joshua a. fishman

Transcription

joshua a. fishman

Perspectives
J A N UA RY - M A R C H 2015
A P U B L I C AT I O N O F T H E N AT I O N A L A S S O C I AT I O N F O R B I L I N G U A L E D U C AT I O N
JOSHUA A. FISHMAN
1926 - 2015
“What did you do for Yiddish today?”
Reach Thousands of
Bilingual Education
Professionals!
Perspectives is published
in four issues each year,
according to the following
schedule of publication/
mailing date:
Issue 1:January-March
Issue 2:April-June
Issue 3:July-September
Issue 4:October-December
Advertise in NABE’s
Perspectives!
Perspectives, a publication of the National Association
of Bilingual Education, is read by nearly 20,000 educators and
administrators. These readers possess significant purchasing power. Many are
responsible for procuring the full range of educational materials, products, and services
for use in linguistically and culturally diverse learning environments.
To reserve your space, simply fill out the contract (available online at
http://www.nabe.org/publications.html) and fax it to 240-450-3799.
Call 202-450-3700 if you have any questions.
Take advantage of this great opportunity to increase your
revenue and advertise in Perspectives!
A
Full page B&W
7.5" x 10"
B
2/3 page B&W
4.875" x 10"
C
1/2 page B&W
7.5" x 4.875"
D
F
E
1/3 page B&W
2.25" x 10" or
4.875" x 4.875"
1/4 page B&W
3.5" x 4.875"
All advertising material
must be received in the
NABE office on the 15th of
the month prior to the issue
date. For example, for the
May/June issue, ad materials are due by April 15.
For rates to advertise
please contact the NABE
office at (240) 450-3700
G
Full page Color
No Bleed: 7.5" x 10" or
Bleed: 8.625" x 11.125"
(trims to 8.375" x 10.875")
Live content 1/4" from trim
Save with multiple insertions!
2 insertions: 3 insertions: 4 insertions: 10% off 15% off 20% off
Contributing to Perspectives
GUIDELINES FOR WRITERS
NABE's Perspectives is published six times
a year on a bimonthly basis. We welcome
well written and well researched articles on
subjects of interest to our readers. While continuing to address issues facing NABE members, Perspectives aims to meet the growing
demand for information about bilingual
education programs and the children they
serve. It is a magazine not only for veteran
educators of Bilingual and English language
learners but also for mainstream teachers,
school administrators, elected officials, and
interested members of the public.
Articles for Perspectives must be original,
concise, and accessible, with minimal use
of jargon or acronyms. References, charts,
and tables are permissible, although these
too should be kept to a minimum. Effective
articles begin with a strong “lead” paragraph
that entices the reader, rather than assuming
interest in the subject. They develop a few
themes clearly, without undue repetition or
wandering off on tangents.
The Perspectives editors are eager to receive
manuscripts on a wide range of topics related to
Bilingual and English learner programs, including
curriculum and instruction, effectiveness studies,
professional development, school finance, parental
involvement, and legislative agendas. We also welcome personal narratives and reflective essays with
which readers can identify on a human as well as a
professional level.
Researchers are encouraged to describe their
work and make it relevant to practitioners.
Strictly academic articles, however, are not
appropriate for Perspectives and should be submitted instead to the Bilingual Research Journal.
No commercial submissions will be accepted.
TYPES OF ARTICLES
Each issue of Perspectives usually contains three or
four feature articles of approximately 2,000 –
2,500 words, often related to a central theme.
Reviews are much shorter (500 – 750 words
in length), describing and evaluating popular
or professional books, curriculum guides,
textbooks, computer programs, plays, movies,
and videos of interest to educators of English
language learners. Manuscripts written or sponsored by publishers of the work being reviewed
are not accepted. Book reviews and articles
should be emailed to:
Dr. José Agustín Ruiz-Escalante
[email protected]
Columns are Asian and Pacific Islander Education
and Indigenous Bilingual Education. (If you have
other ideas for a regular column, please let us
know.) These articles are somewhat shorter in
length (1,000 – 1,500 words, and should be
emailed to one of the editors below:
Asian and Pacific Islander Education
Dr. Clara C. Park: [email protected] Indigenous Bilingual Education
Dr. Jon Allen ReyhneR: [email protected]
PREPARING ARTICLES FOR SUBMISSION
Manuscripts to be considered for the
September/October issue must be received by
July 15. Manuscripts to be considered for the
November/December issue must be received
by September 15. Reference style should conform to Publication Manual of the American
Psychological Association (5th ed.). Articles and
reviews should be submitted electronically to
NABE’s Editor, Dr. José Agustín Ruiz-Escalante at
[email protected] in a Microsoft Word file, 11
point, Times New Roman, double-spaced. Be sure
to include your name, affiliation, e-mail address,
phone and fax numbers.
Photographs and artwork related to the manuscript are encouraged. Please include the name
of the photographer or source, along with notes
explaining the photos and artwork, and written
permission to use them. Photographs should
be submitted as separate TIFF, or JPEG/JPG files,
not as images imported into Microsoft Word or
any other layout format. Resolution of 300 dpi or
higher at actual size preferred, a minimum pixel
dimension of 1200 x 1800 is required. (Images
copied from a web page browser display are only
72 dpi in resolution and are generally not acceptable.) When in doubt, clean hard-copy images
may be mailed for scanning by our design staff.
Perspectives
Published by the National Association
for Bilingual Education
EDITOR
DR. JOSÉ AGUSTÍN RUIZ-ESCALANTE,
THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS – PAN AMERICAN
CO-EDITOR
DR. MARÍA GUADALUPE ARREGUÍN-ANDERSON,
THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO
ASSOCIATE EDITORS
DR. EIRINI GOULETA
GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY
ASIAN AND PACIFIC ISLANDER
COLUMN EDITOR
DR. CLARA C. PARK,
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY-NORTHRIDGE
INDIGENOUS BILINGUAL EDUCATION
COLUMN EDITOR
DR. JON ALLAN REYHNER,
NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY
DESIGN & LAYOUT:
WINKING FISH
Contents
■ Cover Story
Mismatched Legislative Mandates Leave
Florida English Language Learners in the Lurch
Rosa Castro Feinberg.................................................................................................... 7
■ Columns & Articles
Joshua A. Fishman (1926-2015)
by Ofelia Garcia............................................................................................................ 5
Review of Separate is Never Equal: Sylvia Mendez
and Her Family’s Fight for Desegregation
Reviewed by Izel Pineda, Azucena Pineda, and Ellen Riojas Clark.................................... 13
PRINT AND EDITORIAL POLICY
Readers are welcome to reprint
noncopyrighted articles that appear in
Perspectives at no charge, provided proper
credit is given both to the author(s) and to
Perspectives as the source publication.
All articles printed in Perspectives, unless
written by an Association staff person or
a member of the current NABE Executive
Board of Directors, are solely the opinion
of the author or authors, and do not
represent the official policy or position
of the National Association for Bilingual
Education. Selection of articles for
inclusion in Perspectives is not an official
endorsement by NABE of the point(s) of
view expressed therein.
Interview With Prize Winning Author Duncan Tonatiuh
Interviewed by Melony Clark Davis, age 12
Ellen Riojas Clark........................................................................................................ 15
From Spoken to Written Language with ELLs
Ivannia Soto............................................................................................................... 17
Marginalized Voices of Interracial Families
in Heritage Language Education
Kwangjong Park........................................................................................................... 20
Science vs. Education: Indigenous Students in the
Crossfire
Jon Reyhner................................................................................................................ 23
is a tax-exempt, nonprofit professional
association founded in 1975 to address
the educational needs of languageminority Americans.
■ Departments
Contributing to Perspectives - Guidelines for Writers........................................................ 2
N AT I O N A L O F F I C E :
8701 Georgia Avenue, Suite 611
Silver Spring, MD. 20910
Telephone: (240) 450-3700
Fax: (240) 450-3799
www.nabe.org
J A N U A R Y - M A R C H
2 0 1 5
●
V O L U M E
3 7 ,
I S S U E
1
NABE EXECUTIVE BOARD
2 0 1 4 – 2 0 1 5
PRESIDENT – MEMBER-AT-LARGE
Julio Cruz, Ed.D.
9715 Woods Drive, Apt. 1705
Skokie, IL 60077
H: (773) 369-4810 • [email protected]
VICE PRESIDENT – CENTRAL REGION
José Agustín Ruiz-Escalante, Ed.D.
UT Pan American
3740 Frontier Drive
Edinburg, TX 78539
C: (956) 607-1955 • [email protected]
TREASURER – MEMBER-AT-LARGE
MEMBER-AT-LARGE – WESTERN REGION
MEMBER-EASTERN REGION
Josie Tinajero, Ed.D.
Mariella Espinoza-Herold, Ph.D.
Margarita P. Pinkos, Ed.D.
Assistant to the VP for Research
University of Texas at El Paso
500 W. University Ave
El Paso, TX 79968
W: (915) 747-5552
F: (915) 747-5755
[email protected]
Northern Arizona University
P.O. Box 5774
Flagstaff, AZ 86011
W: (928) 523-7141
F: (928) 523-9284
[email protected]
Executive Director
Department of Multicultural Education
School District of Palm Beach County
3388 Forest Hill Boulevard, Suite A 204
West Palm Beach, FL 33411
W: 561-434-8010
Fax: 561-434-8074
[email protected]
MEMBER – WESTERN REGION
SECRETARY – EASTERN REGION
Minh-Anh Hodge, Ed.D.
Anita Pandey, Ph.D.
Professor and PD Coordinator
Morgan State University
1700 E. Cold Spring Ln
Baltimore, MD 21251
W: (443) 885-1752
[email protected]
MEMBER – CENTRAL REGION
Leo Gómez, Ph.D.
Dual Language Training Institute
P.O. Box 420
Edinburg, TX 78540
H: (956) 467-9505
[email protected]
Tacoma School District
P.O. Box 1357
Tacoma, WA 98401
W: (253) 571-1415
[email protected]
MEMBER – WESTERN REGION
Yee Wan, Ed.D., Director
Multilingual Education Services
Santa Clara County Office of Education
1290 Ridder Park Drive, MC237
San Jose, CA 95131-2304
W: (408) 453-6825
[email protected]
Are you a
member?
Membership in NABE includes a subscription to Perspectives,
and so much more.
Visit nabe.org to renew or start your new memberhip today!
4
NABE PERSPECTIVES ★ J A N U A RY - M A R C H 2 0 1 5
CORPORATE MEMBER
Arnhilda Badia, Ph.D.
President, Jose Marti Foundation
1118 S. Greenway Dr.
Coral Gables, FL 33134
(305) 527-2343
[email protected]
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR:
Santiago V. Wood, Ed.D.
W: (240) 450-3700
F: (240) 450-3799
C: (954) 729-4557
[email protected]
Joshua A. Fishman
(1926-2015)
by Ofelia Garcia
A beloved teacher and influential scholar,
Joshua A. Fishman passed away peacefully in his Bronx home, on Monday evening, March 1, 2015. He was 88 years
old. Joshua A. Fishman leaves behind his
devoted wife of over 60 years, Gella Schweid
Fishman, three sons and daughters-in-law,
nine grandchildren and two great-grandchildren. But he also leaves behind thousands
of students throughout the world who have
learned much from him about sociology
of language, the field he founded, and also
about the possibility of being a generous
and committed scholar to language minority
communities. As he once said, his life was
his work and his work was his life.
Joshua A. Fishman, nicknamed Shikl,
was born in Philadelphia PA on July 18,
1926. Yiddish was the language of his
childhood home, and his father regularly
asked his sister, Rukhl, and him: “What did
you do for Yiddish today?” The struggle
for Yiddish in Jewish life was the impetus
for his scholarly work. After graduating
from the University of Pennsylvania with
a Masters degree in 1947, he collaborated
with his good friend, Max Weinreich, the
doyen of Yiddish linguistics, on a translation of Weinreich’s history of Yiddish. And
it was through Yiddish that he came to
another one of his interests ––that of bilingualism. In 1948 he received a prize from
the YIVO Institute for Yiddish Research for
a monograph on bilingualism. Yiddish and
bilingualism were interests he developed
throughout his scholarly life.
After earning a PhD in social psychology from Columbia University in 1953,
Joshua Fishman worked as a researcher for
the College Entrance Examination Board.
This experience focused his interest on educational pursuits, which eventually led to
another strand of his scholarly work –– that
on bilingual education. It was around this
time that he taught what came to be the
first sociology of language course at The
City College of New York. In 1958, he was
appointed associate professor of human relations and psychology at the University of
Pennsylvania, and two years later, moved to
Yeshiva University. At Yeshiva University he
