and mismanage the education of our children, peppering its
policy statements with irrelevant research references.
But
there will be a financial cost too. Our future workforce will
be educated according to the ill-advised inventions of the
state’s political establishment seeking to score points with
voters rather than lead us into a brighter, more prosperous
future.
Jeff
MacSwan
Sent to the Arizona Daily Star, October 23,
2007:
Guest Column
Andrés
Oppenheimer in Tuesday’s Star quotes a report of the World
Bank suggesting that too much effort goes into getting children
in school in Latin America and not enough on the quality of
education they get. My wife, UA Regent’s Professor Yetta Goodman
and I have worked extensively in both public and private schools
from Mexico to Argentina
We believe the World Bank contributes more to the problems of
education in Latin America than it does to solutions. It makes
a condition of any aid they provide that spending on public
education and social services must be reduced. The result is a
deterioration of public education and down grading of private
education as parents must choose lower quality schools because
of the high costs. In Latin America those who can afford it send
their children to private schools. Public schools serve the
working poor. And most children of non-working poor get no
education.
Education varies tremendously among the countries of Central and
South America. The most general problem across Latin America is
getting children into schools and keeping them there. In
Guatemala with a predominant Mayan population, for example, one
public school principal told us that most children drop out by
third grade and only a very few go on beyond 6th. Girls are more
likely to drop out to take care of younger children or to work.
Even in the less economically disadvantaged countries it is very
hard for teachers to subsist on the available pay. Everywhere we
met “taxi teachers” Most schools are half day in Latin America,
so a teacher will teach mornings in one school, eat lunch in a
taxi, and teach afternoons in another. And then they will tutor
children privately to eke out a living.
In rural areas in Mexico and most other Latin countries teachers
have little or no education beyond high school. Teacher
education programs, though improving, are still woefully
inadequate and the private schools syphon off the better
educated teachers.
Oppenhiemer quotes the World Bank report that there is not
enough concern for the quality of education. Ironically, the
curricula and methodology supported by the policies of the
national ministries of education represent the best in modern
pedagogy and where they are implemented the results are
excellent. The problem is that the teachers lack the education
to put the policies into effect. There is virtually no money for
staff development and basic materials, particularly books, are
rarely adequate. We saw classrooms jammed with as many as 60
children in a small space. There’s not even room for children to
misbehave.
Latin American countries spend a far higher part of their gross
national product on education than we or other developed nations
do. And in spite of all the problems we’ve seen a rising tide of
dedicated teachers and inclusion of more learners. We’ve seen
some remarkable teachers achieving success under terrible
conditions. Those who are striving to bring political and
economic democracy in their countries recognize that inclusive
public education is essential to democracy.
There is little value in using the international tests to
compare the schools of Latin America with each other or with
countries in other parts of the world. The World Bank
suggestions would widen the gap between a small educated elite
and the poverty of the working and non working poor.
I once asked an educational official of the World Bank a simple
question. Does the world as a whole have the resources to
provide health care and education for all of the children and
young people no matter where they live? His answer was, “Of
course it does. It’s a matter of priorities.”
Ken Goodman
Professor Emeritus
Language Reading and Culture
College of Education
University of Arizona
Sent to the Taipei Times October 21, 2007
Skill-based English teaching not effective
Letters: On lacking English literacy
Dan Ritco's advice to parents ("Choosing
an English curriculum," Oct. 18, page 8) on English teaching
would have been up-to-date about 30 years ago, but a lot has
happened since then.
Ritco assumes that a skill-based curriculum featuring vocabulary
memorization, grammar study and training in "inductive and
deductive reasoning" is the only path to proficiency.
Over the last 30 years a massive amount of scientific evidence
has accumulated that indicates the hard work of memorization and
study is not only unnecessary but also may be ineffective.
Rather, the research strongly suggests that we acquire language
when we understand what we hear and what we read. At best, the
grammar we study is a supplement with very limited use.
Ritco's view also conflicts with common sense. If successful
second-language acquisition required the memorization of
"thousands of words" and the extensive study of grammar, nobody
would ever acquire a second language.
Ritco is free to disagree with this view, but he is not free to
simply assert the opposite and ignore the last 30 years of
serious research.
Stephen Krashen
Sent to the Chicago Daily Herald, Oct. 7,
2007
Both Tony Reyes (“Bilingual education is not beneficial”;
October 5) and John C. Smith (“Bilingual education doesn’t make
sense,” October 6) are misinformed about bilingual education.
Reyes’ only argument against bilingual education is the obvious
fact that English is important and that parents want their
children to acquire English. Mr. Reyes is apparently not aware
of the fact that scientific studies have consistently shown that
children in bilingual programs do better on tests of English
than children in all-English programs.
John Smith’s view is that there are studies both for and against
bilingual education. Actually, the research is overwhelmingly in
favor of bilingual education; nearly every scholar who has
reviewed the research has concluded that bilingual education
works.
I hope that the critics of bilingual education will take a
little time to find out more about it.
Stephen Krashen
Professor Emeritus
University of Southern California
Published in Language Magazine, October
2007, vol 7, number 2
Disingenuous claims
In a press release issued Sept. 24, 2007, Education Secretary
Spellings points out that reading scores for fourth grade
English learners on a national test (the NAEP) “jumped an
unprecedented 20 points between 2000 and 2005.” The press
release gives the impression that this jump was due to No Child
Left Behind (NCLB). Jim Crawford has pointed out, however, that
nearly the entire increase happened between 2000 and 2002,
BEFORE NCLB WENT INTO EFFECT.
Take a look at the scores:
2000: 167
2002: 183
2003: 186
2005: 187
(2007: 188)
This is only the latest of many examples of disingenuous claims
by the Department of Education. This administration is no more
truthful about education than it is about the Iraq war.
For more details, see Crawford’s analysis at
http://www.elladvocates.org.
Stephen Krashen
Sent to the Dallas Morning News, October 2,
2007:
We all agree with William McKenzie’s view our “Goal
should be all students reading in English as quickly as possible”
(October 2). There is, however, no evidence that the best way to
do this is early testing and “intense classes” in English early
in their school years. This approach apparently seems to some
people to be common sense, but it is inconsistent with an
impressive number of scientific studies and the experience of
many educators: Well-organized bilingual programs have been
shown be more effective than English immersion in helping
children acquire English.
I suspect that McKenzie’s view is based on false information:
Contrary to what he was told, it doesn’t take five years for
children to acquire academic language. It takes five years until
English learners score at the 50th percentile on standardized
tests of reading, a level half of the native speakers of English
do not reach. English learners typically acquire enough academic
English to do a considerable amount of their school-work in
English after two to three years.
Stephen Krashen
Posted on Political Cortex, 9/25/07:
http://www.politicalcortex.com/story/2007/9/25/62158/7847
Disingenuous claims by the Department of Education
In a press release issued Sept. 24, 2007, Education Secretary
Spellings points out that reading scores for fourth grade
English learners on a national test (the NAEP) “jumped an
unprecedented 20 points between 2000 and 2005.” The press
release gives the impression that this jump was due to No Child
Left Behind (NCLB). Jim Crawford has pointed out, however, that
nearly the entire increase happened between 2000 and 2002,
BEFORE NCLB WENT INTO EFFECT.
Take a look at the scores:
2000: 167
2002: 183
2003: 186
2005: 187
This is only the latest of many examples of disingenuous claims
by the Department of Education. This administration is no more
truthful about education than it is about the Iraq war.
For more details, see Crawford’s analysis at
http://www.elladvocates.org.
Stephen Krashen
Published in the Arizona
Republic, 9/22/07:
Teen punished for growing up in U.S.
Regarding "Friends hope to assist deported
high-school grad" (Wednesday, Valley & State):
Outrage is too mild a word to describe the deportation of
Virginia Gutierrez, a recent graduate of Phoenix North High
School.
What kind of a society do we live in that criminalizes
children who were not responsible for their situation and
have no legal means of redress.
