Bilingual education programs aim at easing the non-English speaker into the English academic environment by teaching content classes in the native language. (Freeman, 1996)     In an  English-dominant school, programs that separate Hispanic students from the student body to teach them in Spanish, inhibit these students from integrating into the student body and participating fully in the mainstream education process (Hruska, 2000)  The education Spanish speakers in a bilingual or dual language program receive can be inferior to that which English speakers receive in the same school. (1)

    Barbara Hruska examines the relationship between Hispanic students in a setting where English monolingualism is the norm for most students and teachers.  She stresses that English is not only an academic language but also the means to communicate socially.  When students are  fluent in the language which is used in the mainstream society, the students are able to integrate and feel connected  not only to their peers but the community as well.  When students who are learning English are pulled out of their mainstream classrooms and taken to other classrooms to learn in the native language, social integration is disrupted.  The friendships formed are with other Spanish speaking children rather than with English speaking children in the mainstream class.  While Hruska is a strong advocate of bilingual education, she questions the value of a pull-out program which isolates the Hispanic students for hours of the school day. Hruska firmly believes that a bilingual model which integrates Spanish speaking students into the mainstream classroom for instruction in the best way to achieve integration and therefore equality in the classroom. (2)

    Hruska points out that programs which are offered by a school system reflect the ideologies of the community.  If the community does not value diversity then the school programs will not be adequate for attaining diversity.  For example, in the New England school system  she studies,  a bilingual education program  is state mandated but student participation in the program is voluntary.  By creating  a voluntary program which emphasizes transition from native language instruction to English as a second language instruction, the state demonstrates the low status of Spanish and bilingualism.  Students who belong to the low status group will not be treated equally.  Hruska believes that in order to receive equal education, the student’s native language has to be valued in a visible way throughout school programs.

    The bilingual model which Hruska proposes might be found in a dual language program.  A dual language model combines native English speakers with Spanish speakers and divides the day and grade level content areas into a Spanish learning segment and an English learning segment.  Most dual language programs are created to develop native like proficiency in a second language while maintaining fluency in the first language.   (Freeman, 1996)

    Audrey Amrein and Robert Pena examine dual language programs and suggest that programs need to be analyzed individually because their success is affected by the environment in which the program is developed. They find that the context of the program can determine its success or failure.  For example, Amrein and Pena study a dual language program in the Leigh Elementary School District in Phoenix, Arizona to check for fairness and equality for the Hispanic students.  In this school system, 81% of the students are Mexican-American and only 11% ethnic majority.  The population is socio-economically homogeneous with 97% participation in the free and reduced lunch program.  The study checks for symmetry between use of the two languages and progress in  both languages by the students.

    Amrein and Pena show that the Spanish speaking students suffer asymmetrically because of the lack of adequate bilingual staff and sufficient curriculum resources in Spanish. The teachers available to teach in a dual language program have to be fluent in the language they teach.  In this program, most English teachers speak only English whereas the Spanish teachers speak both languages.  As a result, when the English speaking students do not understand a concept while in the Spanish content class, the bilingual teacher   translates into English.  That means that the student is learning in English rather than the target language.  Using the non-target language weakens the Spanish part of the dual language model for both Hispanic students and English speakers.  (4) Not only is English used more than Spanish for instruction but since Spanish books and resources are more costly and less available, the Spanish language part of the program is not reinforced with supplementary materials like the English part of the program.  Therefore the Spanish speaking students are not gaining the same amount of content instruction, practice and reinforcement that the English speakers receive.

    Another aspect of dual language programs which Amrein and Pena study is the social/political clout of the two target languages.  Even though the program was developed to be a ‘great equalizer’, the students who speak only Spanish are left out because the English and bilingual students switch to English. (p12)  (5) Also, the study shows that English is seen as a more valuable language with a higher status and therefore students do not consider learning Spanish as a desirable goal.  Because of the code switching to English, even in the Spanish instruction time, the students in the dual language program become apathetic about mastering Spanish.  The Spanish speaking students feel left out of the social environment until they learn English.  Therefore, the bilingual aspect of the dual language program does not provide equitable education in Spanish for the Hispanic students.

    Amrein and Pena conclude with a caution that  would be of interest to Hruska.  They state,  ‘Without a systematic review of their practices, dual language programs may be subjecting students to inequality, to fewer educational opportunities, and to policies and practices that  separate students according to race, ethnicity and language orientation. “  (p.13)

    In an article which examines a bilingual program in New Mexico, Rita Martinez enlarges on Hruska’s theory that the ideologies of the decision makers at  the administrative levels of planning school programs influence the value of the programs and therefore the quality of education which Hispanic students receive. Martinez takes the progression one step further by including the attitude of the classroom teacher as an important component of whether Hispanic children will receive equal education.

