03-15-2003, 02:51 AM
Now that I'm working as a teacher, I find myself with less and less time to discuss the state of education on the various fora. Please forgive me for not jumping in sooner.
I'm a certified ESL teacher, although most of my experience with English language learners has been in a mainstream classroom or in a tutoring environment. I have worked as a substitute ESL teacher, but only for a few days total. I currently teach in a bilingual preschool, although English is the only language in which I am fluent. Please note that I have no teaching experience beyond fifth grade, and I am aware that the dynamics of ESL shift dramatically when looking at children who enter the system in middle or high school. My comments relate to elementary ESL.
While learning English is a goal of ESL, I do not believe that an ESL program would be complete if that were its only goal. A major concern is that ESL students will fall behind academically while they are in the process of learning English. ESL programs can help support students by teaching content-specific vocabulary and providing support in a setting that has a lower student-teacher ratio.
Another concern is that bilingual students often lose their native language proficiency. Or, they may not develop proficieny in their native language that extends beyond basic conversational fluency. While you may argue that English is the unofficial official language of the USA, and that we have no responsibility to teach students another language, profociency in an additional language (or more) is certainly an asset in today's world.
It is true that education is an ongoing, non-controlled experiment, but I don't see that situation changing any time soon. My local elementary school has recently implemented the dual-immersion model, and I'm in favor of it even though it's only in its second year at the moment (actually, I'll be enrolling my daughter in the program next year, although sometimes I am conforted by the fact that I know we will be able to support her education at home regardless of the school situation). The school's dual immersion model creates a class with 50% native Spanish speakers and 50% native English speakers and a bilingual teacher. Instruction is in Spanish and English, but the teacher does *not* translate everything- then (s)he would only have time to cover half the content! The goal is for both groups of student to be fluent and academically proficient in English and Spanish, clearly a benefit to both groups of children.
This program does not use the traditional "pull out" model of ESL. In fact, it doesn't take significantly more resources than a traditional classroom, since it still uses one teacher per classroom. One could reasonably argue that resources for a bilingual classroom are not as inexpensive as English resources in the USA, but that may change over time.
I'm out of time to type more on the subject now, but I think I've at least touched on most of your concerns about ESL, although I may have left a few too many loose ends. I'll check back later and see if I have anything to add. :)
-Griselda
I'm a certified ESL teacher, although most of my experience with English language learners has been in a mainstream classroom or in a tutoring environment. I have worked as a substitute ESL teacher, but only for a few days total. I currently teach in a bilingual preschool, although English is the only language in which I am fluent. Please note that I have no teaching experience beyond fifth grade, and I am aware that the dynamics of ESL shift dramatically when looking at children who enter the system in middle or high school. My comments relate to elementary ESL.
While learning English is a goal of ESL, I do not believe that an ESL program would be complete if that were its only goal. A major concern is that ESL students will fall behind academically while they are in the process of learning English. ESL programs can help support students by teaching content-specific vocabulary and providing support in a setting that has a lower student-teacher ratio.
Another concern is that bilingual students often lose their native language proficiency. Or, they may not develop proficieny in their native language that extends beyond basic conversational fluency. While you may argue that English is the unofficial official language of the USA, and that we have no responsibility to teach students another language, profociency in an additional language (or more) is certainly an asset in today's world.
It is true that education is an ongoing, non-controlled experiment, but I don't see that situation changing any time soon. My local elementary school has recently implemented the dual-immersion model, and I'm in favor of it even though it's only in its second year at the moment (actually, I'll be enrolling my daughter in the program next year, although sometimes I am conforted by the fact that I know we will be able to support her education at home regardless of the school situation). The school's dual immersion model creates a class with 50% native Spanish speakers and 50% native English speakers and a bilingual teacher. Instruction is in Spanish and English, but the teacher does *not* translate everything- then (s)he would only have time to cover half the content! The goal is for both groups of student to be fluent and academically proficient in English and Spanish, clearly a benefit to both groups of children.
This program does not use the traditional "pull out" model of ESL. In fact, it doesn't take significantly more resources than a traditional classroom, since it still uses one teacher per classroom. One could reasonably argue that resources for a bilingual classroom are not as inexpensive as English resources in the USA, but that may change over time.
I'm out of time to type more on the subject now, but I think I've at least touched on most of your concerns about ESL, although I may have left a few too many loose ends. I'll check back later and see if I have anything to add. :)
-Griselda
Why can't we all just get along
--Pete
--Pete