Slide 1

Invitation
“If I am not allowed to speak my language I
feel like part of my body is being cut off”
A student raises her left arm and using her right hand
as a pretended knife she severs her forearm
(CUIN 3310 Foundations of Bilingual Education class 1/28/2013)
How do bilingual teachers understand their language choices
in the teaching situation?
52.0 million people are of Hispanic origin as of July 1, 2011
16.7 % percent of the nation's total population.
Plus 3.7 million residents of Puerto Rico, a U.S. territory.
37.0 million people 5 and older spoke Spanish at home in 2010.
12.8 % of the residents 5 and older speak Spanish
(U.S. Department of Commerce United States Census Bureau, 2012)
How do we educate the language
minority student?
Bilingual Education Program Models
Transitional The goal is Monolingualism
L1+L2-L1=L2
Subtractive Bilingualism or Subtractive
Schooling
Developmental & Two Way Bilingual Immersion The goal is Bilingualism
L1+L2=L1+L2
Additive Bilingualism
Bilingualism Main Postulates: Cognitive
Advantages and Developmental Processes
First Language (L1) is background knowledge and building block for all bilingual
developmental processes
•minority language students…
who receive literacy instruction in L1 “score
higher on literacy tests in English and in their
Native Language than students who have been
provided literacy instruction largely or entirely
in English” (Genesee, Lindholm-Leary, Saunders, &
Christian, 2005; Howard E. R., Sugarman, Christian,
Lindholm-Leary, & Rogers, 2007, p. 31; Cummins, 2007;
Lindholm-Leary & Hernández, 2011;Ramirez, 1991;
Thomas & Collier, 2002).
Language as a problem
• The goal is Monolingualism subtractive
bilingualism based on a monoglossic belief
• One “imagined” community with one shared
language and one shared culture (Anderson, 1991;
García, 2009)
The language minority person
has to show proficiency in the
dominant language in order to
access to the next level of
education and citizenship
(Blackledge & Creese, 2010, p. 26).
L1+L2-L1=L2
Language as a right
• The goal is Biliteracy and Bilingualism also
based on a monoglossic belief (García, 2009).
L1+L2=L1+L2
Additive bilingualism
Double monolingualism places the two languages (minority and majority
standards) in a constant struggle and suggest that researchers have to
question the real beneficiaries of making language a terrain for competition
(Blackledge and Creese, 2010 p. 28)
Language as a Resource
Language is an all terrain vehicle (Garcia, 2009)
that accepts language mix & non standard language versions.
Language is a set of resources with unequal access, “situated in a social cultural,
political and historical context” (Blackledge & Creese, 2010, p. 10) and a
communication resource, used by speakers “to serve their social and political
goals” (Makoni, 2006, p. 22).
“languages are understood to evolve, grow, change, live and die in an ecosystem along with other languages” (Hornberger ,2003,p. 136)
Empowerment framework in the
bilingual classroom
What do teachers
reflect back to
minority students in
the student-teacher
interactions ?
coercive power
relations or
collaborative relations
in a process Jim
Cummins (2007)
refers to as
empowerment.
Critical Pedagogy
What is our role as
teachers?
The teacher’s role is to
analyze each of our roles
as oppressors and our
own oppressions
Critical pedagogy clarifies
teachers’ role in
oppressing or liberating
language practices
Image source: www.barnesandnoble.com
Evolution of the Multicultural
Movement
Content Integration Dimension
Ethnic Studies of the 1960s & 70s:
• From Multiethnic to multicultural adding
people with disabilities and woman
Language as a right
• Multiculturalism converges with race, class and
gender critical theories
Language as a resource
Ethnicity, Culture and therefore language are resources
(Banks,1993)
Knowledge Construction Process
• Funds of knowledge (Moll, 2007, p. 274) are
developed by the families through social and
labor market relationships.
Moll’s studies showed
that teachers tapping
into the students’
community funds of
knowledge resulted in
more complex and
meaningful academic
knowledge
Prejudice and Discrimination
• Children early on realize which one is the
preferred language in society (Ovando & Combs, 2012)
• The minority language is relegated even
among bilingual teachers’ practices(Ovando & Combs,
2012, p. 196 referring to Edelsky, 1996)
• Discrimination was found in a study by Palmer
(2010) where “color-blind racism” tinted
teacher’s discourse towards African American
students in a TWBIP
Equity Pedagogy and Deficit Theories
Genetic Deficit Theories
Cultural Deficit Theories
“lower-income ethnic minorities enter school with
faulty oral language and literacy patterns that inhibit
their intellectual development” (Ovando, Combs, &
Collier, 2006, p. 204).