She was deported, it seems, without being given an
opportunity to seek the advice of an attorney or have a
hearing.
This girl is being punished for growing up in the United
States, about which she had no choice. How can a society
criminalize this activity and deport her?
Let's be upfront about what is going on. This is not about
law enforcement. This is about ethnic-cleansing.
All the euphemisms in the world cannot hide the cruel and
petty war against women and children whose only crime is to
want to make a better life for themselves. They are being
punished for our failed system.
Maybe an "American" can adopt her or bring her in as a
political refugee seeking justice.
Based on her treatment so far, she should be granted a visa
right away. - Nicholas Pawley,Goodyear
Published in the Sioux City Journal (Iowa),
September 20, 2007
Bilingual education: A success
Contrary to the claims of a Letter to the Editor in the Sept. 2
Journal headlined "Bilingual ed failure," research has shown
that dropping bilingual education did not accelerate the English
development of California's English learners.
In fact, scholars who have reviewed the scientific research have
concluded that bilingual education is more effective than
"immersion" in helping children acquire the English they need
for school. Four scientific papers have been published in the
last two years in professional journals reviewing the research,
and they all arrive at this conclusion.
Bilingual education has been a success.
Stephen Krashen, School of Education, University of Southern
California
Sent to the Washington Post, Sept 18, 2007
Spanish speakers do well in English, speak English well, support
English
Don Meckley (letters, Sept. 17) thinks that Hispanics have "no
spur to learn English, ' in contrast to other immigrants. This
accusation is unfounded.
Spanish speakers do well in learning English. According to the
recent census, the percentage of Spanish and Asian language
speakers who speak English very well is nearly identical, for
children, 73.4% of Spanish speakers and 72.7% of Asian language
speakers. For adults, the percentages are 47.5% and 50.8%
respectively.
Studies confirm that those in Spanish-speaking families who came
to the US before school age or were born here generally speak
English better than they do Spanish by the time they are in high
school or even earlier, and 70% of third and later generation
Hispanics speak only English.
Polls show that Spanish speakers support the acquisition of
English. According to a recent Pew study, Hispanics feel more
strongly about the importance of children acquiring English than
other groups do.
The impression that Spanish speakers do not speak English well
is due to the presence of new immigrants, who have not yet had
time (and often the opportunity) to acquire English to high
levels.
Stephen Krashen
Published in the Arizona
Republic, Sept. 16, 2007
A lesson on underfunded mandates
Your readers may think special education, English-language
learner and Medicaid programs don't affect them unless their
children participate. Not true.
When the federal or state government mandates implementation
of such programs but fails to adequately fund them, as is
the case for all the programs I just mentioned, all Arizona
students suffer.
Schools were promised a 40 percent federal reimbursement of
special-education costs, but actually get less than 20
percent. The Legislature pays less than half of the
additional program cost of educating ELL students.
Most recently, the federal government has cut back on
reimbursing schools for Medicaid-related costs. And let's
not forget the No Child Left Behind Act. It mandates testing
and tutoring, while lacking sufficient funding.
Few realize that schools must pay for these underfunded but
mandated programs first, which means they must raid their
regular education budgets in their attempts to comply.
Students in regular education programs are forced to make do
with what's left. Your student included. - Michael T.
Martin,Phoenix
The writer is a research analyst for the Arizona School
Boards Association.
Published in the Arizona
Republic, Sept. 12, 2007
Federal measure for schools unrealistic
As an educator, I want to make sure that the
public understands how the federal government's AYP, or
"adequate yearly progress," works.
AYP is a set of more than 200 measurements, and student
bodies are broken down into several subcategories. If a
school fails in any one of those 200 measurements and in any
of the subcategories, such as English-language learners,
then the school is labeled as not meeting AYP.
This unrealistic system almost sets a school up for failure.
It is not an adequate reflection of what is going on in
public schools.
I work hard at continually improving student performance.
Yet it is frustrating and demoralizing to be labeled as
"failing" every year when progress is actually being made.
I encourage all parents to learn more about AYP and how No
Child Left Behind actually works. They will see that almost
all our schools are excellent places of learning. - Bruce
Boyce,Phoenix
Published in the Arizona Republic, September 8, 2007
Politics behind decline
Oh, the crybabies about American culture are
at it again (Sept. 1, "Foundation of America is crumbling")!
American politics might be causing the crumbling, but not
the culture.
American culture has constantly be in flux as new immigrants
arrive on the shores of this great country -- the Irish, the
Swedes, the Germans, the Mexican, the Polish, the Italians,
the Chinese, the Koreans, etc. -- and whenever a new
nationality arrives, we adapt, incorporate and harmonize the
new milieu into what now becomes a different American
culture than previous to the influx.
American culture is not static, but fluid; not stagnant, but
refreshing. Let us carpe diem -- seize the day -- of
opportunity to rejoice with our immigrants. We will only be
sorry if and when they leave, and that's not just Mexicans,
but also Korean, Polish, Russian and a large list of
immigrants who have come to build this country into what it
is always becoming.
-- Gale D. Schmidt, Phoenix
Published in the Arizona Republic, Sept. 7,
2007
On keeping our language pure
State officials are greatly concerned that some teachers in
Arizona speak with accents ("State
faults teachers of English learners," Republic, Aug. 31).
They should be concerned. The language spoken in our classrooms
and our state is at stake, but there is much we can do to
protect it from desecration.
We should consider banning the reading of such books as Animal
Farm, lest students are exposed to alternate spellings, such as
"colour" and "organization."
And we must protect our children from hearing recordings that
might encourage them to "CON-tribute" rather than "con-TRI-bute"
to society.
But most importantly, we must fortify our border - our eastern
border.
If we are to keep our language pure, then we must keep out those
who drive "kas" and infiltrate our state with their "wid" "idears."
We must stop any invasion by those who pronounce Jesus' name
with three syllables and who sit cattywampus rather than
cater-corner from others.
Yes, we are in danger and we must protect the children. And
while we are at it, could someone please instruct Superintendent
of Public Instruction Tom Horne on the proper use of the word
"I"? - Olivia Free-Woman, Phoenix
Published in the Arizona Republic, Sept. 7,
2007
Someday, Mexicans may want a fence
You know with all the outsourcing and the low grades in
education someday, we could end up on the short end of the
stick. Maybe all those fences we are building on the border will
be used to keep us in. - Gene Lord,Lakeside
Published in the Arizona Republic, September 6, 2007:
Teachers become whipping boys
Arizona has no one to blame but itself for Arizona's tragically
substandard and inadequate English-language learner program.
For 15 years, Arizona has been waging a court battle against
appropriate funding of ELL programs. Now the state blames teachers
for the problems in those classrooms ("State faults teachers of
English learners," Republic, Friday)?
The U.S. District Court ruled in 2000 and reaffirmed last March that
Arizona's "arbitrary" and "capricious" funding of ELL programs bears
no relation to the actual funding needed to provide an appropriate
education to students who are learning English, and still Arizona
fights against providing appropriate funding.
How can rolling out new programs like a prescriptive new curriculum
help the problem when they will only serve to substantially increase
school districts' ELL program costs? It is time for the Arizona
Legislature to immediately and adequately ante up and meet its
responsibility to all our children! - Panfilo H. Contreras, Phoenix
The writer is executive
director of the Arizona School Boards Association.
Published in the Arizona Republic, Sept. 5,
2007
I 'wanna' believe this
will work
Regarding "State
faults teachers of English learners" (Republic, Friday):
As a retired teacher who struggled for 30 years to get students
to learn science, with limited success, I was thrilled to read
that Arizona has finally come up with the panacea for teaching:
Never use "gonna," "wanna"
and even "hafta" in the classroom!
I hafta admit that I probably used some of these words while
teaching science. I wanna go back now, watch what I say, and
revel in having students show up every day with the homework
done to perfection, and then get perfect scores on every exam.