was professor of psychology and sociology,
Dean of the Ferkauf Graduate School of
Social Science and Humanities, Academic
Vice President, and Distinguished University
Research Professor of Social sciences. In
1988, he became Professor Emeritus and
began to divide the year between New York
and California where he became visiting
professor of education and linguistics at
Stanford University. In the course of his
career, Fishman held visiting appointments
at over a dozen universities in the USA,
Israel, and the Philippines, and fellowships
at the Center for Advanced study (Stanford),
the East West Center (Hawai’i) the Institute
for Advanced Study at Princeton, the
Netherlands Institute for Advanced Study,
and the Israel Institute for Advanced Study.
Throughout his long career Joshua A.
Fishman has published close to one hundred books and over a thousand articles. He
has not only been prolific, but his original
and complex ideas have been very influential in the academy, as well as extremely
useful to language minorities through the
world. His first major study of sociology
of language, Language Loyalty in the United
J A N U A RY - M A R C H 2 0 1 5 ★ NABE PERSPECTIVES
5
States, was published in 1964. A year later,
he published Yiddish in America. In 1968,
he published the earliest major collection
dealing with language policy and management, Language problems of developing
nations. In the same year, he edited and published Readings in the sociology of language, a
first attempt to define the new field.
By the 1970s Joshua Fishman’s scholarship was recognized throughout the world
for its importance and its relevance about
the language issues prevalent in society. In
1973, he founded, and has since edited, The
International Journal of the Sociology of
Language, a journal of excellent international
reputation. Joshua Fishman has also edited
a related book series published by Mouton,
Contributions to the Sociology of Language
(CSL), with over 200 titles. In both of these
endeavors Fishman has encouraged young
scholars to research, write and publish, supporting and contributing to the academic
careers of many throughout the world, especially in developing countries. For years he
replied daily to letters and e-mails from students from all over the world. His greatest
motivation has been dialoguing with many
about the use of language in society and
answering student questions. The world was
his classroom.
While conducting an impressive body
of research, and being responsive to the
many who asked for advice, Fishman traveled extensively, encouraging the activities
of those seeking to preserve endangered
languages. He will be remembered by the
Māoris of New Zealand, the Catalans
and Basques of Spain, the Navajo and
other Native Americans, the speakers of
Quechua and Aymara in South America,
and many other minority language groups
for his warmth and encouragement. For
a quarter-century, he wrote a column on
6
Yiddish sociolinguistics in every issue of
the quarterly Afn Shvel. He also wrote
regularly on Yiddish and general sociolinguistic topics for the weekly Forverts.
Together with his wife Gella Fishman, he
established the extensive five-generational
“Fishman Family Archives” at Stanford
University library. In 2004 he received the
prestigious UNESCO Linguapax Award in
Barcelona, Spain.
Joshua Fishman’s prolific record of
research and publication has continued until
today, defining modern scholarship in bilingualism and multilingualism, bilingual and
minority education, the relation of language
and thought, the sociology and the social
history of Yiddish, language policy and
planning, language spread, language shift
and maintenance, language and nationalism, language and ethnicity, post-imperial
English, languages in New York, and ethnic,
and national efforts to reverse language shift.
His scholarly work with minority groups
and with others engaged in the struggle
to preserve their languages, cultures, and
traditions has been inspired by a deep and
heartfelt compassion that is always sustained
by the markedly human tone of his most
objective scholarly writing.
Ofelia García is Professor in the Ph.D. programs of Urban Education and of Hispanic
and Luso-Brazilian Literatures and
Languages at the Graduate Center of the
City University of New York. She has been
Professor of Bilingual Education at Columbia
University´s Teachers College, Dean of the
School of Education at the Brooklyn Campus
of Long Island University, and Professor of
Education at The City College of New York.
Her email is: [email protected].
Mismatched Legislative Mandates
Leave Florida English Language
Learners in the Lurch
Rosa Castro Feinberg
Watch out! We were taken by surprise in Florida a few months ago. Don’t let the
same thing happen to you.
Has your state enacted statutes or adopted rules regarding English Language
Learners (ELLs)? Does your state expect teachers, counselors, and administrators
to be prepared to educate language minority students? To effectively engage
parents of students in English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) and Bilingual
Education programs? Are funds allocated for additional instructional time as needed
by students who are no longer enrolled in second language acquisition programs?
Do schools in your state report achievement data for English Language Learners?
These statues and regulations are among those reported by the Education
Commission of the States (ECS) on the English Language Learners/Bilingual State
Policy Database (2014). If you think these laws extend to all ELLs in each of the
states cited in the database, you could be mistaken.
Midway through the 2014 legislative session, that’s what we learned in
Florida. State law governing programs for ELLs does not apply to the private
schools participating in the state’s tax credit scholarship program.
Descriptions of Florida voucher and ESOL law and identification of the
concerns that flow from the divergence between the two sets of laws follow.
Florida Tax Credit Scholarship
Program (FTCSP)
In 2001, Florida enacted a tax credit scholarship program. It is funded by corporate
taxpayers who contribute the amount of
payments in several tax categories otherwise
due to the state to a nonprofit Scholarship
Funding Organization (SFO).The funds are
then used by the SFO for warrants for private school tuition for children from eligible
families. The state provides tax credits to the
corporations to match the amount of the
donations up to the maximum limits set by
law (“Florida tax credit”, 2014).
This indirect method of funding tax
credit programs distinguishes them from
voucher programs which are directly funded
by government. Both are typically referred
to in media reports as voucher programs.
Parents who meet income eligibility
guidelines for program participation select
one of the private schools that accept vouchers. The school may accept or reject the
application. If the voucher is worth less than
the cost of tuition and other fees, the parents or financial aid from the private school
or foundations make up the difference.
Religious schools enroll over 80% of the
program’s students (Florida Department of
Education [FDOE], Office of Independent
Education and Parental Choice, June 2014).
Initial funding was set at $50 million (“One man’s passion”, n.d.) to serve
15,000 students (FDOE, School Choice,
June 2008). During 2013-14, the program
funded tuition for almost 60,000 students
(Melton, 2014). The funding level will reach
$447 million next year (Caputo, 2014).
This growth has taken place without
convincing evidence that the students are
better off academically by attending voucher
schools. National studies comparing student
performance in private and public schools
conclude that there is little to no private
school advantage after controlling for student characteristics (Braun, Jenkins, &
Grigg, 2006; Lubienski & Lubienski, 2013;
Smith, 2005).
Florida law doesn’t require public and
private schools to administer the same
assessments. There are no common results,
writes Dr. David Figlio (the evaluator of the
FTCSP program) “that can be credibly compared with the national norm-referenced test
scores collected for program participants”
(August 2014).
Further, Florida law does not require
public posting of participating students’
average test results for all private schools
accepting students with vouchers. The latest
7
Although lower income families will continue
to have priority stated in law for application
to the program, the expansion of eligibility
to middle income families is a startling
departure from the mission of assisting
underprivileged children.
8
annual evaluation of the FTCSP included average gain scores
for 110 of the the 1,144 schools with students in the relevant
grades in 2012- 13. Scores for these schools are not further disaggregated by grade or demographic group.
At the beginning of the final week of the 2014 legislative
session, the Tampa Bay Times Gradebook posted a summary of
contentious issues related to a pending bill to expand the state’s
voucher program.
The debate has mostly focused on the area of accountability,
and whether students in schools that accept vouchers must take
the same test as students in traditional public schools.
Now some leaders in the state’s Spanish-speaking community are turning the conversation to the topic of academic
options for children who are still learning English. (Solochek,
April 28, 2014)
The limited transparency and accountability required of
voucher schools was decried editorially by el Nuevo Herald and
noted in news and opinion pages in el Nuevo Herald and the
Miami Herald, as well as in other mass and social media (“2014
media”, 2014) .
The August 2014 annual evaluation report for the FTCSP
included a summary of test results for an ersatz ELL subgroup,
comprising 21% of voucher program participants, or more
than 10,000 students. The group, labeled ever limited English
proficient, refers to students who were identified as ELLs by
a public school district prior to their enrollment in a voucher
school (Figlio, August 2014). The report includes no indication
that the members of this group received ESOL or dual language
instruction in their voucher schools.
Florida law does not require private schools to administer
annual English language proficiency tests. Therefore, the number of members of the ever limited English proficient group
who are still limited in their English proficiency is unknown.
Also unknown is the number of members of this group who
entered voucher schools without prior attendance at a traditional school and are unidentified English Language Learners.
How voucher schools can plan to serve ELLs without data
upon which to base identification and placement decisions, or
if indeed any special services are provided to ELLs, is unknown.
What is clear is that parents who want to compare the academic performance of ELLs among voucher schools or between
voucher and public schools still can’t do so.
Legislators originally approved the program “to expand educational opportunities for children of families that have limited
financial resources and to enable children in this state to achieve
a greater level of excellence in their education” (FDOE, Office
of Independent Education & Parental Choice, “Florida tax
credit”, n.d.). In keeping with the goal of helping impoverished
children, program participation was limited to children from
families whose income met guidelines for subsidized meals.
Currently, eligibility is still limited to families whose
incomes are below185% of the federal poverty level, approximately $44,000 for a family of four (Melton, 2014). However,
the 2014 legislature raised the amount of the voucher award
and eliminated requirements for prior attendance at a public
school for students in grade 6 and above. It also extended eligibility beginning in 2016 for partial scholarships to families
earning up to 260% of the poverty level
(“Florida tax credit”, 2014), or $62, 010
for a family of four (“Child nutrition programs”, 2014). This higher income is well
above the Census Bureau’s estimate for
Florida’s 2012 median income of $47,309
for a household of any size (July 8, 2014)
and almost $20,000 above the FTCSP’s
current income eligibility limit. These
changes open the door to government subsidized program participation for students
who already attend private schools.
Although lower income families will
continue to have priority stated in law for
application to the program, the expansion
of eligibility to middle income families is
a startling departure from the mission of
assisting underprivileged children. There
are a million and a half Florida students in
public schools eligible for School Lunch Act
benefits (FDOE, Education Information
& Accountability Services, 2014). This
pool of students qualified for priority status
for vouchers is so large that the proposed
changes could well give rise to speculations
about mission creep.
What states have voucher or tax
credit programs?
According to the National Conference of
State Legislators (NCSL), as of April 2014
there were 14 states with tax credit scholarship programs and 13 states plus the District
of Columbia and Douglas County School
District in Colorado with school voucher
