WASHINGTON—Decisions on how to serve limited-English-proficient students “can best be made at the local level,” according to the National Advisory and Coordinating Council on Bilingual Education.
In its 10th annual report, “New Directions in Late 80’s Pursued,” the council reiterates the call it made last year for “an expansion of alternatives” to bilingual education I and congratulates Secretary of Education William J. Bennett for “carrying forward NACCBE’S recommendations” in recent regulatory and legislative proposals.
The panel voices its support for Mr. Bennett’s plan to give school districts greater “flexibility” to increase the English component of bilingual programs funded under Title VII of the Bilingual Education Act. Also, it endorses his appeal to the Congress to remove funding limits on alternative methodologies such as immersion and English as a second language.
This legislation, S 2256, was recently introduced by Senator Dan Quayle, Republican of Indiana, and eight co-sponsors.
“We have to recognize that students arriving in large numbers in American classrooms will be linguistically and culturally diverse,” the NACCBE report states. “The broad diversity among the various language-minority groups suggests that each has its own educational needs which may be met in different ways ... . There simply is no conclusive evidence that bilingual education should be the preferred approach.”
Decrying “the unfortunate polarization” over the merits of bilingual education and “inappropriate political intrusions” into the debate, the council advocates “a dispassionate effort to see the broad spectrum of needs ... of language-minority students.”
Changing Viewpoint
NACCBE itself has become the focus on controversy, as appointments by Mr. Bennett have changed its ideological complexion from a group generally supportive of transitional bilingual education to one generally skeptical of the methodology. Some members of the 20-member council, including Chairman Anthony Torres, have been outspoken opponents of bilingual instruction.
Such sentiments were evident in “personal views” appended to the report by several NACCBE members:
- Hugh C. Alban, an assistant professor of natural science at Miami-Dade Community College, recounted his own success in learning English through “submersion,” or “sink or swim” on emigrating to the United States from Ecuador in 1956.
“I am not sure that I would have learned English as quickly had I been in a classroom with a Hispanic teacher and 30 other Hispanic children,” he said. “The urgency to learn the language might not have been present.”
“I do not advocate the submersion method at the national level,” Mr. Alban said, but he called for research to determine whether “the concentration of LEP students” may retard the learning of a second language.
California law mandates that English-speaking students make up one-third of bilingual classes, he said, but maintaining this ratio can be a problem because of opposition from both language-majority and language-minority parents.
“The catch-phrase ‘I write it, but I don’t read it’ might well apply to those who write and design state-mandated rules,” he added. “It is those in the trenches who must try to maintain the focus on teaching children while keeping in precarious balance all the trip wire of rules.”
Often, “bilingual” teachers are simply those who have signed an agreement to take courses in a foreign language and are unqualified to teach in it, Mr. Castillo said. “Bilingual education creates an adversary atmosphere when the principal must transfer a teacher who refuses to sign [the agreement]. There are no bilingual teachers available at any price anywhere.”
“The Afghans as a group have won my heart,” she said. “For them, learning English is a patriotic act,” she said, praising the group’s enthusiasm for anti-Soviet political activities.