And now I'm gonna write all my friends who are still teaching,
explain why so few parents are involved in their kids'
education, why the students don't do their homework, why so many
do poorly on exams, and why so many take two- and three-hour
lunches.
Oh, if Arizona had spent our taxes for this study when I was
still in the classroom . . . - Paul E Plummer, Prescott
Published in the Arizona Republic, Sept. 4,
2007
Parallels: Today's
Anglos, Indians of old
I have been reading letters from my fellow European-Americans,
who are outraged at the presence of illegal immigrants from
Spanish-speaking neighbor countries to our south.
Many of those illegals jokingly refer to their presence as "la
reconquista,"
or the reconquering of this land of ours. As we all know, most
of them have mixed Spanish and Native American (Indian)
ancestry. They refer to their unique racial composition as "la
raza," or "the race."
Well, isn't it noteworthy that in fact it is their "Indian"
people from whom we originally stole this continent? Now, we
know how they must have felt when we destroyed their way of
life, brought a foreign language and an alien culture here and,
worse, stole their land from them. - Stanley E. Rocklin, Mesa
Published in the Arizona Republic, Sept. 4,
2007
America is its
immigrants
Regarding "Foundation of America is crumbling" (Letters,
Saturday):
American politics might be causing the crumbling but not the
culture.
American culture has constantly been in flux as new immigrants
arrive on the shores of this great country - the Irish, the
Swedes, the Germans, the Mexican, the Polish, the Italians, the
Chinese, the Koreans and so on - and whenever a new nationality
arrives, we adapt, incorporate and harmonize the new milieu into
what now becomes a different American culture than previous to
the influx.
American culture is not static but fluid and not stagnant but
refreshing.
Let us carpe diem - seize the day - of opportunity to rejoice
with our immigrants.
We will only be sorry if and when they leave, and that's not
just Mexicans but also Koreans, Polish, Russians and a large
list of immigrants who have come to build this country into what
it is always becoming. - Gale D. Schmidt, Phoenix
Published in the Arizona Republic, September 2, 2007:
Our real problems don't have accents
I'm pretty careful about what I say about our immigrants, legal
or otherwise.
The immigrants are not the root of all evil. They are not the
cause of this country's major problems. Somehow I have to
believe that the immigrants aren't responsible for our crumbling
infrastructure, nor are they responsible for corporations
shipping the good tech jobs overseas or the banking/corporate
"de-regulations" (letting the money handlers regulate
themselves).
The Mexicans didn't start a war that by most reasonable accounts
is illegal, however some are willing to fight (and die) for the
U.S. to gain citizenship.
The Mexicans or Canadians don't own the monetary IOUs that are
being used to support our "war on terror," the Chinese do. Oh
yeah and they regulate the substandard garbage they import to
this country.
Now I look for the "Made in Mexico" tag on my purchases, they
are certainly better quality products and they are manufactured
closer to home.
So treat the Mexican and Canadian immigrants well because "We
the People"
may be ending our sentences with "Eh" or "Sí" soon.
It's not just the U.S. We are all American citizens. - George
Phillips,Mesa
Submitted to the Arizona
Republic 8/31/07:
The Republic
reports that the Arizona Department of Education faults
teachers’ poor English for children’s failure to learn
English as quickly as the state asserts they should (“State
faults teachers of English learners,” August 31).
The state sent its language policy out to visit classrooms
and found teachers saying terrible things like “gonna” for
“going to” and “who” for “whom.” That, the ADE concludes, is
why English learners don’t learn English as quickly as they
should.
The level of ignorance and hypocracy underlying state policy
for English Learners appears to have reached an all-time
low. We’ll be paying close attention to the speech of
Schools Chief Tom Horne and his assistant Margaret Dugan,
looking for misplaced modifiers, incorrect pronoun
selection, and unprivileged contractions like “gonna” and “hafta.”
Rest assured: Teachers will be taking notes!
When elected to office, Horne promised English Learners
could learn English easily within a year’s time if only we
would immerse them in a cold bath of English-only
instruction with no access to their home language.
The claims appear to have been motivated entirely by
electoral politics. There was never evidence that such a
program would be successful, and evidence compiled since
Horne took office indicates that it is a miserable failure.
But we cannot expect the department, which has thoroughly
politicized critical issues related to English learners, to
admit their failures and take corrective action. Instead, we
are handed the most absurd excuses one could possibly
imagine.
The quality of education of thousands of children, and of
our state’s future, hangs in the balance. The only benefits
will be political, serving the personal interests of
politicians.
Jeff MacSwan
Chandler, Arizona
Published in Los Angeles Daily News, August 28, 2007
No cause for alarm
Re "English learners do worse on test" (Aug. 24):
We should not be alarmed to read that "only" 27 percent of
English-learners in the LAUSD passed the state English
examination. English-learners are supposed to do worse on
tests given in English. If they didn't, they wouldn't be
classified as limited in English. In fact, if 27
percent passed, and if the test is valid, that means that 27
percent are probably misclassified as limited in English.
The results tell us only that students who have not yet
acquired English have not yet acquired English.
Stephen Krashen
Professor emeritus
University of Southern California
Published in the Arizona Republic, August
25, 2007:
Migrant youths vital to
U.S.
It is wonderful to read a good editorial about immigration ("The
making of America," Editorial, Wednesday).
It is especially wonderful to see that you realize the
importance of our immigrant youths by using the picture of our
dedicated students carrying with happiness and pride the flag of
the only country they love: the United States of America.
Yes, for our own sake, the whole community's sake, we need to do
our best to educate all children so they can contribute to their
maximum potential to this country.
Immigrant children given the chance will become productive
citizens who can help this country reach new levels of
competitiveness.
Unleash the power of education and opportunities for all! -
Carmen Cornejo,Chandler
Sent to the Washington
Post, Aug. 24, 2007:
The report on Virginia test results (“N.Va.
Schools Set Back on ‘No Child’ Test Goals,” Metro, Aug. 25)
highlighted the difficulties for limited-English speakers in passing
standardized tests designed for fluent speakers of English. As a
result, school programs that have been widely hailed as excellent in
serving English language learners – notably, in Fairfax County – are
now being branded as failures.
This approach to “accountability” is not only unfair to teachers and
students; it also defies logic.
The Post’s story failed to clarify an important point. The tests
that the U.S. Department of Education has mandated are neither valid
nor reliable for measuring the academic progress of English language
learners. No one disputes this reality, including the test
publishers themselves. Nevertheless, under the No Child Left Behind
Act, results on such inaccurate tests must be used as the primary
basis for judging schools.
If the goal is to hold schools accountable for their quality of
instruction, the garbage-in-garbage-out approach is indefensible on
any rational basis. If, on the other hand, the goal is to discredit
public schools and make way for privatization schemes, the strategy
makes a lot of sense.
James Crawford, President
Institute for Language and Education Policy
Sent to the Chicago Sun-Times, August 24, 2007
Misinformed about bilingual education
Contrary to what Esther Cepeda’s statements (“English
as a first priority,” August 23, bilingual educators agree that
English is a first priority, and scientific research agrees. Study
after study has shown that children in bilingual programs typically
outperform similar children in all-English classes on tests of
English reading. In fact, four major reviews coming to this
conclusion were published in the last two years in professional
journals.
Properly organized bilingual programs use the child’s first language
as a means of accelerating English development, not to delay it.
Stephen Krashen
The four major reviews:
1. Slavin, R. and Cheung, A. 2005. A synthesis of research of
reading instruction for English language learners, Review of
Educational Research 75(2): 247-284.
2. Rolstad, K., Mahoney, K., & Glass, G. 2005. The big picture: A
meta-analysis of program effectiveness research on English language
learners. Educational Policy 19(4): 572-594.
3. Genesse, F., Lindolm-Leary, K., Saunders, W., and Christian, D.
2005. English Language Learners in U.S. Schools: An Overview of
Research. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 10(4),
363–385.