Subtractive Bilingualism or Subtractive Schooling
(Valenzuela, 1999), where the school system has the
goal to take students into normalcy: monolingualism
and monoculturalism
Cultural difference Theory and School
Culture and Social Structure
“…to improve the performance of
underachieving students from
various ethnic groups— one that
teaches to and through their
personal and cultural strengths,
their intellectual capabilities, and
their prior accomplishments.
Culturally responsive teaching(…)
is routine and radical (Gay, 2010,
p. 26).
With the initial purpose of surveying how scholars have
framed the education of language minority students the
review has shown…
• a landscape of bilingualism and bilingual education
• a typology of bilingual education programs
• the cognitive advantages of bilingualism and the
time needed to become bilingual
• societal diglossia and heteroglossia, monoglossic
and heteroglossic beliefs.
• language ideologies: language as a problem, as a
right, and as a resource
• critical pedagogy and multicultural education
This literature review is part of a candidacy proposal
of inquiry that formulates the following initial
research questions:
1. How do teachers make sense of their conceptions
of language use and language choices when
reflecting upon their bilingual teaching practices?
2. How do they categorize their own language
experiences in the teaching-learning situation in
their narratives of having being language minority
students themselves?
3. What type of questions regarding language use and
language practices emerge during their teaching
practice?
References
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Anderson, B. (1991). Imagined Communities. London-New York: Verso.
Banks, J. A. (1993). Multicultural Education: Historical Development, Dimensions and Practice. Review of Research in Education, 19, 349.
Blackledge, A., & Creese, A. (2010). Multilingualism. A Critical Perspective. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Cummins, J. (2007). Language interactions in the classroom: From coercive to collaborative relations of power. In O. Garcia, & C. Baker,
Bilingualism: An Introductory Reader (p. 187). Toronto: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Freire, P. (1978). Pedagogía del Oprimido. Ciudad de Mexico: Siglo XXI.
García, O. (2009). Bilingual Education in the 21st Century: A Global Perspective. West Sussex, United Kingdom: Wiley-Blackwell.
Gay, G. (2010). Culturally Responsive Teaching: Theory, Research, and Practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
Genesee, F., Lindholm-Leary, K., Saunders, W., & Christian, D. (2005). English Language Learners in Schools: An Overview of Findings.
Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 10(4), 363-385.
Hornberger, N. H. (2003). Afterword: Ecology and Ideology in Multilingual Classrooms p.136. In A. Creese, & M. Peter, Multilingual
Classroom Ecologies, Inter-relationships, Interactions and Ideologies (p. 136). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Howard, E. R., Sugarman, J., Christian, D., Lindholm-Leary, K., & Rogers, D. (2007). Guiding Principles for Dual Language Education.
Second Edition. Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics.
Lindholm-Leary, K., & Hernández, A. (2011). Achievement and language proficiency of Latino students in dual language programs:
native English speakers, fluent English/previous ELLs and current ELLs. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 32(6),
531-545. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2011.611596
Makoni, S., & Pennycook, A. (2006). Disinventing and Reconstituting Languages. In S. Makoni, & A. Pennycook, Disinventing and
Reconstituting Languages (pp. 1-41). Clevedon, GBR: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Ovando, C. J., & Combs, M. C. (2012). Teaching in Multicultural Contexts. New York, N.Y.: McGraw-Hill.
Palmer, D. (2010). Race, Power, and Equity in a Multiethnic Urban Elementary School with a Dual-Language "Strand" Program.
Anthropology & Education Quaterly, 41(1), 94-114.
Ramirez, D. (1991). Final Report: Longitudinal Study of Structured English Immersion Strategy, Early-Exit and Late-exit Transitional
Bilingual Education Programs for Language Minorty Children. Retrieved from
http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/mispubs/ramirez/longitudinal.html.
Thomas, W., & Collier, V. (2002). A National Study of School Effectiveness for Language Minority Students' Long Term Academic
Achievemnt:Final report. Retrieved from http://crede.berkeley.edu/research/llaa/1.1_final.html
U.S. Department of Commerce United States Census Bureau. (2012, August 6). Hispanic Heritage Month 2012: Sept. 15 — Oct. 15.
Retrieved from Profile America Facts for Features:
http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/facts_for_features_special_editions/cb12-ff19.html
Valenzuela, A. (1999). Subtractive Schooling. U.S.-Mexican Youth and the Politics of Caring. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Download Report