programs (2014). The Friedman Foundation
for Educational Choice maintains a data
base that tracks states with various types of
school choice plans and identifies the statutes regulating each program in Arizona,
Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana,
Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode
Island, Utah, and Wisconsin (Catt, 2014).
Don’t stop reading if your state is not on
the list. Like Texas, it could be added soon.
Vasquez Heilig reports that the American
Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) met
in Texas during the first week in August
with the goal of promoting school choice
programs in that state (2014).
The Executive Director of the Center on
Media and Democracy described ALEC’s
role and mission.
On ALEC Task Forces, unelected corporate lobbyists and elected state legislators
act as “equals” and both get “a VOICE and
a VOTE” on bills or templates to change
U.S. law in countless ways. ALEC’s state
legislative leaders are tasked with a “duty”
under ALEC’s public by-laws to get ALEC
“model” bills introduced and passed in their
home states. Graves, July 13, 2011)
ALEC’s model scholarship tax credit
bill has been available for five years (“Great
schools”, August, 2009).
Saul summarized school voucher developments in Georgia and commented on
Arizona, Florida, and Pennsylvania programs
(2012).
and monitoring issues for the plaintiffs. The
text of her PowerPoint presentation summarizing the provisions of the Consent Decree
(Carmona, September 1, 2014) includes
specification of ELL rights such as the
following.
School districts must:
◗◗
Identify and assess to measure not only
the students’ level of English language
proficiency but also the students’ level of
proficiency in basic subject areas.
◗◗
Provide access to intensive English language instruction and instruction in basic
subject areas of math, science, social
studies, and computer literacy which is
1) understandable to the student given
his level of English language proficiency
and 2) equal and comparable in amount,
scope, sequence and quality to that provided to English proficient students.
◗◗
Require appropriate professional preparation and credentials for all teachers who
teach any subject in any language to
English Language Learners and for their
school counselors and administrators.
◗◗
Offer parental involvement and leadership training opportunities and ensure
that communications (written and oral)
between school district boards and personnel and parents of current or former
ELLs are in the parents’ primary language
or other mode of communication commonly used by the parents unless clearly
not feasible.
◗◗
Provide equal access for ELLs to all
programs that are appropriate for their
academic needs, including compensatory,
exceptional, vocational, adult, or early
childhood education as well as dropout
prevention and other support services
without regard of their level of English
language proficiency.
Florida ESOL law
Dr. Eric Dwyer, professor of TESOL and
Foreign Language Education at Florida
International University, gave his opinion on
the effect of the voucher program on ELLs.
“Expanding the voucher program would
hurt students who are learning English as
a second language. He noted that public
schools must follow specific guidelines for
teaching ESOL students, while private
schools do not” (cited in Mcgrory, June 14,
2014).
So what is it that Florida ELLs jeopardize if they go to voucher schools? The
rights, benefits, and services codified in
state law and board of education rule and
set forth in the Consent Decree in LULAC
v. Florida Board of Education. That document incorporates the settlement agreement
expressing Florida’s interpretation of federal
civil rights law protecting ELLs as applied
to Florida circumstances and is the foundation for state ESOL law and rules (FDOE,
Bureau of Student Achievement through
Language Acquisition, n.d.).
The LULAC law suit was filed by a
public interest law firm, Multicultural
Education, Training, and Advocacy
(META), Inc., on behalf of a group of
plaintiffs that includes the League of
United Latin American Citizens (LULAC),
ASPIRA of Florida, The Farmworkers’
Association of Central Florida, the Florida
State Conference of NAACP Branches,
the Haitian Refugee Center, the Spanish
American League Against Discrimination
(SALAD), The American Hispanic
Educator’s Association of Dade (AHEAD),
and the Haitian Educators’ Association.
Attorney Lisa Carmona at the Florida
Equal Justice Center is the lead local cooperating attorney overseeing implementation
The Florida Department of Education must:
◗◗
Monitor districts to ensure program compliance and effectiveness.
◗◗
Adhere to a complaint investigation process and timeline, report findings, and
issue a corrective plan for violations.
Even with this support, the achievement
status and graduation rates for ELLs in
Florida (as in many other states) are far
9
from ideal. We know that because assessment results for public schools are publically
reported. But imagine how ELLs would
fare without provisions in law such as those
listed above.
The consequences of
mismatched Florida laws for
ELLs
Perhaps there are voucher schools that voluntarily provide the services listed above.
However, they are private schools and as
such largely unregulated. Florida laws governing private schools are applicable to over
2,000 PK-12 private schools (FDOE, Office
of Independent Education and Parental
Choice, 2013-2014). These statutes include
explicit disavowal of any intent by the state
to regulate, control, approve or accredit
private schools, to monitor them through
site visits more than seven times a year, or
to undermine a private school’s authority to
determine its own standards and curriculum
(“Accountability of private schools”, 2013;
“Florida tax credit”, 2014; “Private schools”
2013).
Accordingly, voucher schools, though
supported by taxpayers’ contributions, do
not have to comply with state ESOL law.
Since ELLs are not legally entitled to state
ESOL services in voucher schools, the only
recourse for their parents should problems
arise is to change schools.
Yet student mobility takes a toll on academic progress. In explaining why voucher
students who go back to public schools do
not perform as well on state assessment
tests after their return as their low income
peers who never attended voucher schools,
Figlio (July 2013) reports that “students
experience a temporary downward blip
in performance in the year they switch
schools, especially for reasons other than
natural grade progression”. However, ELLs
must acquire the English language and also
meet graduation standards on the same
schedule as their English proficient peers.
They have no time to lose.
Voucher schools are not required to hire
teachers who earned college degrees or state
teaching credentials, or who are professionally prepared to instruct ELLs; to follow
the state’s curriculum, to adhere to the
state’s accountability policies, or to publicly
report what they do or don’t do. Parents and
taxpayers cannot effectively monitor progress for ELLs in voucher schools because
they administer tests whose results can’t be
compared directly with those administered
in the public schools. As a result, parents
are unable to make an informed choice of
schools. To cap it all off, there is no requirement that parents of ELLs be made aware of
the rights their children must surrender in
exchange for a voucher.
Commenting on the veto campaign to
secure a veto for the voucher expansion bill,
a columnist for Tampa’s 7Dias, summed up
the consequences for ELL students. “Por
dondequiera que veamos esta ley no es una
ventaja para nuestros muchachos y es por
ello que tantas organizaciones se han unido
para pedirle al gobernador que por favor la
vete” (Reno, 2014). [From any perspective
we see that this law leaves our children at
a disadvantage and that is why so many
organizations have come together to ask the
governor to please veto it.]
For a list of the organizations participating in the veto campaign, see (“Which organizations”, 2014).
Recent legal developments
Three challenges to voucher programs were
presented to the state courts after the end of
Florida’s 2014 legislative session.
Citizens for Strong Schools, Inc.
v. Florida State Board of Education
In May 2014, Southern Legal Counsel, Inc.
filed a second amended complaint to expand
a pending school funding adequacy case.
The plaintiffs include Citizens For Strong
Schools, Inc., Fund Education Now, several
parents, and two students.
They seek a declaration that the State
of Florida is breaching its paramount duty
to provide a uniform, efficient, safe, secure,
and high quality system of free public
schools that allows students to obtain a high
quality education, as required by Article IX,
section 1(a) of the Florida Constitution and
ask the court to require defendants to fulfill
their constitutional duties under Article
IX. The amended complaint adds allegations challenging the FTCSP, the adequacy
of Florida’s pre-kindergarten program, and
the quality of pre-kindergarten learning
opportunities.
The list of factual allegations includes as
item 89 this statement: “The FTCSP does
Parents and taxpayers cannot effectively monitor progress for ELLs in voucher schools because
they administer tests whose results can’t be compared directly with those administered in the
public schools. As a result, parents are unable to make an informed choice of schools. To cap it all
off, there is no requirement that parents of ELLs be made aware of the rights their children must
surrender in exchange for a voucher.
10
not require private schools to offer services
to meet the needs of English Language
Learners” (Chonin, 2014).
School board members for the Bay
District Schools in Panama City, Florida, are
considering supporting the law suit (www.
wjhg.com, 2014).
Faasse v. Scott
In July, a member of the Florida Education
Association (FEA) filed a challenge to the
manner in which Senate Bill 850 (which
included provisions for expansion of the
FTCSP program) was enacted. The plaintiff
is Tom Faasse, a social studies teacher in the
Lee County Public Schools.
The plaintiff ’s motion for summary
judgment asserts that the law was enacted
in violation of Article III, § 6 of the Florida
Constitution which requires that bills be
limited to a single subject whereas the bill
for expansion of the FTCSP was joined to
several others in a prohibited omnibus fashion. The requested relief is a final judgment
declaring Chapter 2014-184 of no force and
effect (Meyer, 2014a).
If the plaintiff prevails, the FTCSP
would still continue under conditions
specified in legislation from prior years.
Components of the bill not previously
established in law would end.
McCall v. Scott
In August, a group of organizations and
individuals filed their challenge to the
FTCSP. Plaintiffs include a parent, a state
senator, a public school principal, a rabbi,
two ministers, the Florida Association of
School Administrators, the Florida Congress
of Parents and Teachers, Inc., the Florida
Education Association, the Florida School
Boards Association, the Florida State
Conference of Branches of NAACP, and the
League of Women Voters of Florida, Inc.
Plaintiffs allege the FTCSP violates
Article IX, § 1, and Article I, § 3 of the
Florida Constitution because private school
vouchers:
◗◗
educate Florida children in a manner other
than through the system of free public
schools mandated by Article IX, § 1;
◗◗
fund the education of Florida children in
a system of schools that is not “uniform,”
as required by Article IX, § 1. Article I,
§ 3; and
◗◗
defy the prohibition against taking rev-
enue from the public treasury directly or
indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or
religious denomination or in aid of any
sectarian institution as commanded in
Article I, § 3 .
The requested relief is a declaration from
the court that the FTCSP is unconstitutional and an order to enjoin defendants
from taking any further measures to implement it (Meyer, 2014b).
Additional points of view on this case are
summarized in the Orlando Sentinel (Postal,
2014) and in RedefinED (Pillow, 2014).
For summaries of related legal developments in other states, see Bidwell (2014),
Dalesio, (2014), and The Associated Press
(2014).
state and local education associations, and
community based groups such as LULAC
and the NAACP.
◗◗
Identify journalists and bloggers covering education and state politics in your
state. You can find them by searching on
Twitter for “ [name of state] education
reporter”. Follow and comment on their
stories and periodically send them information based on your research. Don’t
expect an immediate response-they have
daily deadlines to meet.
◗◗
Stay informed. Set up Google Alerts for
bill numbers, court cases, or reporters you
want to track. Subscribe for email updates
from NABE Weekly News, Learning the
Language in Education Week, NCELA’s
Nexus, Politico.com’s Morning Edition,
and follow TESOL News.
◗◗
Ask for peer review and buy-in from
allied groups for your requests to policy
makers (local and state board of education members, city and county commissioners, state department of education
officials, members of the state legislative
delegation). Present your requests and