4. Francis, D., Lesaux, N., & August, D. 2006. Language of
instruction, In D. August & T. Shanahan, (Eds.) Developing literacy
in second-language learners, pp. 365-413. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Published in the Arizona Republic, August
22, 2007:
Enough! I am a Spanish
teacher in the Scottsdale Unified School District with a
master's degree. I still have to take 60 hours of classes,
unpaid and on my time, to be qualified to teach English as a
second language to kids.
This is part of the No Child Left Behind Act and is federally
mandated. I do not get a pay raise for doing this, just more
work. Our salary increase this year does not keep up with the
cost of living, and we have to pay more for our insurance again
this year.
Furthermore, the article on the Aug. 1 Arizona Republic Opinions
page, "Losing faith in Phoenix," states that we are still nearly
last in teacher pay and our kids are far behind the rest of the
nation. Starting salaries are abysmal. The system is broken, and
we need to fix it.
-- Monica Pereira, Scottsdale
Published in the Arizona Republic, August
17, 2007:
To the mother who wrote on Aug.
9 that she was upset that her 4-year-old son is the only
non-Hispanic in his Head Start class, I have one question:
What's your point? Maybe your son might learn another culture,
maybe even a second language. That might be useful since we live
in the Southwest, which is heavily influenced by the Hispanic
culture.
However, I wonder if your point is that you are assuming that
every child in that class is the child of an illegal immigrant?
Either way, your letter smacks of racism and that worries me
more than your son being the minority in his class.
Published in the Arizona Republic, August
15, 2007:
FUTURE TEACHER UPSET BY LACK OF BILINGUAL ED
I am a student at ASU West in the special education department
and we have been learning about all the laws pertaining to
education, specifically special education and English immersion.
I am upset over our state's movement toward English immersion
and the refusal to allow any bilingual education. It used to be
allowable for a teacher to provide interpretation for a student.
Now teachers are legally barred from giving any teaching
information in the students' native tongue. To add insult to
injury, students can only be in an English immersion class for
one year. How do we expect English-language learners to fully
grasp the language when they are only taught for one year
without any interpretation, then thrown to the proverbial wolves
with an expectation to learn subject matter? When English
speakers take foreign language classes, interpretation is not
only needed, but also necessary. We give them a year, yet we
need more to learn a new language.
-- Theresa Elliott, Phoenix
Published in the Arizona Republic, August
11, 2007:
State immersion program is flawed
Arizona's new Structured English Immersion Program (SEI)
mandates that all
English- language learners now be grouped according to their
English-language proficiency in the same classroom for at least
four hours per day.
The idea is that if these students spend a school year (nine
months) together in one classroom with a teacher who instructs
them in English, they will become fluent enough to be
mainstreamed the following year.
The main problem with this model is that it segregates students
by their home language, which in most districts is Spanish. So
now students will not have the necessary interaction with their
English-speaking peers, as they had before. They will be forced
to sit in a classroom full of students who speak, in most cases,
only Spanish. This model only works well in areas that have many
different home languages, thus forcing students to communicate
with their classmates in English.
What the legislators in Arizona fail to realize is that kids,
particularly elementary students, learn most of their oral
language from their peers, not the classroom teacher. Now that
they are segregated by language, they will only have one English
role model (the teacher) instead of 20 or more English-speaking
students. - Tom Gabriele,Scottsdale
Sent to the China Post (Taiwan), August 5,
2007:
“The provision of a rich supply of high-interest storybooks is a
much more feasible policy for improving English learning than
any pious pronouncements about the urgent need to raise teacher
quality. ” (Francis Mangubhai and Warwick Elley)
The many suggestions appearing in the China Post for
improving the level of English proficiency in Taiwan nearly
always ignore the most obvious, the most economical, the easiest
to implement, one that students enjoy doing, and the one best
supported by research: Study after study, including several done
in Taiwan, shows that increasing the amount of self-selected
reading done by students has a profound impact on first and
second language proficiency. Those who read more do better on
tests of reading, writing, grammar, and vocabulary, and do
better on the TOEFL.
We also know from the research that when young people have
access to genuinely interesting and comprehensible reading
material, they usually read it.
Before investing in untested and expensive adventures such as,
restructuring the MOE, and testing teachers, and English
villages, a crucial first step is to improve the collection of
interesting and comprehensible English books available to
students, and begin to include some reading time in class.
Stephen Krashen, Ph.D.
Sent to Education Week, July 17, 2007:
Outrageous and Insulting
Don Soifer (“Laying the foundation for a new
segregation system,” July 17) assumes test scores have
gone up for English learners under NCLB. They haven’t.
Please see: “Selling NCLB: Would You Buy a
Used Law From This Woman?” by James Crawford, available at
www.elladvocates.org/nclb/spellings2.html.
Soifer claims that English learners’ improvement (which didn’t
happen, see above) is the result of standardized testing,
because now English learner test scores “will be counted.” In
other words, Soifer is saying that nobody cared about English
learners before NCLB, an outrageous and insulting accusation.
Stephen Krashen
Published in the Arizona Republic, July 25,
2007:
Migrant hotline seems foreign
Regarding "Sheriff
unveils migrant hotline" (Valley & State, Saturday):
All this time I thought I was living in east Phoenix in 2007.
After reading about Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio's migrant
hotline, I feel like I am living in East Germany in 1970.
Frank A. Blume, Phoenix
Sent to the Taipei Times, July 24, 2007:
Does
Taiwan have an English problem?
About once a week I read an article about how students these
days can’t write, or can’t spell, or just don’t know much. These
articles have been appearing regularly for over 100 years, going
back to 1880, when Harvard University introduced remedial
writing classes because so many entering students failed the new
entrance exams. In 1894, Harvard criticized high school writing
teachers for the poor performance of students entering college.
Note that these were the best students in the United States
attending the best university of its time.
The articles appear in nearly every country, with writers in
each country complaining of low and/or declining standards, and
often saying that their students are behind those in other
countries. Taiwan has contributed its share. Recent examples are
Eileen Tan’s “Failing in English,” in the Taipei Times of March
27, 2007, and Hugo Tsang’s “English scores low in college test,”
on July 24, 2007, both commenting on the quality of students’
essays written for the College Entrance Examination and both
suggesting that Taiwanese students have serious problems in
writing English.
Missing, however, from these accusations is real evidence that
there has been a decline and that performance is lower than is
to be expected. A number of analyses comparing student
performance over time have found no decline of literacy in the
United States. I know of no studies comparing English
performance of today’s students in Taiwan with those of previous
years, but these analyses need to be done before accusations of
declining standards are made.
We can make a crude comparison of English proficiency in
different countries by looking at TOEFL scores. The only Asian
countries that do better than Taiwan on the TOEFL, discounting
countries in which English has official status or is very widely
used, are China and Korea. I suspect that in China only the
most advanced English students take the TOEFL: three times as
many students take the TOEFL in China as in Taiwan, but the
population of China is fifty times larger.
There is thus no evidence one way or the other that English
proficiency in Taiwan has declined, and an examination of TEOFL
scores suggests that Taiwanese students are doing quite well
compared to students in other countries.
Of course, we should always try to do better. As reported
several times in the Taipei Times, there is very strong evidence
that a powerful means of increasing competence in written
English is wide reading (e.g. Kao Shin-fan, “Reading for fun is
vital to learning a language,” July 8, 2007). In addition,
research specifically shows that wide reading is very helpful
for improving writing, reading and vocabulary development for
those studying English in Taiwan, including studies by Syying
Lee and Ching Kang Liu at National Taipei University and Ken
Smith at the Wenzao Ursuline College of Languages. Most
important, students can continue to read long after they finish
their English courses, and can continue to improve.
In his article, Hugo Tseng describes one exceptional essay he
graded that was impressive in both English language and content:
I predict that this student has done a great deal of reading in
English.
Prof. Krashen is currently teaching a summer course at
Tamkang University, in the Department of English.