    The state  mandates a program but the district and the school site develop the program.  The classroom teacher is responsible for delivering.  Martinez uses a bilingual program at  Mariposa Elementary School in New Mexico to illustrate her point.   The state mandates that bilingual programs have to be available .  The district says that funding is limited and informs the schools that there are not many certified, bilingual teachers available.  Also, the money for program development is limited. This sends the message to the schools and the teachers that the program is not a priority.  Each school is left to develop its own program with little guidance or district support.  There are no salary incentives for recruitment or training of bilingual teachers.  Also, the state does not accept bilingual certification from other states.  The result is a limited bilingual program which has limited resources, limited curriculum materials and possibly a teacher who was drafted into the position rather than volunteering for it. The students will not receive quality education in an unequal situation like this. (Amrein and Pena, 2000)

    Martinez believes that teachers reflect the views of the ‘dominant culture’ (p. 3) According to Martinez,  dominant culture espouses that even if Spanish is taught in the school, the goal should be transition to English because Spanish is not a status language and the school is an English speaking institution.  As a result, teachers, even in a bilingual program, tend to promote the use of English and the development of English skills.  This weakens the Spanish education of the Hispanic child and devalues the home language.

    At Mariposa, teachers tried and abandoned a number of bilingual teaching models.  Most teachers interviewed by Martinez felt that the bilingual program was a failure and it did not ensure quality education for Hispanic students. Most bilingual teachers returned to teaching in English or requested a pull-out program for their Hispanic students during the academic year.  Reasons for the failure center on  inadequate staffing, unwillingness to teach in a bilingual program, insufficient materials and planning for the program and the overall school climate.  Teachers feel that they were not trained to teach in a bilingual program and resent being told to do so.  Martinez puts the responsibility for delivering a quality program on the teachers.  In her study, she shows that when the teachers have a negative attitude towards the program they have to teach, the students do not receive quality education.

    The three articles cited above (Hruska, Martinez and Amrein and Pena)   show that the bilingual education program is providing unequal instruction to Hispanic students.  Nancy Mae Antrim examines a school along the El Paso/Ciudad Juarez border which has a bilingual program as well as  monolingual instruction.  Antrim’s article focuses on student attitudes towards Spanish in a school which has both a bilingual program and a pull-out ESL program.  I found her statistics on proficiency and fluency in Spanish an interesting adjunct to the views expressed by Hruska, Martinez and Amrein.  The other authors state in their articles that the reason  bilingual education is so important to Hispanic students is the belief that students need to learn content information in the native language. Antrim examines  the attitudes towards Spanish versus English with students who have participated in an elementary bilingual program and compares them with students who learned in English.  Antrim looks at attitudes.  I looked at proficiency in Spanish results.  Antrim reports that 72% of the students in the bilingual programs say they speak and understand Spanish at the ‘excellent’ or ‘very good level’.  But for reading and writing the percentages for those categories drop to 44%.  That says to me that Spanish speakers are entering the bilingual program fluent in Spanish and coming out of it fluent and confident in speaking Spanish, but they are not learning the academic content of reading and writing.  Where is the value of the bilingual education program?

    Fundamental questions about bilingual education for the Spanish speaking child remain unanswered.    By isolating Spanish speakers and teaching them in Spanish, are the schools hindering these children from integrating into the student body and therefore inhibiting them from participating fully in academic life?   When examining bilingual education, the main concern educators must have is whether the Hispanic child is receiving inferior education because of his attendance in a bilingual program.  (6)

References

Amrein, A.,& Pena, R. A. (2000, January 13), Asymmetry in dual language practice:     assessing imbalance in  a    program promoting equality. Education Policy Analysis   Archives,  Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n8,html

Antrim, Nancy Mae (1999, October), Language at the elementary school.  Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Linguistics Association of the Southwest, San Antonio, Tx.

Freeman, R.D. (1996),  Dual language planning at Oyster Bilingual School:  “It’s much more  than language”.  TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 30, No.3,  557-582.

Hruska, Barbara, L. (2000, October), Ideologies, programs and practices:  implications for   second language learners.  Paper presented at the Puerto Rican Studies    Association Conference, Amherst, Ma.

Martinez, Rita R. (1998, April) Classroom teachers; view of a bilingual program.  Paper   presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association,  San Diego, Ca.