Supporting Bilingualism in a Time of Resistance: Educators, State Policy, and Implementation Challenges

• In Event: Sheraton Roundtable Session 23
  In Roundtable Session: Exposing Majoritarian Narratives: Sociohistorical Misrepresentation and Mythology in Language Policy

Abstract

In today’s political epoch, amidst struggles for the maintenance of immigrant and refugee rights, limits on language minority students’ access to bilingual education might be expected. Yet in New York State (NYS), the default approach to educating English learners (ELs) has always been bilingual education (BE). Historically, BE was codified by state law (C.R. Part 154) in schools serving a certain number of ELs who share the same home languages.
Often however, New York State’s BE requirement is circumvented by schools in rural and other non-urban areas, thus replicating historical patterns in U.S. schooling in which educational access and equity by ethnic and other minority students is limited (Gándara & Hopkins, 2012). For decades, findings from substantive research have clearly shown the benefits of bilingualism, biliteracy, and bilingual education for promoting the academic achievement of English learners (Ramirez, Yuen, Ramey, & Pasta, 1991; Rolstad, Mahoney, & Glass, 2005). Therefore, restricting ELs’ access to bilingual education in schools, functionally violates students’ civil linguistic rights to native language maintenance.
In an attempt to rectify schools’ non-compliance with C.R. Part 154, in Fall 2015, NYS amended its language policy to require that districts in which 20 or more children with shared home languages offer bilingual programs. This change resulted in districts scrambling to meet the new mandate, with many out of compliance. This paper will present results from secondary analyses of two quantitative studies in which survey methods were employed to identify educators’ perspectives regarding BE in NYS. The first was conducted in 2007 (Capullo, 2007) and the second replicated in 2015 (Tomaschke, 2015). Findings from the 15-item Likert scale survey show that, although narratives and actions from districts tend to discourage BE, educators in rural areas are aware of its benefits and may be willing to tackle new BE implementation challenges. These studies contribute to the growing body of research contradictory to presumed current dominant political discourses. Outcomes therefore, demonstrate that removal of various systemic barriers to BE programs would likely result in broader state-wide implementation. The paper will explicitly identify these impediments and make recommendations for their avoidance.

References:
Capullo, K. E. (2007). Attitudes of middle school personnel toward heritage language
maintenance for language minority students (Unpublished Master’s thesis). State University of New York at Fredonia, Fredonia, New York.
Gándara, P., & Hopkins, M. (2010). Forbidden Language: English learners and restrictive
language policies. New York: Teachers College Press.
Ramirez, J. D., Yuen, S. D., Ramey, D. R., & Pasta, D. J. (1991, February). Longitudinal study of
structured English immersion strategy, early-exit and late-exit transitional bilingual education programs for language-minority children (Final report, volumes 1 and 2). San Mateo, CA: Aguirre International. Retrieved from
Rolstad, K., Mahoney, K. S., & Glass, G. V. (2005). The big picture: A meta-analysis of
program effectiveness research on English language learners. Educational Policy, 19(4), 572-594. doi: 10.1177/0895904805278067
Tomaschke, G. R. (2015). A study revisited: Attitudes of middle school personnel toward
heritage language maintenance for emergent bilingual students. Retrieved from SUNY Fredonia Digital Repository, Archives and Special Collections, Master’s Theses, http://hdl.handle.net/1951/66605

Author

• Karen E. Lillie, SUNY - College at Fredonia