Stephen Krashen
Professor Emeritus
University of Southern California
Published in the Arizona Republic, July,
24, 2007:
Proceedings in Spanish aid due process
Regarding "Courting
controversy" (Arizona Living, Thursday):
The Constitution gives everyone the right to due process.
Court proceedings in Spanish help to guarantee that to people
who would otherwise not be able to understand what's happening.
I think Spanish-language courts should be expanded to deal with
issues beyond just DUI cases.
To deny a person the ability to have a say regarding their own
legal future goes against the ideals this nation was founded on.
With so many Spanish-speaking people in this state, I'm
surprised this isn't more common.
Everyone deserves the right to defend himself or herself in
court no matter what language he or she speaks. - J.L.
Christensen,Glendale AZ
Published in the Houston Chronicle,
07/11/2007:
Must do our best for students
I read the Chronicle's July 9 article
"Dual-language classes in Texas spark debate" with
frustration. No educator would support an instructional
program that would "minimize English as the primary
language of this nation." The point is that bilingual
education is the instructional strategy proven to be the
most successful in bringing limited English proficient
students to academic achievement in English. An
examination of the data, such as those assembled by
Virginia Collier, shows that LEP students who
participate in bilingual programs score higher on
English achievement tests than LEP students who
participate in other programs. The only program that
shows greater success is dual language. Every
dual-language program I have seen or studied recruits
volunteers for the English-speaking students. And most
programs have waiting lists. So how can these students
be considered "guinea pigs"?
The parents of these students are
taking advantage of the opportunity for their children
to achieve academically in two languages. The Collier
study shows that their achievement in English does not
suffer. It is true that LEP students often show poor
passing rates on the English TAKS. Remember, these are
math, science, history and reading tests — not language
tests. Consider taking your children to France and
having them attend French schools. Would you expect them
to pass an algebra test administered in French at the
same rate as the French students? Or how about a test in
French history? How many years would you expect it to
take your child to master academic content (in French)
at the same level as his French classmates?
Immigration is not a debate for
educators. Our challenge and privilege is to educate all
students who come in our doors. Why not use the
strategies that have shown the greatest success?
Educating students with special needs costs more. But
the cost of not doing our best for children is
unacceptable.
NANCY NICHOLS
retired elementary school
principal, Houston
Published in the Houston
Chronicle, 07/11/2007:
Why listen to teachers now?
The issue of dual-language classes is
being decided by unqualified politicians (i.e. state
legislators) with the help of politically correct
consultants. What we teachers know is this: Students
must be able to read to be successful in school, and
phonics is the only proven way to teach effective
reading skills.
Students learn reading skills best
when they are taught to read phonetically in the
language they use at home. Students in grades 1 to
3 cannot help each other because they have inadequate
language skills to express themselves. Combining
languages in these grades will not have a synergistic
effect. In fact, the classes will probably fail to help
either the English speaking students or the Spanish
speaking students because both will use nonstandard
grammatical constructs.
Conversely, combined language programs
in grades 4 to 7 could work to the benefit of both
Spanish and English speaking students provided both
groups of students are well-grounded in proper grammar
and reading skills in their primary language.
But why listen to teachers? Education
policy has been set for years by ignoring their input.
JAMES A. BABB
Friendswood
Published in the Houston
Chronicle, 07/11/2007:
Restoring old Texas tradition
Monday's Page One story called two-way
immersion bilingual education an "experiment." Actually,
it's a tried and true method and an American and Texas
tradition.
Between the Civil War and World War I,
a number of cities such as Cincinnati, Cleveland and
Indianapolis provided not just German instruction in
their public elementary schools, but divided their
school day roughly between English and German.
Kids in the German track in Cleveland
got only 60 percent as much English reading, grammar and
spelling per week as kids in the English-only track.
But there were apparently no ill
effects. Kids from the bilingual track had higher
passing rates on high school entrance exams (conducted
entirely in English), than those from English-only
classes.
An Anglo principal from Cincinnati
reported similar results.
San Antonio had a German-English
school run on similar principles. Although private, it
was publicly subsidized.
In Texas in 1886, more than 4,400 kids
were receiving German instruction in public schools,
compared to 3,000 in private or parochial schools. Not
until 1905 did Texas law even require English as the
medium of instruction. Though less common, there were
also instances of Polish, Italian and Czech being taught
in public elementary schools in some states.
We should congratulate our Legislature
for House Bill 2814 and for restoring an old Texas
tradition.
WALTER KAMPHOEFNER
director of graduate studies,
department of history, Texas A&M University, College
Station
Published in the Arizona Republic June 30,
2007:
Teaching kids to read is a heroic endeavor
Regarding "Reading, writing and reality" (Viewpoints, Sunday):
I compliment The Republic for recounting the heroic combined
efforts of the newspaper, staffers at The Republic and the
students and teachers at Creighton Elementary to tackle
education's first basic goal of helping kids learn to read.
What a worthy goal - no matter that not all students reached
grade-level standards. As a retired teacher, I know the hard
work demanded of all participants in this learning process.
I do see a convergence here with another front-page story, that
of the federal judge's mandate that Arizona punch up its money
and programs to teach students English. The elementary students,
and not just those at Creighton, must learn English and,
ideally, this should happen before they tackle reading in
English.
Arizona's superintendent of public instruction must take that
responsibility seriously. Get English-learner programs funded,
Tom Horne. - Kay Hartley, Surprise
Published in the Arizona Republic, Jun. 21,
2007:
Legislative myopia blurs vision of global challenges
The myopia of our state lawmakers never ceases to amaze. An
international studies program in the global economy makes
tremendous sense. My boys went through the International
Baccalaureate high school program. They were challenged and
taught to think. That's what good education programs should do.
A bill to set up more schools and begin a foreign language in
kindergarten was shot down by lawmakers who can't think outside
their failing school boundaries. What a shame!
- Joel Nilsson, editorial writer
Published in the Daily Breeze (Torrance, CA), June 19, 2007:
The Governor’s bad advice
Gov. Schwarzenegger’s remarks (“Governor:
Spanish media hinder English,” June 15) are contrary to what is known about
language acquisition as well as the Governor’s own experience.
We don’t acquire language when we are “forced to speak” but when we understand
what we hear and read. The Governor’s avoidance of speaking German, in other
words, did not help him acquire English faster. (I wonder how much he avoided
German: I was a regular weightlifter at Venice Beach and Gold’s Gym when Arnold
and his pal Franco Columbu first arrived in California. I noticed that they
spoke German all the time with each other, and kept it up for years.)
Watching TV and reading books and newspapers in Spanish can actually accelerate
English language acquisition: As Alex Nogales pointed out, the information
immigrants get from Spanish media can help them function in society. The
information they get in Spanish also helps make what they hear and read in
English more comprehensible, which accelerates English acquisition.
Most disturbing about the Governor’s remarks, however, is the assumption that
Hispanic immigrants don’t want to acquire English and aren’t trying. Every poll
taken confirms that Hispanics, like other groups, understand the importance of
English. Several reports have confirmed that there are long waiting lists of
students wanting to take ESL classes. If we are serious about helping immigrants
acquire English, we need to provide more ESL classes and more accessible ESL
classes.
These classes helped Gov. Schwarzenegger: In a speech delivered in 2005 at Santa
Monica Community College, Schwarzenegger said that soon after he came to the US
(in 1968), he took a number of classes in English as a second language at Santa
Monica College, and he described the classes as excellent.
Stephen Krashen
Sent to the American-Statemen (Austin), June 6, 2007:
The Pew Report: English Learners are English Learners
The Pew Hispanic Center reported that students classified as limited in English
do not do as well as fluent English speakers on tests of reading and math
(“Study
finds broad disparity in students' reading, math scores,” June 7).
If they didn’t score lower on these tests, given in English, they wouldn’t be
classified as limited in English. Pew tells us that nation-wide 73 percent of
English learners scored “below basic” in reading. That means that 27 percent are
probably misclassified as limited in English.