rationale in person, via email, at meetings
of the state board of education, at hearings held by the department of education,
or at legislative delegation meetings.
◗◗
Report your findings to parents, colleagues, and community through conference and convention presentations, publications, letters to the editor and opinion
pieces to newspapers, social media and
blog postings, and through talk, community, and public radio.
Summary and recommendations
The major purpose of this article is to alert
parents, educators, and advocates to the
disparity between ESOL and voucher law in
Florida and to the consequences of this disparity for ELLs. A second goal is to encourage examination of similar laws in other
states to determine if such conflicts also exist
elsewhere. If they do, here are some suggestions for advocates on confronting the
problem.
Recommendations
Florida advocates for ELLs have found these
procedures helpful over the past decade in
gaining policy reform for the state’s quarter
million ESOL students.
◗◗
◗◗
◗◗
Investigate the ESOL and voucher laws
in your state. Use the ECS and NCSL
databanks cited in this article as a starting
point. Ask your elected officials’ legislative aides or government relations staff
at your colleges and schools districts for
help in locating state law and legislative
web sites and the date and location for
legislative delegation meetings.
Establish a means for private and rapid
communication of information and calls
for action to and from your colleagues. In
Florida we’ve used Yahoo Groups mailing
lists for this purpose. Recruit members
of your NABE and TESOL affiliates as
members. Set up a blog as an information warehouse where your associates
and allies can go to post or retrieve documents.
Coordinate with groups with related
goals, including parent organizations,
Tips
◗◗
Always fact-check your statements. Your
goal is 100% accuracy. Although your
statements should be complete, always
hold something in reserve for later use
in radio or television debates or to discourage time consuming email or blogcomment wars.
◗◗
Always use your personal (not your institutional) phone, internet device, email
account, and time when making requests
for legislation or funding if you work for
a tax funded agency.
◗◗
Never send an email message or post a
comment you would not want to see on
the front page of your newspaper.
11
References
Accountability of private schools participating in
state school choice scholarship programs. (2013).
Retrieved September 5, 2014, from http://www.
leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?mode=View%20
Statutes&SubMenu=1&App_mode=Display_
Statute&Search_String=school+choice&U
RL=1000-1099/1002/Sections/1002.421.html
Bidwell, A. (2014, August 8). School vouchers: Legal,
depending on where you live. U.S. News & World Report.
Retrieved September 7, 2014, from http://www.usnews.
com/news/articles/2014/08/28/florida-teachers-parentssue-state-over-school-voucher-tax-credit
Braun, H., Jenkins, F., & Grigg, W. (2006). Comparing
private schools and public schools using hierarchical
linear modeling. [NCES 2006-461]. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for
Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S.
Government Printing Office. Retrieved September 2,
2014, from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/
studies/2006461.pdf
Caputo, M. (2014, September 10). Crist sides with teachers
union over black clergy in school-choice program
lawsuit. Tampa Bay Times. Retrieved September 11,
2014, from http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/
stateroundup/crist-sides-with-teachers-union-overblack-clergy-in-school-choice-program/2197118
Carmona, L. (2014, September 1). Summary of ELL rights
under federal and Florida law, by Lisa Carmona, Esq.,
Florida Equal Justice Center, Inc. Retrieved September 2,
2014, from http://esolfl.blog.com/2014/09/01/summaryof-ell-rights-under-federal-and-florida-law-by-lisacarmona-esq-florida-equal-justice-center-inc/
Catt, A. D. (2014). Public rules on private schools: Measuring
the regulatory impact of state statutes and school choice
programs. The Friedman Foundation for Educational
Choice. Retrieved September 2, 2014, from http://www.
edchoice.org/Research/Reports/Public-Rules-on-PrivateSchools--Measuring-the-Regulatory-Impact-of-StateStatutes-on-School-Choice-Programs.aspx
Child nutrition programs, income eligibility guidelines. (2014).
Retrieved September 4, 2014, from http://www.fns.usda.
gov/sites/default/files/2014-04788.pdf
Chonin, N. (2014). Citizens for Strong Schools, Inc. v. Florida
State Board Of Education. Retrieved June 2, 2014, from
http://www.southernlegal.org/files/9314/0551/2860/
Second_Amended_Complaint.pdf.pdf
Dalesio, E. P. (2014, September 13). NC courts sort
voucher law, students stay in class. Retrieved
September 14, 2014, from http://www.newsobserver.
com/2014/09/13/4147217_nc-courts-sort-voucher-lawstudents.html?rh=1
Education Commission of the States (ECS) State Policy
Database, English Language Learner/Bilingual. (n.d.).
Retrieved August 31, 2014, from http://www.ecs.org/ecs/
ecscat.nsf/WebTopicView?OpenView&count=-1&RestrictT
oCategory=English+Language+Learner/Bilingual
Figlio, D. N. (July 2013). Evaluation of the Florida tax credit
scholarship program participation, compliance and test
scores in 2011-12. University of Florida, Northwestern
University, and National Bureau of Economic Research.
floridaschoolchoice.org/pdf/FTC_Research_2011-12_
report.pdf
Figlio, D. N. (August 2014). Evaluation of the Florida tax credit
scholarship program participation, compliance and test
scores in 2012-13. University of Florida, Northwestern
University, and National Bureau of Economic Research.
floridaschoolchoice.org/pdf/FTC_Research_2012-13_
report.pdf
Florida Department of Education (FDOE). (n.d.). Bureau of
Student Achievement through Language Acquisition.
Rules and legislation. Retrieved September 10, 2014, from
http://www.fldoe.org/aala/rules.asp
FDOE, Education Information & Accountability Services.
(n.d.). Data publications and reports: Students. Retrieved
September 4, 2014, from http://www.fldoe.org/eias/
eiaspubs/pubstudent.asp
12
FDOE, Office of Independent Education & Parental
Choice. (n.d.). Florida tax credit scholarships program.
floridaschoolchoice.org/Information/ctc/
Reno, N. C. (2014, June 20). Vetar la SB 850 o Propuesta de
Ley de Vales (Vouchers) de escuelas. 7Dias. Retrieved
June 21, 2014, from http://lanoticiadiaria.com/pais/usa/
diario.php?id=103
FDOE, Office of Independent Education and Parental
Choice. (June 2014) Florida tax credit scholarship program:
June 2014 quarterly report. Retrieved September 10, 2014,
from http://www.floridaschoolchoice.org/Information/
CTC/quarterly_reports/ftc_report_june2014.pdf
Saul, S. (2012). Public money finds back door to private
schools. New York Times. Retrieved September 13, 2014,
from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/22/education/
scholarship-funds-meant-for-needy-benefit-privateschools.html?pagewanted=all&_r=4&
FDOE, Office of Independent Education and Parental
Choice. (2014). Florida’s private schools annual report,
2013-2014. Tallahassee, FL: Retrieved September 9, 2014,
from http://www.floridaschoolchoice.org/information/
private_schools/annual_reports/Private_School_Annual_
Report_2013-2014.pdf
Smith, K. (2005). Data don’t matter? Academic research and
school choice. Perspectives on Politics, 3 (2), 285-299. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1537592705050218
FDOE), School Choice. (2008). Corporate tax credit program,
June 2008 quarterly report: Corporate tax credit scholarship
program statistics. Retrieved September 12, 2014, from
http://www.stepupforstudents.org/docs/default-source/
Government-Reports/ctc-fast-facts-08-08.pdf
Florida tax credit scholarship program. (2014). Retrieved
September 9, 2014, from http://www.leg.state.
fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_
Statute&Search_String=&URL=1000-1099/1002/
Sections/1002.395.html
Graves, L. (2011, July 13). About ALEC exposed: An open
letter from CMD’s executive director, Lisa Graves.
Retrieved September 2, 2014, from http://www.prwatch.
org/news/2011/07/10883/about-alec-exposed
Great schools tax credit program act (scholarship tax
credits). (August, 2009). Retrieved September 8, 2014,
2014, from http://www.alec.org/model-legislation/
the-great-schools-tax-credit-program-act-scholarshiptax-credits/
Lubienski, C. A. & Lubienski, S. (2013). The public school
advantage: Why public schools outperform private schools.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Mcgrory, K. (2014, June 14). Parent, teacher groups urge
Scott to veto school voucher bill. Miami Herald. Retrieved
September 2, 2014, from http://www.tampabay.com/
news/politics/stateroundup/parent-teacher-groupsurge-scott-to-veto-school-voucher-bill/2184337;
Melton, R. (August 20, 2014). Issue brief: Florida tax credit
scholarship prog ram. Retrieved September 11, 2014,
from http://fsba.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/IssueBrief_Florida-Tax-Credit-Scholarship-Program.pdf
Solochek, J. S. (2014, April 28). Are Florida vouchers good or
bad for English-language learners? The sides take shape.
Tampa Bay Times. Retrieved September 11, 2014, from
http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/gradebook/are-floridavouchers-good-or-bad-for-english-language-learnersthe-sides/2177243
The Associated Press. (2014, September 8). New hearing
sought in education tax credit case. Education Week.
Retrieved September 13, 2014, from http://www.edweek.
org/ew/articles/2014/09/08/new-hearing-sought-ineducation-tax_ap.html?qs=new+hampshire
2014 media coverage, ESOL/Voucher issues. (2014).
Retrieved September 9, 2014, from http://esolfl.blog.
com/2014-media-coverage-esolvoucher-issues/
U.S. Census Bureau. (July 8, 2014). State and County
QuickFacts: Florida. Retrieved September 9, 2014, from
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/12000.html
Vasquez Heilig, J. (2014, August 4). Cloaking inequity:To
ALEC in Texas: School vouchers are poppycock. Retrieved
September 2, 2014, from http://nepc.colorado.edu/blog/
alec-texas-school-vouchers
Which organizations are asking Governor Rick Scott to veto
SB 850, the voucher expansion bill? Retrieved September
10, 2014, from http://esolfl.blog.com/2014/06/09/whichorganizations-are-asking-governor-rick-scott-to-veto-sb850-the-voucher-expansion-bill%C2%BFquienes-son-lasorganizaciones-que-le-piden-un-veto-al-gobernadorrick-scott-del-proyecto-de-expan/
www.wjhg.com. (2014, September 9). School board
considers backing education lawsuit. Retrieved
September 10, 2014, from http://www.wjhg.com/home/
headlines/School-Board-Considers-Backing-EducationLawsuit-274551591.html
Meyer, R. G. (2014a). Faasse v.Scott. Retrieved September
10, 2014, from
http://www.meyerandbrooks.com/documents/Faasse%20
vs%20Scott/Plaintiff’s_Motion_for_Summary_
Judgment_and_Incorporated_Memorandum.pdf
Meyer, R. G. (2014b). McCall v. Scott. Retrieved
September 10, 2014, from https://au.org/files/pdf_
documents/2014-8-28_FL-tax-credit-complaint.pdf
National Conference of State Legislators (NCSL). (2014, April
22). Private school choice. Retrieved September 1, 2014,
from http://www.ncsl.org/research/education/privateschool-choice635174504.aspx
One man’s passion, a legislature’s resolve. (n.d.)
Retrieved September 11, 2014, from https://www.
stepupforstudents.org/about-us/history
Pillow, T. (2014, August 28). Nation’s largest private school
choice program now under legal attack. Retrieved
September 13, 2014, from http://www.redefinedonline.
org/2014/08/lawsuit-filed-challenging-florida-tax-creditscholarships/
Postal, L. (2014, August 28). Lawsuit calls Florida voucher
program unconstitutional. Orlando Sentinel. Retrieved
September 14, 2014, from http://www.orlandosentinel.
com/news/breaking-news/os-school-voucher-lawsuit20140828-story.html
Private schools. (2013). Retrieved September 10, 2014,
from http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_
mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=private%20
schools&URL=1000-1099/1002/Sections/1002.42.html
Rosa Castro Feinberg, Ph. D., retired from a
faculty position at the College of Education,
Florida International University. She was a
teacher, the Director of the University of
Miami Lau Center, a member of Florida’s Post
Secondary Education Planning Commission,
and as a member of the Dade County School
Board, the first Latina elected county-wide.
She is a member of the State Education
Committee for LULAC Florida, an advisory
council member for the Spanish American
League Against Discrimination (SALAD), and
the manager of the Sunshine State TESOL
Advocacy Mailing List. She is a former member of the NABE Board.
Review of
Separate is Never
Equal: Sylvia Mendez
and Her Family’s Fight
for Desegregation Reviewed by Izel Pineda, Azucena Pineda, and Ellen Riojas Clark
ISBN: 1-4197-1054-0
Illustrated and written by Duncan Tonatiuh
Separate Is Never Equal: Sylvia Mendez
& Her Family’s Fight for Desegregation is
the 2015 winner of the ALA Pura Belpre
Illustrator Award. This award honors “a
Latino writer and illustrator whose children’s
books best portray, affirm and celebrate the
Latino cultural experience” according to the
