Tom, thanks for the info.
John Mace, I agree with your stance. I am a bit narrow-minded however, being a secondary-ed major I sometimes forget about el-ed issues.
excerpt from Prop 227:
"305. Subject to the exceptions provided in Article 3 (commencing with Section 310), all children in California public schools shall be taught English by being taught in English. In particular, this shall require that all children be placed in English language classrooms. Children who are English learners shall be educated through sheltered English immersion during a temporary transition period not normally intended to exceed one year. Local schools shall be permitted to place in the same classroom English learners of different ages but whose degree of English proficiency is similar. Local schools shall be encouraged to mix together in the same classroom English learners from different native-language groups but with the same degree of English fluency. Once English learners have acquired a good working knowledge of English, they shall be transferred to English language mainstream classrooms.
…
(a) “English learner” means a child who does not speak English or whose native language is not English and who is not currently able to perform ordinary classroom work in English."
Sounds like the process of teaching English to non-English speakers to me.
I really wish these school districts with large non-English speaking populations and pull a “turning lemons in to lemonaide” move. Put all the kids in bilingual programs, using the non-English speaking kids to help the English only kids pick up a second language. So much of what is taught in schools is pretty worthless anyway, throw them into a bilingual situation early when they can pick up a second language as easily as they can learn to play kick-ball on the playground. And it’s actually something that might be useful and fun. I sure wish I had had that “opportunity” as a kid.
Now, of course I’ve grossly oversimplified the situation as there are dozens of languages involved and picking the 'right" one would be hard. But there are more than one ways to skin this cat, and some creative thinking wouldn’t hurt anyone.
Look, ruadh: I’m really not into dissecting stuff from people who are intentionally twisting it to mean what they want it to mean. The proposition was to put a timeline on how long a child would be in classes conducted in a language other than English. Only the foolish will pretend that such a timeline equates with the method of teaching such a class.
John, you’re making some excellent points in this thread, too.
And, since I believe that knowing the common language of the community you live in is key to success, I do believe that the aspiration of “bilingual ed” as known in the USA (KG and I know of a place where it takes on an entirely different sense…) should be that the student gets to function on equal footing with the native-speaker once they are out of school and out in the Real World. Providing an entire education in the native language just so that at age 18 THEN you have to try and learn what the English is for “Prueba de Aptitud Académica”, “beca”, “matrícula”, “concentración académica”, “solicitud de empleo”, “contribución sobre ingresos”, “cuota sindical”, “factura”, “pagaré”, or “cesantía temporal”, does not help.(*)
bizzwire, the word “assimilate” is loaded-as-all-get-out in the inmigrant/American-minorities milieu, where it connotes not just becoming able to communicate with the greater society and know what are their laws, uses and customs, but to actually adopt Anglo culture, uses and customs as yours, and ditch your own except for what food you serve for holiday dinners. IMO we should seek integration: have everyone be able to communicate adequately in the common language of the greater society, know the basic social/cultural pillars of that society, and break the enclave mentality by using that knowledge to interact with others in that society.
(BTW, IMO any “English-only” rule that would attempt to actually forbid the use of any other language in personal communication on government propery, such as for instance, between two students in the school yard at recess, or two employees in the lunch room during their lunch break – as opposed to during the immersion class or while manning the front desk --, would be silly.)
(*)respectively: SAT, scholarship($), registration, academic major, employment application, income tax, union dues, invoice, promissory note, temporary layoff
No, both Myer v. Nebraska and Bartels v. Iowa stand for the proposition that the law cannot forbid the teaching of foreign languages. Neither case addresses the case of a school choosing not to offer general education in multiple languages.
- Rick
The English only crowd insist on ignoring the fact that a number of states like Texas, New mexico and Arizona were part of Mexico and their language was Spanish. It is the English-speaking people who are the immigrants there and trying to impose their language. The native population are not immigants and they have no obligation to adapt to the more recently arrived anglos. If the USA wants to have a single language then they should return those states to Mexico or have Spanish as the sole language. Next thing you know some people will be saying the Iraquis should be forced to speak English.