This report tells us only that students who have not yet acquired English have
not yet acquired English.
Stephen Krashen
Published in the Los Angeles Times, April 12, 2007:
A few choice words for Gingrich
Re "The pursuit
of happiness — in English," Opinion, April 7
Newt Gingrich thinks that replacing bilingual education with intensive English
instruction will help minority-language children acquire English. It won't.
Studies show that bilingual education does a better job of helping children
acquire English than English "immersion." In the last two years, four major
reviews have been published confirming that children in bilingual programs do
better on tests of English reading than those in all-English programs, including
one report from the U.S. government. Gingrich is free to disagree with the
research, but he is not free to ignore it.
STEPHEN KRASHEN
Los Angeles
Published in the Atlanta
Journal-Constitution April 10, 2007:
English vs. Spanish: Responses to "English language must be
preserved,"
Immigrants work hard to learn English; end the
careless gripes. To suggest that the Hispanic community is lazy
and is destroying the preservation of the English language and
culture is ludicrous.
As a volunteer ESL [English as a Second
Language] teacher, I can say that learning English is very
involved.
We work with immigrants from across the world.
They are honest hardworking people trying to keep their families
together and make a better life for themselves. To successfully
learn another language takes practice, not just study.
In many ways the immigrants are limited in
their interaction with English-speaking people and work long
hours isolated from the need to speak English.
Americans are so careless when considering the
situation of these immigrants.
And as far as destroying our culture, you've
got to be kidding. The big box corporations and mindless TV
babble are doing a fine job of that.
MARY ELLEN GREENBERG, Decatur
Published in the Atlanta
Journal-Constitution April 10, 2007:
Crying wolf is so elementary First of all,
welcome to the group of 300 million people who have known from
kindergarten onward that English is the "official" (we call it
the "national") language of this great country.
Also, unless the writer is a Native American,
where does she set the line that divides the arrival of her
ancestors, who were welcomed and who enriched the culture of the
United States, and the ones who are leading us to begin
sacrificing our "own American culture and the English language"?
Like all previous immigrants, Latinos arrive
without knowledge of the language and culture and, also as all
previous immigrants, will jump at the chance —- which we deny
them in many ways —- to learn the language that will allow them
to incorporate into this society: English.
Only in this country can you read, as the
writer asserts ". . . one day we'll have to learn another
language to survive in our very own country." God forbid that
our very own children become multilingual!
TEODORO MAUS- Maus, the former consul-general
of Mexico in Atlanta, is a naturalized U.S. citizen.
Sent to the Chicago Sun-Times, April 9, 2007:
Esther Cepeda (“English-only,
please,” April 8) agrees that giving English learners core curriculum in
their first language may be a good idea, but is still eager to dump bilingual
education because she has personally seen bilingual programs she considered to
be of inferior quality.
I assume if she observed some algebra classes she decided were of low quality,
she would also be in favor of eliminating algebra.
Research has consistently and overwhelmingly shown that English learners in
bilingual programs do better on tests of English than those in the all-English
“immersion” option that she and Newt Gingrich prefer.
Stephen Krashen
Sent to the Los Angeles Times, April 7, 2007
Re: Want to
pursue happiness? Learn English (April 7)
Newt Gingrich thinks that replacing bilingual education with intensive English
instruction will help minority language children acquire English. It won't.
Study after study shows that bilingual education does a better job of helping
children acquire English than English “immersion.” Bilingual programs use the
child’s first language in ways that accelerate English language development.
In the last two years, four major reviews have been published confirming that
children in bilingual programs do better on tests of English reading than those
in all-English programs, including one report from the US government.
In addition, dropping bilingual education in California (Proposition 227) did
not improve performance on tests of English: Researchers found no differences
among test scores for English learners inCalifornia districts that continued to
offer bilingual education, those that had eliminated bilingual education, and
those that had never offered bilingual education.
Mr. Gingrich is free to disagree with the research, but he is not free to ignore
it.
Stephen Krashen, The four major reviews:
1. Slavin, R. and Cheung, A. 2005. A synthesis of research of reading
instruction for English language learners, Review of Educational Research 75(2):
247-284.
2. Rolstad, K., Mahoney, K., & Glass, G. 2005. The big picture: A meta-analysis
of program effectiveness research on English language learners. Educational
Policy 19(4): 572-594.
3. Genesse, F., Lindolm-Leary, K., Saunders, W., and Christian, D. 2005. English
Language Learners in U.S. Schools: An Overview of Research. Journal of
Education for Students Placed at Risk, 10(4), 363–385.
4. Francis, D., Lesaux, N., & August, D. 2006. Language of instruction, In D.
August & T. Shanahan, (Eds.) Developing literacy in second-language learners,
pp. 365-413. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. English Learner test scores in
California: Parrish, T., Linquanti, R., Merickel, A., Quick, H., Laird, J. &
Esra, P. (2002). Effects of the implementation of Proposition 227 on the
education of English learners, K-12: Year 2 report. San Francisco: West Ed.
Also: Goto-Butler, Y., Orr, J. E., Bousquet Gutierrez, M. & Hakuta, K. (2000).
Inadequate conclusions from an inadequate assessment: What can SAT-9 scores tell
us about the impact of Proposition 227 in California? Bilingual Research Journal
24: 141-154.
Sent to the China Post (Taiwan) April 7,
2007
Developing Competence in English: A Suggestion
The China Post is correct in urging caution in offering
university level courses in English (Teaching
other classes in English not very practical, April 7).
Subject matter taught in a second language can be very effective
for both content learning and language acquisition, but only
when instruction is comprehensible, that is, when students know
enough English to understand instruction and when instructors
are proficient in English, as well as proficient in techniques
for making input comprehensible to non-native speakers. In the
absence of these conditions, attempting to teach content in a
second language is a waste of time.
I must, however, disagree with the cure suggested by the Post.
The most efficient means of building the kind of competence
needed to study in English is not by instituting more English
conversation classes. The research overwhelmingly says that
extensive reading is the best (and perhaps the only) way of
building competence in “academic language,” the kind of language
used in science, business, and many other professions.
Research has shown that the amount students read on their own in
English is a strong predictor of TOEFL scores, and a recent
study by Beniko Mason of Shitennoji International Buddhist
University in Osaka, Japan, has shown that students can increase
their TOEFL scores through self-selected pleasure reading alone,
without formal study.
In addition, a number of studies done in Taiwan, such as those
done by Syying Lee and Ching Kang Liu at National Taipei
University, and Ken Smith at the Wenzao Ursuline College of
Languages have confirmed that more reading in English leads to
better reading ability, as well as to better writing and
vocabulary development. Beniko Mason and Kyung-Sook Cho (Busan
National University of Education, Korea) have also presented
their work in conferences in Taiwan, showing that free reading
is effective for students of all ages.
These studies show that reading is more efficient than
traditional instruction, and of course students (and teachers)
find it more pleasant. Reading alone is not enough to develop
speaking and listening ability, but there is evidence that
extensive reading contributes to oral/aural competence as well.
If extensive reading is made part of the English curriculum, and
if students establish a reading habit and continue to read in
English after their schooling is done, high levels of English
competence and continued progress in English is very likely.
Stephen Krashen
Published in
the Washington Post April 6, 2007:
Newt Gingrich is seriously out of date where bilingual education
is concerned (Gingrich: Bilingual Classes Teach 'Ghetto'
Language, April 1). He believes, contrary to the evidence, that
eliminating bilingual classes in favor of English immersion
would help non-English-speaking children learn English faster.
All responsible educators agree that every non-English-speaking
child in the United States needs to learn English. Research
shows that modern bilingual education actually accelerates the
learning of English, by using the child's home language as a
springboard.
Children can pick up basic knowledge and literacy skills much
faster in the language they already know. Their knowledge and
literacy then readily transfer into English. Research
consistently shows that this is more efficient than immersion in
most cases.
