Immersion Helps Kids Learn English
Editorial
Before the increased number of minority workers causes a resultant increase in the number of bilingual teachers, Wisconsin educational policy makers should take a look at what's happening in California. Two years ago, the state's voters ash-canned a 30-year tradition of providing bilingual education in public schools. Bilingual education, California-style, meant that youngsters whose primary language was Spanish, Chinese or Japanese received most of their core instruction in their native language. English was taught to them as a foreign language. When bilingual education ended, English immersion began. The results appear to be dramatic, according to statewide test scores. Students classified as ''limited-English-proficient'' who were placed in immersion classes improved their test scores in nearly every subject at every grade level. (Hispanics still scored lower than whites in reading, math and science, although sadly, the gap was even greater between whites and blacks, most of whom ought to consider English as their native language.) Ken Noonan, superintendent of the Oceanside, Cal., school district and the founder of the state Association of Bilingual Educators, strongly opposed English immersion, but is now savoring his helping of crow. ''I thought it would be harmful but I was wrong. The kids have taken to English and are absorbing it like little sponges,'' he said. Others, including Timothy Boals, director of bilingual programs for the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, are not convinced. ''So far, it's only a two-year experiment; it's way too early to tell,'' he said. He cites research by Stanford University's Kenji Hakuta that shows children with the most instruction in their native languages tend to do better seven or eight years down the road. Putting kindergartners in English immersion certainly increases their fluency in ''social English,'' but their English skills do not necessarily keep pace in higher grades when ''instruction gets much more abstract,'' Boal said. Bilingual education in Wisconsin involves two main groups: Hispanics and Hmong. The difference is, Hispanics are often taught by Spanish-speaking teachers (which is considered true bilingual education), while Hmong children are taught by English-speaking teachers aided by Hmong translators and aides (which is called ''English as a Second Language'' or ESL instruction.) According to Boals, both techniques work equally well. But do they work as well as English immersion? Not according to the preliminary results in California. If those findings are confirmed as the children move up through the grades, Wisconsin educators should prepare to jettison bilingual education the way their California peers have. It's also worth noting that California's English-immersion doubters point to several other educational reforms instituted at the same time. One was smaller class sizes, which the California teachers' union initially applauded -- until they realized that many of the new teachers hired throughout the state didn't have degrees in teaching. The notion that a mathematician could teach math without having been steeped in educational theory and child development for four years was galling to many in the educational establishment. The other reform was a mandatory return to teaching phonics. The ''whole language'' method of teaching reading went into the same ashcan as bilingual education. If phonics can help children with limited English proficiency learn English, doesn't it stand to reason that it could help English-speaking children learn to read? Tell it to your local legislator. |