You know, while we are over there, maybe we should teach all the Iraqies English…
If we’re going back hundred of years, why stop at Spanish? Those areas originally spoke various Native North American languages. Why not teach those? 
A serious point: English is the international language – for business, science, and, The Straight Dope. Teaching people English is doing them a great favor
>> If we’re going back hundred of years, why stop at Spanish? Those areas originally spoke various Native North American languages. Why not teach those?
How about because Spanish is what those people choose to speak? Is that a good enough reason for you?
Those people have been speaking Spanish for generations and their entire culture is based on that language. And you want to wipe that out so you can understand them easier?
I guess the next step would be to mandate English names so we don’t have to deal with the problem of misspelling strange, foreign, names. That would solve another problem and we can justify it on the grounds that it would make life easier for them.
I find it odd that some people care so much about protecting the civil rights of the Iraqis while at the same time proposing restricting the civil rights of Americans.
"How about because Spanish is what those people choose to speak? Is that a good enough reason for you?
Those people have been speaking Spanish for generations and their entire culture is based on that language. And you want to wipe that out so you can understand them easier?"
Be serious. Spanish (and Christianity) was imposed on Native Americans by Spain in the same way English was by England. Impose English on them and 3 generations from now they’ll “choose” to speak English, too. Because it’ll be the only language they know.
Wonderful, we have a proposal for imposing anglo culture and language on all natives. All those in favor say “I”.
And here I was thinking these attitudes belonged to the dark past. . .
sailor, I think you’re being whooshed, though maybe in great measure because of oversimplified phrasing on Mr. Mace’s part. What I read was NOT him advocating imposing the anglo culture and language on all natives, but his rejecting the “that was what the natives spoke before it became part of the US” argument on the basis that, to coin a phrase, history happens.
Hindering or burdening my use of Spanish, or imposing assimilation on me, is wrong because it violates MY inalienable rights, shared with every human, in freedom and equal dignity to live, think, express myself and pursue happiness. Not because it was the language of my great-grandparents before 1898: that is not a special gift from Providence, just an accident of geography and history. OTOH, if by the tides of history the society around happens to be dominated by another language and culture, that pursuit of happiness will be a lot easier if at least I can work among them rather than limit myself to my enclave.
Which is pretty much what I said
I am glad we agree.
Well, at issue here is only Prop. 227, which does neither of that. Under the law, people are free to use Spanish and need not assimilate. The law only says that English immersion classes will replace bilingual classes in public schools.
I’m not saying whether that is a good thing or a bad thing - I don’t know enough to decide. But sailor and yourself are talking about the wrong issue.
Sua
IIRC France mandates (or used to mandate) that first names be chosen from an official list.
Sua, I do not think I am “talking about the wrong issue”. Why can’t parents decide what language they want their children to be educated in? Why should the State decide? I say, if there is a sufficient number of parents to make it viable the state should not get in the way with this law.
Other countries do too. I think it is stupid and I think it is wrong.
sailor: The state has a vested interest in educating the children, thus the concept of free education. The state also has a vested interest in educating those children to the point where they will have the opportunity to succeed. Although the United States does not have an official language, the de facto common language is, in case you’ve missed the memo, English; therefore, the state has every right to mandate education be conducted in that language.
Prop. 227 does not cause the state to decide what language those parent’s children are educated in. Instead, Prop. 227 is a decision by the State as to how they will spend the State’s money, on English immersion classes or bilingual classes.
You have an obligation to educate your children until they are sixteen. You have the right to rely upon the free educational services provided by the State in order to meet that obligation. But you don’t have the right to mandate the form or content of that State-provided education, except through democratic processes.
You phrase it as “why should the state decide what language the children are educated in?” An equally valid wording is “what should parents decide what language the State teaches in?”
Sua