U.S. Faulted On Bilingual Education

GAO says misuse of research led to criticism of programs.

WASHINGTON—The Department of Education made poor use of bilingual education research and statistics and reached erroneous conclusions that played down the value of teaching in languages other than English, a new congressional report charges.

A General Accounting Office draft report obtained by The Times says that 10 experts in bilingual education were asked to examine a series of research papers that the department had cited in its criticism of bilingual education programs, and the majority concluded that the department misinterpreted the research.

The GAO report was requested by Rep. Augustus F. Hawkins (D-Los Angeles), chairman of the Education and Labor Committee. It is the latest exchange in the continuing battle over the future of the bilingual programs, a battle that pits Education Secretary William J. Bennett against bilingual education proponents and some members of Congress.

Flexibility Urged

Bennett has advocated allowing school districts more flexibility in deciding how much native language to use in instruction, but his opponents call that an effort to gradually allow English to become the sole classroom language. Spanish speakers are the nation’s largest language minority.

Currently, federal law requires that school districts with substantial enrollments of foreign language speakers use those languages in basic instruction, and the government helps subsidize the bilingual classes.

Bennett has said the research showed that foreign-language-speaking students taught at least partially in English often learn as well as those taught in the other languages.

The report said that the experts rejected the department’s conclusion that programs without native language “are as promising” as those with it.

“On the contrary,” the report went on, “most of these experts believe that the research evidence supports the use of native language” in teaching children whose first language is not English.

In an interview, one of the experts surveyed by the GAO accused the Department of Education of “fraudulent and dishonest use of my work.”

‘Changed Meaning’

Christina Bratt Paulston, chairman of the linguistics department at the University of Pittsburgh, said that Bennett “completely changed the meaning” of a paper she wrote. The introduction to her paper cited “disparate” views on the use of native language instruction. But Paulston said her own conclusion — contained in the paper — was that such instruction was beneficial.

Loye Miller, Bennett’s spokesman, would not comment on Paulston’s specific charge, but he took issue with the GAO report, saying that Bennett “does not favor any one method of teaching over another.” He said that the education secretary resents being “locked into one method by the current legislation.”

No more than 4% of the nation’s $143.1-million federal budget for bilingual education may be used for alternatives to instruction in the pupil’s native language. The alternatives tend to use more English. Bennett frequently has criticized the rule and has tried to get it reversed in Congress.

Miller produced letters from two of the 10 panelists. One of them, Herbert J. Walberg, research professor of education at the University of Illinois at Chicago, said that because “true believers” carry out so much of the bilingual education research, the research is biased to support the programs.

Favors More English

Walberg said that he favors using more English than currently is used in bilingual programs.

The GAO report is likely to intensify conflicts over the programs. Said Hawkins: “Clearly, since there is no evidence to support the current department position, what remains is an ideological, rather than factual, opposition to the use of native language in the classroom.”

The report said that the 10 experts “were carefully chosen for their expertise and their diversity of viewpoint on bilingual education.” The panelists, most of them from universities, including the University of California, Berkeley, the University of Arizona and Harvard, are specialists in bilingual education, language learning and social science.



Comments are closed.