American Library Association (ALA).
His latest children’s picture book is the
story of the injustices that Sylvia Mendez,
her family, and her classmates, the majority
who were citizens and spoke and wrote perfect English, suffered when they were denied
entrance to a “whites only” school.
Izel and Azucena Pineda, sisters, dictated
their answers to my questions regarding the
book after Izel read the book to her little
sister for this review. Quotes from Duncan
Tonatiuh’s blog give additional context.
Dr. Clark: Who are the characters in the
story?
Azucena & Izel: The main characters
are Sylvia, her family, and Mr. Marcus
(the lawyer).
Dr. Clark: Where did the story take place?
Azucena & Izel: The story took place in
Orange County, California, in 1944.
The early documentary, The Lemon Grove
Incident, used in many bilingual education
courses also documents the lawsuit filed
by the Mendez family. This 1947 case was
of vital importance because it led to the
desegregation of schools across the United
States prior to the Brown vs. Board of
Education decision.
Duncan’s blog: “I think kids are extremely
intelligent. But I think that sometimes we
don’t give them the credit they deserve.”
Dr. Clark: Tell me what the story is about.
Azucena: I liked the story because it showed
courage and bravery.
Azucena: The story is about the sacrifice
that Sylvia Mendez and her family made to
fight for desegregation.
Izel: The story is about the merging of
schools, and the mix of races in schools that
was not allowed until after desegregation
happened. It is about Sylvia Mendez and the
people who helped desegregate the schools
in California.
Dr. Clark: What did you like about the
story?
Azucena: I liked that in the end they got
what they were fighting for: they got to go
to the Westminster school when before they
couldn’t go because of the color of their skin.
Izel: I liked that they keep fighting for what
is right, even when they’ve been told multiple times that change can’t happen. And
in the end, they do win and she even makes
friends with the people at her new school.
Dr. Clark: Why did you like the story?
Izel: I liked the story for its fairness and justice, whether it was shining through Sylvia
when she decided to protest, or the courtroom, where the judge decided to let the
Mexican children go to the all-white school.
Dr. Clark: How do you think the characters felt when this was happening?
Azucena: I think they felt angry when the
kids were not allowed to register for school
because they were Mexican and had brown
skin.
Izel: I think they were surprised at how racist the school was, and upset because they
had to go a different school because of their
skin color. But when they won the lawsuit,
I’m sure they felt proud of themselves, and
happy that they can go to the school that
had denied them access before.
Dr. Clark: Why is it important for children to know about this historical event?
13
Azucena Pineda
Age 8
3rd grade
Fernandez Elementary
Northside ISD
Izel: He wanted to acknowledge Sylvia’s family for correcting what was wrong, and how
just and brave the families acted when they
filed a lawsuit. He wanted us to be thankful
for her actions. He wanted us to be proud of
Sylvia and of being a Mexican.
Duncan: Hopefully my books help Latino
children realize that their stories and their
voices are important”
Dr. Clark: Did the author do a good job
of telling the story? Of doing the artwork
for the book? Why?
Izel Pineda
Age 13
7th grade
Stevenson Middle
School
Northside ISD
Azucena: They should know about this
because they should know that Sylvia
worked hard to get herself into that
school that didn’t want her. They should
also know that what Sylvia Mendez did
is something that has helped people who
are white be friends with people who are
Mexican because they can be in the same
school. We learn about Martin Luther
King, Jr., every year; we should learn about
Sylvia Mendez.
Izel: I think it is important because
Mexicans also struggled with racism and
segregation! It shows how we fought for the
right to be together with other races, and
how we had perseverance! It changed the
way schools are today and how Mexicans
are viewed through society.
Duncan’s blog: “I try to make books about
things that I’m passionate about–social justice, history, art.”
All of Duncan’s illustrations are influenced by ancient Pre Columbian art, in particular by the codices.
14
Dr. Clark: Did you like the illustrations?
Why?
Azucena: Not exactly. I did not really like
the way their ears and mouths were drawn.
They looked very weird to me. But I did
like their clothes and the scenes, and especially the cow poop in one of the fields!
Izel: I liked the illustrations a lot, because
it ties back to ancient drawings from indigenous tribes in Mexico. I liked the patterns
and colors and the way the buildings were
made throughout the story.
Duncan’s blog: “That is why my art is very
geometric, my characters are always in profile, and their ears look a bit like the number three. My intention is to celebrate that
ancient art and keep it alive.”
Dr. Clark: Why do you think the Author
wanted to write a children’s book about
this event?
Azucena: He wanted to show what it was
like back then with desegregation and how
hard it was and he wanted to show us that
we should be grateful for Sylvia Mendez and
her family and what they did.
Azucena: Yes, I think that he put a lot of
words but sometimes because it was so long,
I got a lost. I liked the cars that were drawn
in the story and the pictures were right
below the words, so that helped me understand the story.
Izel: He did a great job, in my opinion!
I liked the details he put in, and all the
characters that are in the story. I also loved
the artwork; because it’s a cool twist to the
everyday artwork we see when we read other
books. I like how it has the indigenous
tribes’ ancient features in the characters.
Dr. Clark: What ages can read this book
and still enjoy the book?
Azucena: Ages 2 to 100 because anyone can
learn about desegregation and that separate
is not equal!
Izel: All ages! You’re never too old to read a
picture book! Especially a good historical one.
The book and the interview with Izel
and Azucena points out the importance of
the need to learn about our history that
segregation also included Latinos and just
African Americans. The struggle is not over
and we need to remember what Sylvia’s
mother says in the book, “When you fight
for justice, others will follow.” We need to
know our history in order to understand
our place in the world.. ★
Ellen Riojas Clark, Ph. D., is Professor
Emerita of Division of Bicultural Bilingual
Studies at University of Texas at San Antonio.
Email: [email protected].
Interview With Prize Winning
Author Duncan Tonatiuh
Interviewed by Melony Clark Davis, age 12 • By Ellen Riojas Clark
Duncan Tonatiuh and Melony Clark Davis eating breakfast with a very hot salsa in San Miguel de Allende, Mexico. 2014.
What inspired you to be writer?
I loved reading when I was in Elementary School. My family did not have
a TV for some time and I would always borrow a book from my school’s
library to entertain myself in the afternoons. I became interested in writing
and whenever I had writing assignments I would go on and on for pages.
My love for reading and writing has continued throughout the years.
What inspired you to write this particular
story?
I only learned of Sylvia Mendez and her
family’s fight for desegregation in recent
years. I wanted to make a picture book of
the story because it is an important piece of
history that very few people in the United
States are familiar with.
I also wanted to make the book because
even though legal segregations is no longer
permitted in schools in the US, a lot of segregation in schools still exists today.
Your books seem to have a central theme,
what is it?
I think my books deal with social justice,
history and art.
I received a scholarship to attend a
small, progressive boarding school in
Williamstown, Massachusetts called Buxton.
After I graduated I went to Parsons School
of Design and to Eugene College in New
York City.
What did you major in college?
At Parsons I was in a department called
Integrated Design where I could choose
a lot of my classes. I mostly studied
Illustration and Photography. At Eugene
Lang, I majored in Writing.
How old are you?
I am 30 years old.
You are very fluent in both English and
Spanish, how did that happen?
I grew up in Mexico, in a city called San
Miguel de Allende. Spanish is my first language. My father is American though and
he always spoke to me in English. When
I turned 16 I came to United States to
attend high school and later on college. My
English, especially my writing, improved
when I came to the US, but I could speak it
well because of my Dad.
What schools did you go to and where?
When did you start writing?
I enjoyed writing when I was in elementary
school, but I became especially interested in
it when I was in high school.
When did you start doing illustrations?
When I was 9 years old or so I became very
interested in comic books and in anime.
I had a large collection of Spiderman and
X-men comics. I started creating my own
superheroes and writing and drawing my
own stories. I’ve loved drawing ever since.
15
The more time and energy you spend doing something,
the better you get at it. If you like to write, read and write
as much as you can. If you like to draw, draw and look at
different types of artwork as much as you can. The more
you do it, the better you’ll get at it.
What comes first story, then illustrations?
Or reverse?
First, I have an idea for a story. Then I write
a manuscript. I revise the manuscript several
times and once the story is done or close to
done I begin to illustrate it. I feel very lucky
that I write and also draw because when I’m
working on a book I have more freedom
and control and I can adjust the text and
the illustrations as I see fit.
What will your next book be about?
I just finished the illustrations for a new
picture book I wrote. It will be called Funny
Bones: Posada and His Day of the Dead
Calaveras and it will be available in the fall
of 2015. It will be a biography of an artist
named José Guadalupe Posada who is best
known for his Day of the Dead skeleton
drawings.
How would you describe your artwork?
Why do you think the subject matter of
your books is important?
I like to think of it as Contemporary PreColumbian Art. I’m very much inspired
by the art of ancient Mexico, specially the
Mixtec codex. I try to make drawings that
honor the past, but that deal with stories
that are happening nowadays or that happened in the recent past.
I try to make books about that interest me
and that I care about like social justice, art
and history. I hope that readers first of all
find the books interesting and entertaining.
Hopefully they will also learn something
about their culture or the culture of their
classmates.
Is it unusual to be both the author and
the illustrator?
How do you conduct the research for your
books?
It is unusual. Most picture books are written by one person and illustrated by another
one.
It depends on the book but I always go to
the library and I try to read a lot of the books
on the subject I’m researching. In the case of
Separate Is Never Equal I was able to meet
Sylvia Mendez two years ago. I listened to her
speak and I got to ask her questions. I was
also able to find court transcripts of the case
and I used some of the dialogue from Sylvia’s
talk and from the transcripts in my book.
What do you like to do when you are not
writing?
I like to read, ride my bike and play
capoeira among other things.
16
What message can you give us tweeners/
kids my age 11-13?
The more time and energy you spend doing
something, the better you get at it. If you like
to write, read and write as much as you can.
If you like to draw, draw and look at different types of artwork as much as you can. The
more you do it, the better you’ll get at it.
Teachers, here are two links that would be
of interest for you and your classroom.
◗◗
Anti-Defamation League curricular
guide to Duncan Tonatiuh newest book,
Separate is Never Equal. http://www.adl.
org/assets/pdf/education-outreach/bookof-the-month-separate-is-never-equal.pdf
◗◗
Duncan Tonatiuh’s blog is full of
information that would be useful for
teachers and students:
http://www.duncantonatiuh.com/
Melony Clark Davis, age 12, is a 6th grade
student at Lanier Middle School in Houston
Independent School District.
Ellen Riojas Clark, Ph. D., is Professor
Emerita of Division of Bicultural Bilingual
Studies at University of Texas at San Antonio.
Email: [email protected]. ★
From Spoken to
Written Language
with ELLs
by Ivannia Soto, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Education at Whittier College
As states across the country contend with
how to roll out the Common Core State
Standards (CCSS) as the new benchmark
for what students should know and be able
to perform at each grade level, they also
have to determine how to meet the needs of
ELLs within a more rigorously and cognitively demanding set of expectations for all
students. Currently, one out of every four
students in the United States comes from an
immigrant family, where most of the time
children speak a language other than English