Bilingual education doesn't solve all problems, but it is a
valuable tool. Taking it out of teachers' hands would make it
harder for many children to learn English. Mr. Gingrich is right
to emphasize the importance of English for all Americans, but he
would be a more effective advocate for this cause if he were to
learn how language education actually works in the real world.
Ashley Hastings
ashleyhastings@mac.com
Sent to USA Today, Posted on Washington
Post website, April 1, 2007
Re:
Gingrich critical of bilingual education (April 1)
Newt Gingrich is wrong and Peter Zamora is right: Bilingual
education does a better job of helping children acquire English
than English “immersion.” Bilingual programs use the child’s
first language in ways that accelerate English language
development.
In the last two years, four major reviews (including one from
the US government) have been published confirming that children
in bilingual programs do better on tests of English reading than
those in all-English programs, including one report from the US
government.
Stephen Krashen
The four major reviews:
1. Slavin, R. and Cheung, A. 2005. A synthesis of research of
reading instruction for English language learners, Review of
Educational Research 75(2): 247-284.
2. Rolstad, K., Mahoney, K., & Glass, G. 2005. The big picture:
A meta-analysis of program effectiveness research on English
language learners. Educational Policy 19(4): 572-594.
3. Genesse, F., Lindolm-Leary, K., Saunders, W., and Christian,
D. 2005. English Language Learners in U.S. Schools: An Overview
of Research. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk,
10(4), 363–385.
4. Francis, D., Lesaux, N., & August, D. 2006. Language of
instruction, In D. August & T. Shanahan, (Eds.) Developing
literacy in second-language learners, pp. 365-413. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Sent the to Raleigh
(N.C.) News & Observer, March 23, 2007
A modest
amount of Spanish
When teachers use a modest amount of Spanish (less than 20 percent) with Spanish
speaking preschoolers, children are better adjusted and learn just as much
English (“Native speech key for preschoolers, study finds,” March 22).
Missing from the News & Observer’s report, however, is the consistent finding
that continued modest use of the first language (known as bilingual education)
generally results in better English development.
In fact, in the last two years, four major reviews (including one from the US
government) have been published confirming that children in bilingual programs
do better on tests of English reading than those in all-English “immersion”
programs, including one report from the US government.
In addition to making children feel more comfortable, bilingual programs use the
child’s first language in ways that accelerate English language development.
Stephen Krashen
Published in the Pasadena Star
News, May 23, 3007
Defending bilingual ed
Columnist Tom Elias ("Mexican classes hold back U.S.immigrants,"
May 18) refers to Proposition 227, the initiative that
dismantled bilingual education in California, as "highly
successful."
It wasn't.
A report from the American Institutes for Research and West Ed
found that Proposition 227 did not result in any improvement in
the English language of minority children in California.
In addition, scientific studies consistently show that children
in bilingual programs typically score higher on tests of English
than do children in all-English immersion programs.
In fact, four major reviews coming to this conclusion were
published last two years in scientific journals.
Stephen Krashen
Rossier School of Education, USC
Los Angeles
Sent to the Pasadena Star-News, May 21,
2006
Study confirms bilingual approach is valid
The Star-News interprets a recent EdSource study as “Further
proof: English is (the) answer,” May 21, and as showing that
English-immersion classes are the key to doing well.
The researchers found that English learners do better when they
have quality ESL instruction, when subject matter (math) is
taught using special “sheltered” techniques (p. 16), and when
English learners “were taught mathematics with primary language
assistance” (p. 19).
This is exactly what bilingual education does. The EdSource
results agree with the many published studies showing that
bilingual programs are more successful than English immersion
for helping children acquire English.
Stephen Krashen
Professor emeritus
University of Southern California
Sent to the Ventura County Star, May 15,
2007
Tom Elias (“Mexico wants to have immigrants return,” May 15)
refers to Proposition 227, the initiative that dismantled
bilingual education in California, as “highly successful.” It
wasn’t. A widely publicized report from the American Institutes
for Research and West Ed found that Proposition 227 did not
result in any improvement in the English language of minority
children in California.
Less well known is the scientific research on bilingual
education. Scientific studies consistently show that children in
bilingual programs typically score higher on tests of English
than do children in all-English immersion programs. In fact,
four major reviews coming to this conclusion were published last
two years in professional, scientific journals, including one
from the US Government.
Stephen Krashen
Published in the Los Angeles Daily News,
April 30, 2007
Bilingual education
Doug Laskin ("Ominous Saenz for LAUSD," April 29) is uninformed.
Bilingual education is not native language only. English is
introduced the first day, and subject matter is taught in
English as soon as it can be made comprehensible. Studies
consistently show that children in bilingual education do better
than those in English immersion on tests of English reading.
Scientific studies also show that dropping bilingual education
did not improve English proficiency for children in California.
Finally, reading scores are low in California not because of
bilingual education, but because California has the worst school
libraries and public libraries in the U.S.
Stephen Krashen
Professor emeritus
University of Southern California
Sent to the Ventura County Star, April 17,
2007
English Learners and the State Exit Exam
California State Superintendent of Instruction Jack O’Connell is
“deeply concerned” that students classified as English Learners
did not do as well as other groups on the State High School Exit
Exam (“More seniors are passing state exit exam,” April 17).
Half of the test is English Language Arts. It has a reading
section and a writing section, which includes an essay.
According to the Department of Education website, statewide, for
all grades combined, 28% of those considered to be English
Learners passed the English Language Arts part of the test in
2006. Overall, 61% passed. Statistics for Ventura County are
similar, with 30% of English Learners passing, and 60% overall.
This is no surprise. Students are classified as English Learners
because they have not yet acquired enough English to succeed in
school. If they are able to pass an exam that demands a high
level of competence in English, they should not be considered
English Learners.
The low passing rate for this group simply confirms that the
classification system is accurate.
Stephen Krashen
Published in the Arizona Republic Mar. 30, 2007
Butting heads on English-learners
Regarding the editorial Wednesday, "Flawed law needs fixing,"
and the column of the same day by Robert Robb, "A legal leap
into Neverland":
How can the editorial writer and Robb, one of The Republic's
most respected columnists, come up with such diametrically
opposed viewpoints on the issue of the English-learner law?
What are we to make of this contradiction? I thought the goal of
editorials and columns is to educate and enlighten, not
obfuscate.
I respectfully suggest your readers deserve more reasoned
insight than was offered in this particular editorial. - Terry
Zerkle, Cave Creek
Published in the AZ Republic, Feb. 17,
2007:
REAL 'KINDERGARTEN LESSON' REFLECTED IN
STUDENTS
Robert Robb's column on Wednesday predicts that two recent
Arizona education reforms, full-day kindergarten and school
construction financing, are and are unsound taxpayer investments
("Kindergarten
lessons," Opinions).
Further, he suggests that the Isaac and Roosevelt school
districts, which serve low-income, inner-city students, have
"around half" of the students failing the state's third grade
AIMS reading test, even excluding English-learners.
The data tell a different story about our community. In fact,
Isaac School District has benefited greatly from both full-day
kindergarten and the work of the School Facilities Board. We
believe these programs have been among the many contributions
responsible for the steady growth and improved academic
achievement of Isaac students.
The Arizona Department of Education reports that 69 percent of
all Isaac School District third-grade students are "meeting or
exceeding" the state standards in reading. Specifically, 89
percent of third-grade students at Lela Alston Elementary "met
or exceeded" the standard on the AIMS reading test, whereas 81
percent of third-graders at Esperanza Elementary, 75 percent at
Moya Elementary and 70 percent at Morris K. Udall "met or
exceeded" the state standards in reading.
In addition to strong performances in reading, these four
schools (and four others in the Isaac School District) received
a "performing-plus"
achievement profile, indicative of achievement above state
performance goals in the three critical core content areas of
reading, writing and math.
Overall, our students, their families, teachers and support
staff are proud of our upward academic trajectory in all
instructional areas and are appreciative of such initiatives
such as full-day kindergarten and the SFB.
