Non-English speaking students...accommodate or teach them to think in English | Eastern North Carolina Now

     There is always a danger when one frames a complex issue that oversimplifies the issue that much will be lost. But such is often essential in order to foster a useful debate of that complex issue. Bilingualism is such a case. Having said that we will attempt here to frame that issue in a simple manner in the hopes of contributing to a significant debate here in Beaufort County that seems to only grow as the years go by.

     Simply stated the issue is: To what extent must and should we accommodate those who do not speak English?

     On one side there are those who believe in accommodation. They believe being able to communicate is the basic ultimate goal and anything that facilitates communication is desirable. This leads, in schools, to programs that teach non-English speaking students in their native language at one extreme or to a lesser extreme to teach them in their native language while learning English. Oversimplified again, these approaches generally result in "bilingual" or "multilingual" programs and approaches. Translation is a key component in accommodation.

    On the other side are those who believe in immersion. No, not Baptists, but those who believe non-English speaking students should be taught to think in English. Note the words there. Not learn to speak or write English but think in English. The theory behind immersion is that both the English speaking culture and the non-English speaking individuals will best be served by everyone thinking in English. The sooner the better.

     During the 1970's through the 1990's the tendency was to accommodate. More recently the move, particularly in public education has been toward immersion. But it would be false to assume the issue is simply one of moving from one approach to another. It is far more complex than that, as can be seen in this article.

     And there is always the issue of what impact accommodation has on English thinking students. First there is the money issue. The presumption here is that dollars spent on bilingual education is money that is not spent on English thinking students. The extension of that idea is that if non-English speaking students are placed in classrooms with English thinking students that the teacher must make accommodations for the non-English speaking students and thus that hampers the English thinking students and divides the teacher's time and focus.

    And these issues play out in many diverse ways. But one example is: To what extent does the school try to accommodate the parents of non-English speaking students? Or does the school assume the responsibility of teaching the parents to either translate into or think in English? Ultimately most schools end up providing the translation simply because it is more efficient to do so for parents. And most non-English speaking parents get someone to translate for them, often their own children (especially the younger ones who seem to learn English quicker and better).

    And then there is always the funding issue. There is a myriad of funding, mostly Federal, for "special needs." Some of that funding is specific to bilingual education. Other funds are targeted for special needs that are only indirectly related to bilingual, such as disadvantaged (poor) or disabled or "challenged" students. There are, certainly, English thinking students who have language deficiencies that most accept should be accommodated.

    And any time the funding issue is debated the issue of illegal immigrants becomes a hot topic. There are many studies that have shown that illegal immigrants impose a net cost on public education. For example, the Congressional Budget Office reviewed a number of studies about the cost of illegal immigration and came to the conclusion that--you ready for this: It's a lot. The CBO would not put a single number on it. Other estimates run as high as $338.3 Billion a year.

    And here in Beaufort County alone one estimate is that the cost of educating students of non-native born parents exceeds $7 million dollars and if other estimates are correct the cost of educating ILLEGAL immigrant children exceeds $3.5 million, about a quarter of which comes from local tax payers.

    But in a sense the issue of legal vs. illegal immigrants in public schools is a mute point. The U. S. Supreme Court ruled in Plyler v. Doe in 1982 that schools cannot exclude students from public education on the basis of their immigration status.

    So....which is better: accommodation or immersion? The answer is simply stated: Nobody knows. At least not in the sense that they can "prove" one way is always best. "Further research is needed."

    Delma Blinson writes the "Teacher's Desk" column for our friend in the local publishing business: The Beaufort Observer. His concentration is in the area of his expertise - the education of our youth. He is a former teacher, principal, superintendent and university professor.