(Ballantyne, Sanderman, & Levy, 2008).
Similarly, whereas the general population
grew by 7 percent in the decades between
1997 and 1998, and 2008 and 2009, the
English Language Learner (ELL) population
grew by 51 percent (Ballantyne et al., 2008).
However until recently, the rapid growth in
the number of ELLs has not been matched
with sufficient knowledge about the best way
to educate this population of students with
the new grade-level academic expectations,
especially within the academic mainstream.
Similarly, according to the Education
Week Research Center (2014), only 22%
of U.S public school teachers surveyed in
August 2014 said they felt “prepared” or
“well-prepared” to teach the new ELA and
math standards to ELLs, with 29% reporting that they felt “not at all prepared”. As a
result, many schools and districts are struggling with how to meet the linguistic needs
of ELLs across all literacy domains and content areas within the CCSS.
Teaching Academic Language
Across Content Areas
In our old paradigm of teaching language,
we believed that we needed to teach ELLs
to learn English first, before they were
ready for academic content. At best, what
we used to do to embed language was to
integrate vocabulary as the overlap of language with our teaching. What we now
know is that during mainstream instruction, ELLs need much more than vocabulary instruction to access the core content,
instead they need intentional scaffolding
to address the academic rigor of the CCSS.
Linquanti and Hakuta (2012) agree that
language and content must no longer be
taught in isolation:
… the overlap between language and
content has dramatically increased,
particularly as a result of the focus
on higher-order language uses in
the new standards. In addition, the
[Understanding Language] Initiative
argues that this overlap brings with it
an urgent need to attend to the particulars of instructional discourse in
the disciplines.
Since the overlap between language and
content has become increasingly important,
so will the preparation needed to prepare
ELLs for the demands associated with writing within the disciplines. Because many of
our ELLs oftentimes have not made adequate
progress in either language or content, we
simply cannot afford to teach these components of language one at a time. Instead,
academic language must become central to
all academic areas. These components of
academic language include instructional discourse, which connects to the emphasis on
the listening and speaking standards within
the CCSS, as well as expressing and understanding reasoning.
Language Shifts for ELLs
within CCSS
The Common Core State Standards (CCSS)
require teachers to shift their instructional
practices in several significant ways, which
in turn necessitates practice and intentionality. Some of these key shifts include
embedding language development across
the curriculum; an increase in oral language
and multiple opportunities for speaking and
listening; and an emphasis on collaboration, inquiry, and teamwork. In this way,
the new speaking and listening demands of
the CCSS require ELLs, who are oftentimes
invisible and silent in classrooms, to participate in “academic discussions in one-onone, small group, and whole-class settings”.
Additionally, listening and speaking anchor
standard #1 asks students to “collaborate
to answer questions, build understanding,
and solve problems” (Common Core State
Standards, 2013). This means that teachers must prepare intentional lesson plans
in order to elicit more opportunities for
academic oral language development in the
classroom setting. Since this has not been
previously expected of students, especially
ELLs, we may not realize the importance
of incorporating academic talk into our
classrooms, or we may not have been taught
how to apprentice students into academic
discourse, including active listening.
Deborah Meier, visionary teacher, author,
and founder of successful small schools in
New York City and Boston suggests that
“Teaching is listening, learning is talking”
(http://deborahmeier.com/). The notion that
students need to engage in more academic
talk is at the heart of the CCSS movement,
but it is essential to reorient our teaching in
such a way that we systemically and intentionally begin to release more responsibility
to students where they practice academic
talk. In essence, we are reconceptualizing the
last decade or so of educational policies and
expectations, where the reverse was true: the
teacher was talking most and students were
17
regurgitating information, not necessarily
learning or internalizing concepts or content
via language output.
Listening and Speaking as
Scaffolds for Reading and Writing
School systems often struggle with how to
meet the linguistic needs of ELLs across all
domains of listening, speaking, reading, and
writing. Reading and writing, especially,
are often areas where ELLs lag in achievement. Writing, specifically, is the most
cognitively and linguistically demanding
of the domains, as it is the culmination of
speaking, reading, listening, plus syntax,
grammar, and vocabulary development.
Additionally, teachers are frequently not
adequately prepared to teach writing across
genres and content areas.
Of the four literacy domains, writing
is the most cognitively and linguistically
demanding of the four domains. Unpacking
the organizational structures of each type
of writing unveils what is often the hidden
curriculum of school for many students.
Explicitly teaching students the insides of
each kind of writing genre can provide valuable access to this literacy domain. Many
times, we assume that students will naturally
pick up these expectations when reading, or
as we provide model/benchmark papers. It is
only with this kind of explicit teaching and
modeling, however, that many students, especially ELLs, are able to function successfully
as capable and proficient writers. Explicitly
teaching the organizational structures of writing genres can assist students with the writing
expectations of college and beyond.
In essence, we must find the academic
language essential to the content being taught,
which includes academic oral language.
For ELLs, academic oral language is a scaffold for writing. When ELLs are allowed to
speak before they write, they write much
more effectively, as oral language becomes a
mental outline for the writing process. For
example, explicitly teaching academic language stems (“I believe that …” or “I agree
with the author because …” during academic
oral language practice can then be transferred
into writing (see Figure 1.1 below), as ELLs
internalize syntactically appropriate responses.
Additionally, when paired with more proficient partners, ELLs can benefit from a
language model, who can use more sophisticated vocabulary and complex grammatical
structures. When oral language is archived in
a graphic organizer, such as the Figure 1.1, it
can be used as a foundation for longer writing
pieces, such as a summary of a story in the
example below. When used intentionally, oral
language practice is not a waste of time or in
vain and can be used to write more extensive
selections. Accountability and informal assessment for speaking has been built into the
talking exercise, especially when graphic organizers are collected to determine instructional
next steps from the writing samples.
The figure above demonstrates the use of
open-ended questions to assist students with
recalling and summarizing the major parts
of a story. Notice how ELLs are given the
language by which to begin their responses,
as well as listening stems to engage with
their partners actively. There is also an
academic language stem for coming to consensus with a final response, which will be
shared with the whole class. Teachers can
then have students put their three responses
together to create a longer summary of the
story, thus moving from speaking to writing.
genres in particular are identified— narrative,
informational, and argumentative—which
allows educators to intensely focus on allowing students, especially ELLs, to achieve success with these genres over time. Since the
distribution of emphasis is on the three genres
of writing, teachers can also be more efficient
in their plans for writing instruction. For
example, in contrast to prior standards movements, there is less of an emphasis on short,
focused research projects. Additionally, since
the narrative writing genre has been given less
importance, it is essential to distribute time to
each genre according to emphasis. Specifically,
educators must examine the specific expectations for each writing genre with their
students, in order that they are adequately
prepared and successful with each.
For each new writing genre that
is expected of ELLs, the following
Curriculum Cycle can be introduced to
insure explicit and clear writing expectations (Gibbons, 2002).
◗◗
A specific purpose for writing—
explicitly stating the purpose and
reason for the writing assignment; connecting the writing to real-world application (e.g., scientists and historians use
this genre of writing).
◗◗
A particular overall structure for writing—providing a clear description of the
organization of the writing genre. If there
is an organizational pattern, making that
clear to students (e.g., for argumentation,
presenting an argument and anticipating/
addressing counterarguments).
◗◗
Connectives—introducing the specific
transition words associated with the particular writing genre (e.g., for procedural
writing, the use of enumeration).
◗◗
Specific linguistic features—providing
students with the grammatical tense that
they should be writing in, as well the
Explicitly Teaching Writing
Genre Expectations
The writing demands of the Common Core
State Standards (CCSS) further require educators to become more explicit and intentional
about writing expectations. Three writing
Figure 1.1 Think Pair Share with Open-ended questions and Academic Language Stems
Question
(Open-ended)
What I think
(Speaking)
What my partner thought
(Listening)
What happened at the beginning
of the story?
What happened at the beginning of My partner stated that the
the story was …
beginning of the story was …
What happened in the middle of
the story?
What happened in the middle of
the story was …
What happened at the end of the
story?
What happened at the end of the
story was …
(Soto, 2012)
18
What we thought
(Consensus)
We came to consensus that the
most important part of the story
was …
specialized vocabulary associated with the
writing style (e.g., narrative writing selections can include dialogue).
In this way, the Curriculum Cycle
(Gibbons, 2002) also connects to Key CCSS
ELA Practice 2: Produce clear and coherent
writing in which the development, organization, and style are appropriate to task, purpose,
and audience (CCSS, 2013).
Putting it All Together
The lesson plan template below can assist
teachers in designing writing lessons that
guarantee that listening and speaking,
academic vocabulary, and the elements of
the Curriculum Cycle are incorporated
(Gibbons, 2002). First, teachers would link
the CCSS standards to the writing objective
being taught. Next, building background
knowledge experiences for the writing topic
and genre are developed. Building background knowledge has received a negative
wrap with some in the CCSS movement.
Building background knowledge around
the writing topic or content of the lesson is
absolutely essential for ELLs who may not
have background knowledge that matches
American expectations, or around a particular topic, because they have not had those
direct experiences themselves.
In this way, building background experiences levels the playing field, so that all
students are adequately prepared to meet the
content demands of the writing process that
they will engage in. As such, background
knowledge experiences must be carefully
thought through, so that ELLs are able to
equitably function in the mainstream classroom setting. Such building background
knowledge experiences can include a series
of sources around a topic, including short
text selections across text types, videos, pictures, and/or hands-on experiences.
ELLs must also be explicitly taught specialized vocabulary that they will need to
both understand content and use alongside
of the writing genre. The Frayer model
is a method by which to teach concepts
using one target word at a time. After
building background knowledge around a
word, students are lead through a process
of identifying examples, non-examples,
drawing a visual, and finally writing their
own definition. With this process, ELLs
are learning several words and concepts at
a time (not just the target word) under the
Figure 1.2 Curriculum Cycle Lesson Plan Organizer
Common Core State Standard
Writing Objective
Building background knowledge for content
of writing
Specialized vocabulary needed (Frayer model)
Academic oral language development
(Think-Pair-Share with open-ended questions)
Writing Purpose
Writing Organization
Writing Connectives (linking words
associated with genre)
Other Linguistic Features (tense, verbs,
describing words)
(Soto, 2014)
examples section. This assists with closing the vocabulary gap, as ELLs come to
school knowing far fewer words than their