-- Kent Scribner, Tempe
Published in the Arizona Republic, Jan. 31, 2007:
Yes: Key to nation's
strength
Jan. 31, 2007 12:00 AM
Regarding "Let's
ditch '50's mentality" (Opinions, Monday):
Kudos to Linda Valdez for exposing a possible ulterior motive
behind Tom Horne and Margaret Garcia Dugan's opposition to
Flores vs. Arizona: a rejection of any form of multicultural
education as "frivolous."
Valdez correctly asserts that the real strength of our nation
depends upon "embracing and valuing the many different kinds of
people who live here."
If we are to succeed as a nation both in international trade and
in leadership for democracy, we need to use the diverse cultural
laboratory of our own country for producing citizens who value
differences, respect the validity of our perspectives and
understand the interdependence of people.
Arizona is dead last in funding for education. It seems
unconscionable that a state superintendent of public instruction
might be opposing funding for English-language learner students
on ideological grounds. - Delight Diehn, Phoenix
Sent to the AZ Republic, January 31, 2007:
Ms. Valdez
recognized another problem with the Flores English-Learners
lawsuit: faulty thinking. Basically, the representative from the
Arizona Department of Education suggests we rob Peter to pay
Paul. Robbing one under funded education program to under-fund
another is not the answer. You’d think the education department
would support appropriate funding for every student, without
respect to culture, color, language, or country of origin. Those
under Superintendent Horne’s leadership would better serve the
public by advocating for student learning instead of calling
cultural understanding classes “frivolous”.
Let’s put on our thinking caps: We’re the fastest growing state
in the nation. Therefore, we need to sufficiently fund ALL
education in Arizona.
Alejandra Sotomayor, Laveen, AZ
Published in the Statesman-Journal (Salem,
Oregon), January 27, 2007:
Studies show that bilingual education
is preferable to immersion method
Emilio Trampuz is partly right in his Jan. 12 guest opinion when
he says you need to be immersed in a language to acquire it. But
“immersion” alone won’t do it. You can watch Japanese TV all day
and acquire nothing. What you hear and read has to be
comprehensible.
When Mr. Trampuz was a child in Chile, the
Spanish input he got was comprehensible because he was already
well-educated, at grade level or above, in Croatian (his first
language) when he went to school. He already knew math and
science, for example, having learned it in his first language,
so math and science classes in Spanish were at least partly
comprehensible to him.
Good bilingual programs are especially helpful
for children without this kind of background. These programs
supply subject matter instruction in the first language, which
makes the English they hear more comprehensible.
Research confirms that bilingual education
works: Nearly every scholar who has reviewed the research has
concluded that bilingual education helps children acquire
English more rapidly than “immersion” does. One more thing:
Contrary to Mr. Trampuz’ statement, bilingual programs do not
limit English to 30 minutes a day. In most programs, after a few
years, most of the school day is in English.
Stephen Krashen, Professor Emeritus at
University of Southern California, Los Angeles
Published in the Denver Denver Post, Jan.
25, 2007:
More than one language
Letter-writer John C. Gessert was disturbed with Sen. Ken
Salazar giving his State of the Union preview speech in Español.
Mr. Gessert stated, "No one accommodated my German- speaking
great-grandparents, who understood that it would be necessary to
learn English to succeed in America." For your information, Mr.
Gessert, our forefathers, in writing the Colorado Constitution,
did accommodate your great-grandparents, as well as my
Spanish-speaking grandfather (born in 1874) and English speakers
of the state. The Colorado Constitution was written in English,
Spanish and German.
Carlos Santistevan, Denver
Sent to the Los Angeles Times, January 18, 2007:
A strong foundation in the first language means better English
Some schools in southern India will be teaching students in their primary language, and introducing English after two or three years, rather than providing all education in English.
Contrary to “English as an unsanctioned language” (January 17) this does not mean students will develop less English proficiency. They may, in fact do better in English.
Studies done world-wide consistently show that providing a strong foundation in the first language results in better second language development.
Stephen Krashen
Sent to The Times Herald-Record (New York: Hudson Valley, Catskills), Jan 14, 2006:
Mike Levine (“In plain English, Hispanics lose again,” January 14) is misinformed about bilingual education. Nearly every researcher who has reviewed the scientific research has concluded that children in bilingual programs typically acquire English they need in school more rapidly than those in all-English “immersion” programs.
In fact, in the last two years, four major reviews have been published confirming this, including one from a US government report. Bilingual education works because it uses the child’s first language in ways that accelerate English language development.
Stephen Krashen, Professor Emeritus, University of Southern California
Published in the San Antonio Express-News, January 13, 2007:
Bilingual education is not a “failed policy.”
Contrary to David White’s claims (Jan. 6), research has shown that dropping bilingual education did not accelerate the English development of California’s English learners. Also, nearly all scholars who have reviewed the scientific research have concluded that bilingual education is more effective than “immersion” in helping children acquire the English they need for school. White blames bilingual education because a smaller percentage of limited English children do well on TAKS than do students state-wide. But English learners are supposed to score lower on tests like TAKS: According to the TEA, when English learners can pass the TAKS reading test, they are typically no longer classified as limited in English. Also, students with low English proficiency enter the school system all the time, so TAKS scores for English learners must remain low. Applying the same logic, Mr. White would consider hospital intensive care centers to be inferior to the general wards, because the patients in intensive care are sicker.
Stephen Krashen
Published in the Arizona Republic, The
(Phoenix, AZ), January 10, 2007:
How about more money, too?
Regarding "Schools priority No. 1 for governor" (Republic,
Sunday):
It's exciting to read that there will be more emphasis put on
education.
My daughter teaches in a Valley elementary district. Schools
there are on rations for supplies: one ream of paper for two
weeks for 25-plus kids. That wouldn't be so bad except there are
not enough textbooks to go around, so they have to share with
other classes. There also are not enough workbooks to go around.
She buys extra reams of paper when she's shopping and we all
pitch in and buy her additional supplies.
There are three families out of 25 who speak English as their
primary language. The pressure is huge to make sure all students
perform well on the required tests. Many of the parents do not
speak English.
My daughter is totally dedicated; she loves her job and the
children, and they love her! Her reviews are outstanding.
The requirements to become a teacher are stringent and expensive
to attain.
It is frustrating to try to juggle all that is expected, work
evenings and weekends to keep up with all the paperwork, and
then have to go out and buy paper for her kids!
New residents are very interested in schools and how they
perform. The public schools and their teachers need to be given
a higher priority as funds are distributed.
Please, governor and lawmakers, put more emphasis on education!
-- Barbara Montgomery, Phoenix
Published in the Arizona Republic, The (Phoenix, AZ), January
7, 2007:
More 'academic tracks' needed
I read with interest Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom
Horne's "My Turn" column proposing an "opt-out" policy for math
course work because of concerns about increasing high school
dropout rates ("More math = more dropouts," Opinions, Dec. 29).
Although I can agree that some of us are not mathematically
inclined, there are many of us who are not inclined to classic
literature, writing, history, foreign languages or science. Will
we propose an "opt-out" policy for those subjects as well?
Standards make all of us nervous -- students, parents and
elected policymakers in this case because there is a chance it
might make someone unhappy. It may mean that some of us did not
achieve at the same level as others.
Instead, maybe it is time for our education policymakers to
focus not on dropout rates, but instead on ensuring that
academic achievement actually means something.
And maybe it is time for Arizona to seek ways to work better
with those individual students who may not necessarily be bound
for higher education by providing multiple opportunities to
identify a path that provides them with a program of study that
prepares them for their futures.
As the former president of the state Charter School Board, I
have become more and more concerned with the "dumbing down" of
our academic expectations, while we ignore the reality that we
need to provide more than one academic track for a society that
is made up of very different individuals.
That is what our education policy leaders should be focused on
-- not how to "opt out" of protecting important standards.
-- Kurt Davis, Flagstaff
AABE
is a