native English peers. When you know a
word, you know what it is and what it isn’t.
The non-examples section assists with fully
comprehending the target word. The visual
quadrant becomes especially important to
ELLs because oftentimes they can recall the
visual before the linguistic label. Finally,
when students write their own definition
of a word, they are much more likely to
retain that definition because they have been
actively engaged in the development of the
definition and there is ownership over the
word and process.
The linkage between spoken and written language using Think-Pair-Share was
established earlier in this article, along with
the importance to developing appropriate
open-ended questions that will cognitively
and linguistically prepare ELLs to begin
thinking about the topic. The academic oral
language that was archived using ThinkPair-Share can now be used alongside the
explicit teaching of the writing genre’s purpose, organization, connectives, and other
linguistic features. This scaffolded approach
to teaching writing can assist ELLs with
becoming successful speakers and writers
across disciplines and genres of writing.
The Curriculum Cycle Lesson Plan
Organizer below can be used to plan for the
essential scaffolds that ELLs, as well as most
students, require when attempting writing.. ★
References
Ballantyne, K.G., Sanderman, A.R., Levy, J. (2008). Educating
English language learners: Building teacher capacity.
Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for English
Language Acquisition. Available at http://www.ncela.
gwu.edu/practice/mainstream_teachers.html.
Education Week Research Center (2014). From Adoption to
Practice: Findings from A National Survey of Teachers.
Bethesda, MD: Editorial Projects in Education Inc.
Gibbons, P. (2002). Scaffolding language, Scaffolding
learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Linquanti, R. & Hakuta, K. (2012). How Next-Generation
Standards and Assessments Can Foster Success for
California’s English Learners. Palo Alto, CA: Policy Analysis
for California Education and Rennie Center for Education
Research & Policy.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices,
Council of Chief State School Officers (2010). Common
Core State Standards. Washington, DC: National
Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council
of Chief State School Officers.
Soto, I. (2014). Moving from Spoken to Written Language.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Soto, I. (2012). ELL Shadowing as an Urgency for Change.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Understanding Language Initiative. (2012). Available at
http://ell.stanford.edu/
Dr. Ivannia Soto is associate professor of
Education at Whittier College, where she
specializes in second language acquisition,
systemic reform for English language learners
(ELLs), and urban education. She has presented
on literacy and language topics at various
national conferences, and as a consultant has
worked with a variety of districts and county
offices in California, providing technical assistance for systemic reform for ELLs and Title
III. Soto is the co-author of The Literacy Gaps:
Building Bridges for ELLs and SELs, as well as
the author of ELL Shadowing as a Catalyst for
Change and From Spoken to Written Language
with ELLs, all published by Corwin Press.
19
Asian and Pacific Islander
Marginalized Voices
of Interracial Families
in Heritage Language
Education
Kwangjong Park, Ph.D., University of New Mexico
Most studies on issues around language maintenance and loss
have focused on children of immigrant families, especially when
both parents are from the same minority ethnic groups and speak
a minority language at home exclusively or to some degree.
However, little is known about the linguistic trajectories of nontraditional heritage language learners, such as adoptees, children
of interracial families, and later generation of immigrants (Lee
and Shin, 2008; Shin, 2010). Particularly, the high rate of heritage
language attrition among second generation Koreans has drawn
special interest to scholars (Lee and Shin, 2008). Yet, there has been
a paucity of studies of Korean heritage language learners who
come from non-traditional and diverse backgrounds.
This paucity of studies may be due
to the misconception that Koreans are
known as a racially/ethnically homogeneous group and Koreans’ monolithic ideology conceptualizing Koreans with pure
blood and homogeneity, which in turn
sets diverse backgrounds of Koreans apart
20
from the group of a “real Korean” (Lim,
2008). In addition, whereas most people
assume that the first generation of interracial families is bilingual, intermarriage
has contributed to heritage language loss
since the language of power, prestige, and
privilege becomes the household language
in interracial families (Diamond, 1994).
Based on the 2009 American Community
Survey (ACS) of single Asian population
aged 5 and over, 77% spoke a language
other than English at home whereas only
18% of Asians who reported two or more
races spoke a language other than English
at home. This indicates that the percentage of people using only English as a
household language increased exponentially through interracial marriage.
Therefore, this study on the trajectories
of language experiences and subsequent
social and cultural experiences of biracial
Korean youth can give insights into the
heritage language education for non-traditional and diverse backgrounds of heritage
language learners. Four youth (three female
and one male) and their Korean parents
(two female and one male) participated in
the study. The age range of participants was
17 to 21. All participants reported their
first language as English and their Korean
fluency was self-reported as a beginning
level. Participants were selected based on
the following criteria: (1) a first generation
of being biracial, (2) children of parents
with two different racial/ethnic heritage
(one of the parents should be a Korean
American immigrant). This study took
place in a southwestern state known as a
“majority minority” state with high concentrations of Hispanic and Native American
populations. According to the 2010 U.S.
census, Koreans represent 0.15% of the
total state population.
This study addressed the following questions: How do biracial (Korean plus another
racial/ethnic background) youth come to
understand their sense of self? This overarching question involved two sub-questions: (1)
what role do languages play in this process?
and (2) what other experiences shape selfidentification? Data was collected through
individual interviews, a focus group interview, dyad and triad interviews and selfreported questionnaires. The interviews were
conducted through semi-constructed, openended and in-depth questions. Since the
author had been a Korean language teacher
in the Korean community for 10 years and
involved in the Korean community, the
researcher’s field notes and relationship with
participants became critical resources to
this study. An individual interview lasted
30-60 minutes and a focus group interview
and dyad and triad interviews lasted 1 to 2
hours. All interviews were audio-recorded.
The findings of the study show three themes
underlying adolescents’ biracial experiences:
(1) being doubly otherized, (2) their parents’
socialization practices, and (3) their evolving
interpretations with self-identification. First,
doubly otherized refers to the experience of
being outsiders not only in their racial/ethnic group but also the mainstream (ComasDiaz, 1996). Hence, I regard the “Doubly
othering experience” as a way in which biracial adolescents’ appearances and languages
contributed to the participants’ feelings of
incompetency, discomfort and isolation in
terms of authenticity of Americanness and
Koreanness compared to their American and
Korean counterparts. Biracial adolescents’
doubly otherized experience resulted from
Koreans’ monolithic ideology conceptualizing Koreans with pure blood and homogeneity (Lim, 2008) and people’s concept
of White as American and nonwhites as
foreigners (Takaki, 1993). Second, the parents’ socialization practices refers to the ways
Parents and family members should be
educated about challenges that their
biracial children encounter and encourage
them to explore their multiple identities
and to build a positive sense of self.
in which participants felt rejected and marginalized due to their parents’ socialization
practices focusing on imposing American
identity and emphasizing social, cultural and
linguistic capital of the mainstream. Korean
American parents’ adoption of two ideologies, patriarchal and monoracial/monoethnic
ideology defining Korean as pure blood and
homogeneity and American assimilationist
language ideology endowing English as a
symbolic indicator of authenticity as a real
American, also contributed to their biracial
children’s othering experience. Finally, evolving interpretations of their experiences refer
to the biracial adolescents’ different views on
identity-related events that were contingent
on the interplay between their own individual characteristics and situations in a given
time and place.
Findings suggest that parents need
to understand the multiplicity of their
biracial children’s heritages and identities.
Socialization practices that impose a particular identity and language on biracial
youth may lead them to discern themselves
from their Korean communities. In addition, since parents do not ethnically socialize their children, their biracial children are
not prepared to deal with societal discrimination and stereotypes toward minorities.
In turn, imposing a language and a culture
may lead these biracial youth to shame
their heritages and build a negative sense of
self. Parents and family members should be
educated about challenges that their biracial
children encounter and encourage them
to explore their multiple identities and
to build a positive sense of self. Whereas
studies have shown that Korean American
churches have a positive influence on the
Korean identity of Korean American students (Char, 2001; Pak, 2003), this study
shows that Korean American churches
reinforced the biracial youths’ estrangement from the Korean community because
the youth were unfamiliar with the Korean
linguistic and cultural knowledge necessary
for appropriate social interactions in Korean
cultural and social milieu. Also, participants
interpreted comments about their physical
features, language fluency, and names as
disapproval of legitimacy of their authenticity as Korean and/or American.
The participants discussed that they were
often expected to represent Korean culture
and language, which gave them feelings of
incompetence and a sense of shame due to
unfamiliarity with ancestral background
knowledge. One participant commented,
“People assume that I am Asian but you
know I’m in the middle so I just want them
to understand that I have grown up here…
I want them to understand that I am not
really culturally very different [from them]”.
Pinpointing minority cultures as an exotic
and different culture from the norm reinforces the ways in which minority cultures
deviate from the norm.
This study sheds light on heritage language learners who do not fit the traditional
profile of the heritage language learners.
All four biracial youth discussed straddling
between people’s dichotomous and binary
concept of identity and their multiplicity
and fluidity of identities due to their dual
heritages; “being half, you’re one and the
other and everything, but you’re not really
both, but you’re really one or the other…
it would be nice to identify with one and
not have to straddle the line”. Participants
indicated that while Korean language would
serve as an important foundation for biracial
youth as they explored their choices of identities and move toward fulfilling their sense
21
that they are not marginalized in heritage
language, but it is not for my children in
the future.” This alarming view on Korean
as a heritage language may lead to rapid
language loss among this non-traditional
profile of heritage language learners due
to the failure of intergenerational transmission of heritage language. Listening
to these marginalized voices will not only
strengthen cultural and linguistic bonds
in different generations but also benefit to
enrich national resources.
language schools. A participant noted that
References:
Educators need to cater to students’
various degrees of ethnic and linguistic
socialization and different backgrounds so
“Korean might be my heritage language,
but it is not for my children in the future.”
This alarming view on Korean as a heritage
language may lead to rapid language
loss among this non-traditional profile
Cha, P. T. (2001). Ethnic identity formation and participation
in immigrant churches: Second-generation Korean
American experiences. In H.Y. Kwon, K. C. Kim, and R.
S. Warner (Eds.), Korean Americans and their religions:
Pilgrims and missionaries from a different shore (pp. 141156). University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University
Press.
Comas-Diaz, L. (1996). LatiNegra: Mental health issues
of African Latinas. In M.P.P. Root (Ed.), The multiracial
experience: Racial borders as the new frontier (pp. 167190). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Diamond, J. (1994). Speaking with a single tongue. In
V.P. Clark, P.A. Eschholz & A.F. Rosa (Eds.), Language:
Introductory readings (pp. 692-701). New York: St. Martin’s
Press.
of heritage language learners due to the
Lee, J. S. (2002). The Korean language in America: The role
of cultural identity and heritage language. Language,
Culture, and Curriculum, 15, 117-133.
failure of intergenerational transmission
Lee, J.S. & Shin, S.J. (2008). The Korean language education
in the United States: The current State, opportunities,
and possibilities. Heritage Language Journal. 6(2), 1-20.
of heritage language.
Lim, T.C. (2008). Who is Korean? Migration, immigration,
and the challenge of multiculturalism in homogenous
societies. The Asia-Pacific Journal, 30, 1-9.
Pak, H. (2003). When MT is L2: The Korean church
as a context for cultural identity. In N. Horberger
(Ed.). Continua of biliteracy (pp. 269-290). Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters.
of self, lack of Korean fluency contributed
to their marginalized and dissonant feelings
towards a Korean ethnic community. In
turn, this feeling may lead them to lose their
motivation to learn their heritage and their
heritage language.
As heritage language learners’ backgrounds continue to diversify and become
complex, researchers need to pay attention to underrepresented and marginalized
voices from heritage language education.
Doing so will lead us to understand different issues and challenges that traditional heritage language learners do not
face. This study’s findings show that
participants negotiate multiple identities by consciously shifting the ways in
which they identified their racial and ethnic background in different cultural and
social milieu at a given time. The youth
in this study learned to represent different
layers of their identities by strategically
and situationally maneuvering within
22
the dissonance between people’s perceptions and their own perceptions of their
identities as a result of their cognitive and
psychological maturity, and the expansion
of their social context. Therefore, educators and educational researchers should
understand youths’ identity development
as a multiple and fluid process and provide
opportunities to explore their multiple
identities.
Heritage language educators often
assume that students of Korean heritage
already possess some degree of Korean linguistic and cultural knowledge. However,
these assumptions can marginalize Korean
heritage language learners with diverse
backgrounds in Korean ethnic communities (Shin, 2010). Educators need to cater
to students’ various degrees of ethnic and
linguistic socialization and different backgrounds so that they are not marginalized
in heritage language schools. A participant
noted that “Korean might be my heritage
Shin, S. J. (2010). What about me? I’m not like Chinese but
I’m not like American: Heritage- language learning and
identity of mixed-heritage adults. Journal of Language,
Identity, and Education, 9, 203–219.
Takaki, R.T. (1993). A different mirror: A history of multicultural
America. Boston: Little Brown & Co.
Kwangjong Park is a postdoctoral fellow at
the University of New Mexico. She has taught
Korean for 12 years at new Mexico Korean
Language School, and has also served on its
advisory committee. She can be reached at
[email protected].
Indigenous Bilingual Education
Science vs. Education:
Indigenous Students
in the Crossfire
Jon Reyhner, Northern Arizona University
The statement of purpose of the No Child
Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 calls for
“promoting schoolwide reform and ensuring
the access of children to effective, scientifically based instructional strategies and challenging academic content.” However, the
call for “scientifically based instructional
strategies” belies the challenges faced in conducting educational research generally (see
e.g., Lagemann, 2000; Berliner, 2013) and
the cultural differences American Indian and
other Indigenous students can exhibit (see
e.g., Reyhner & Singh, 2013).
One only needs to look at the research
on race used to support Jim Crow and antimiscegenation laws by some of the greatest
scientists of the day in the late 19th and
early 20th century so well described in
Stephen J. Gould’s The Mismeasure of Man
to have doubts about putting our faith in
science, especially when scientists study
controversial issues surrounding race and
ethnicity. The late Native American scholar
Jack D. Forbes (2000, p. 8) argues,
there is reason to believe that the push
for “standards” is actually an attempt
to destroy multiculturalism, pluralism,
and non-Anglo ethnic-specific curriculum by forcing all public schools
to adhere to a curriculum approved by
centralized agencies controlled by white
people. The standards are to be enforced
by means of constant testing of students
(and often of teachers) based solely on the
centrally approved curriculum…. What
standardized tests surely do is to force
upon states, localities, and regions a collectivist “testing culture” that negates the
unique heritages, dialects, and values of
a particular area. Native nations and the
schools serving their pupils will most likely
become as assimilationistic as the pre1928 BIA boarding and mission schools.
In addition, American Indians and other
Indigenous students are rarely adequately
represented in educational research to
the point where there is real doubt as to
whether the research conclusions can really
be applied to them with confidence. Factors
external to classrooms—especially living in
poverty (see e.g., Berliner, 2005) and parents’ education level—also bear on educational outcomes regardless of teacher quality,
curriculum, and instructional practices. The
U.S. Census 2010 American Community
Survey found 35% of American Indian students living in poverty and 20% growing up
in families where the head of the household
does not have a high school diploma (KIDS
COUNT, 2012).
Terry Huffman (2010) in Theoretical
Perspectives on American Indian Education
examines research specifically targeting
American Indians and discards older “cultural deficit” explanations used to explain
the academic performance of American
Indian students and scrutinizes newer
theories that look at cultural discontinuity
between home and school. His review of
research supports the idea that American
Indian students with strong tribal identities can draw strength from them, giving
those students the resilience and persistence needed to be successful in school
and life. His study supports both/and,
bilingual/bicultural educational approaches
that support American Indian languages
and cultures while also teaching students
English and about the United States and
the increasingly globalized world we all
live in today. As Sioux teacher and author
Luther Standing Bear wrote 80 years ago,
Indigenous youth need to be “doubly educated” so that they learn “to appreciate
both their traditional life and modern life”
(1933, p. 252).
Huffman examines cultural discontinuity, structural inequality, interactionalist, and
transculturation theories and the evidence
supporting them, seeking to understand
American Indian student academic performance. Four chapters comprehensively
exploring and critiquing the research supporting each theory follow an excellent overview of American Indian education scholarship in chapter one. Reprints of four seminal educational journal articles are included,
each of which provides research backing for
one of the theories. His concluding chapter
examines emerging Indigenous/decolonization approaches to the study of American
Indian education, including Tribal Critical
Race Theory, the Family Education Model
and the Medicine Wheel Culturally Intrinsic
Research Paradigm.
23
All the theories Huffman examines
along with the emerging approaches have
implications about making classroom curriculum and teaching methods reflect and
support the cultural/tribal background
of American Indian students. A major
researcher and proponent of the transculturation theory, Huffman supports the
idea that American Indian students with
strong tribal identities can draw strength
from those identities, enabling them to
persevere and be successful students. Much
of the newer research Huffman describes
supports constructivist instructional
approaches that emphasize the importance
of teachers utilizing and building on the
background knowledge that students bring
with them into the classroom from their
home, community and previous school
experiences. This constructivist approach
is also supported more generally in the
National Research Council’s reports How
People Learn (2000) and How Students
Learn (2005) as well as in the assisted performance approach advocated by Roland
Tharp and Ronald Gallimore in Rousing
Minds to Life (1988).
Examining educational research and
disaggregating test scores by ethnic group as
mandated by NCLB makes a lot of sense.
However, too often the research being used
at most minimally involves Indigenous children and thus has very limited application
to them. The report of a national colloquium on improving academic performance
among American Indian, Alaska Native and
Native Hawaiian students published in 2006
in the Journal of American Indian Education
(Vol. 45, issues 1 & 2) indicates the need
for culturally and linguistically appropriate
education for American Indian and other
Indigenous students.
Innovative Indigenous language and culture immersion programs are showing success with students (Reyhner, 2010, 2013). It
is critical that we get longitudinal research
tracking the academic and social gains made
by students in these programs at least into
college as a means of supporting or rejecting
anecdotal findings of lower dropout rates,
positive identities, and greater academic
success for Indigenous students who are in
culturally appropriate educational programs.
References
Berliner, D. C. (2013). Educational research: The hardest
science of all. Educational Researcher, 31(8), 18–20
Berliner, D. C. (2005). Our impoverished view of educational
reform. Teachers College Record 108(6), 949–995.
Forbes, J.D. (2000). The new assimilationist movement:
Standards, tests, and Anglo-American supremacy.
Journal of American Indian Education, 39(2), 7-28.
Gould, S.J. (1981). The mismeasure of man, New York: W. W.
Norton
Huffman, Terry. (2010). Theoretical perspectives on American
Indian education: Taking a new look at academic success
and the achievement gap. Lanham, MD: AltaMira.
KIDS COUNT Data Book. (2012). Baltimore, MD: Annie E.
Casey Foundation.
history of education research. Chicago: University of
Chicago.
National Research Council, Commission on Behavioral
and Social Science Education. (2005). How students
learn: History, mathematics, and science in the classroom.
Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
National Research Council, Commission on Behavioral and
Social Science Education. (2000). How people learn: Brain,
mind, experience, and school. Washington, D.C.: National
Academy Press.
Reyhner, J. (2013). Improving American Indian education
through best practices. In J. Ross (ed.), American Indians
at risk (599-614). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.
Reyhner, J. (2010). Indigenous language immersion schools
for strong Indigenous identities. Heritage Language
Journal, 7 (2), 138–52.
Reyhner, J. & Singh, N. K. (2013). Culturally responsive
education for Indigenous communities. In R. Craven, G.
Bodkin-Andres & J. Mooney (eds.), Indigenous peoples
(pp. 139-159). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Standing Bear, L. (1933). The land of the spotted eagle.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Tharp, R. G., & Gallimore, R. (1988). Rousing minds to
life: Teaching, learning, and schooling in social context.
Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Dr. Reyhner He also has edited since 1990
a regular column on indigenous bilingual
education in the National Association
for Bilingual Education’s magazine, now
called Perspectives. Since 1995 he has been
at Northern Arizona University where he
is currently a professor teaching bilingual
multicultural education courses. He is recognized in “The NAU Legacy: People Making a
Difference” for “Pioneering a New Culture of
Education.” He has developed web sites on:
• American Indian / Indigenous Education
• Teaching Indigenous Languages
Lagemann, E. C. 2000. An elusive science: The troubling
Examining educational research and disaggregating test
scores by ethnic group as mandated by NCLB makes a lot
of sense. However, too often the research being used at
most minimally involves Indigenous children and thus has
very limited application to them.
24

joshua a. fishman

Transcription

Similar documents

Customer`s recommendations using the SCI technology:

FL7891-R3 Florida Product Approval for International Beams I

the ESL/Bilingual newsletter.

- Tree cactus is-afSOToundonlower

Supersedes Villages Truck Tonnage and Parking

Viewing Banner Finance Documents in VCU eServices

OL396 Gunwharf Quay

Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher

Master Money Mentor - UF/IFAS Sarasota County Extension

JOB DESCRIPTION: INSIDE SALES REPRESENTATIVE