Language Policy Processes and Consequences: Arizona Case Studies (Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 98, Band 98) - Hardcover

Hardcover

ISBN 10: 1783091940 ISBN 13: 9781783091942

Verlag: Multilingual Matters, 2014

Inhaltsangabe

This book traces the recent socio-historical trajectory of educational language policy in Arizona, the state with the most restrictive English-only implementation in the US. Chapters, each representing a case study of policy-making in the state, include: ¿ an overview and background of the English-only movement, the genesis of Structured English Immersion (SEI), and current status of language policy in Arizona; ¿ an in-depth review of the Flores case presented by its lead lawyer; ¿ a look at early Proposition 203 implementation in the context of broader educational 'reform' efforts; ¿ examples of how early state-wide mandates impacted teacher professional development; ¿ a presentation of how new university-level teacher preparation curricula misaligns with commonly-held beliefs about what teachers of language minority students should know and understand; ¿ an exploration of principals' concerns about enforcing top-down policies for SEI implementation; ¿ an investigation of what SEI policy looks like in today's classrooms and whether it constitutes equity; ¿ and finally, a discussion of what the various cases mean for the education of English learners in the state.

Über diesen Titel

Über die Autorin bzw. den Autor

Sarah Catherine K. Moore is a Program Director at the Center for Applied Linguistics, Washington, DC. Her research interests include educational language policy, teacher preparation, curriculum and instruction for language learners and policy implementation.

Auszug. © Genehmigter Nachdruck. Alle Rechte vorbehalten.

Language Policy Processes and Consequences

Arizona Case Studies

By Sarah Catherine K. Moore

Multilingual Matters

Copyright © 2014 Sarah Catherine K. Moore and the authors of individual chapters
All rights reserved.

ISBN: 978-1-78309-194-2

Contents

List of Contributors, 
1 SEI in Arizona: Bastion for States' Rights Karen E. Lillie and Sarah Catherine K. Moore, 
2 Flores v. Arizona Tim Hogan, 
3 Proposition 203 and Arizona's Early School Reform Efforts: The Nullification of Accommodations Wayne E. Wright, 
4 Ensuring Oversight: Statewide SEI Teacher Professional Development Sarah Catherine K. Moore, 
5 (Mis)aligned Curricula: The Case of New Course Content Amy Markos and Beatriz Arias, 
6 Exploring Principals' Concerns Regarding the Implementation of Arizona's Mandated SEI Model Giovanna Grijalva and Margarita Jimenez-Silva, 
7 The Four-hour Block: SEI in Classrooms Karen E. Lillie and Amy Markos, 
8 Conclusion: The Consequences of Nullification Terrence G. Wiley, 
Index, 

CHAPTER 1

SEI in Arizona: Bastion for States' Rights

Karen E. Lillie and Sarah Catherine K. Moore

Those involved in making and enforcing public school policy should ensure that their actions are lawful.

La Morte, 2008: 1

Recent discussions on educational language policy, particularly in contexts involving restriction, compulsory or repression-oriented policies (e.g. Wiley, 2007, 2010, 2013), have discussed the power of state governments over school law and federal policy. Federal laws have played an important role in monitoring K–12 educational settings despite the fact that public education is not specifically mentioned in the US Constitution (La Morte, 2008). Federal regulation is due, in part, to funding and oversight under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). State governments, however, particularly through state statutes and school board rules, tend to have a heavier hand in educational policy matters, more so than at the local government level. As La Morte (2008) discusses, there is a 'myth of local control' in education policy – while many believe that local districts have control over schools, the power truly often lies within state governments, since they are responsible for dispersing funds to schools and districts. A problematic issue within the structure of school funding is that all three levels of government have a say in what happens in schools, and it is rare that all three agree. Situated within the complexity of contextual issues, such as the politics, economy and ideologies inherent around language and schooling, the effects of language policies on educational settings can be potentially devastating in their execution. Such is the case in Arizona.

English-Only in the US: A Brief History

The United States is multilingual in its nature, a nation founded by immigrants. A largely held myth is that English is its official language. English may be the de facto language, but by no means is English the sole language through which all persons conduct themselves. Throughout US history, language has been taken for granted and often contested during eras when politics, financial considerations and national defense issues emerged as contentious, and during which opposition to the perceived influx of immigrants 'taking over' increased. Widespread desires for declaring English as the national language of the United States, which would further weaken the status of minority languages, emerged early in this nation's history (Cashman, 2006; Crawford, 2000a, 2000b, 2004; Wiley, 2004, 2013; Wiley & Wright, 2004; Wright, 2011).

The US Constitution does not identify one language de jure; in fact, when its authors debated the question of language, such codification was deemed unnecessary due to the dominance of English (Kloss, 1998 [1977]; Wiley, 2004, 2010). Benjamin Franklin was one of the earliest to publicly argue against any type of bilingualism and push for an official English status. This occurred with the Pennsylvania Germans (Cashman, 2006; Crawford, 2000a, 2000b; Wiley, 2004). Once Franklin realized that the votes he needed were from those for whom English was not their dominant language, Franklin changed his mind and began withholding his English-only sentiments in an effort to embrace his desired political allies.

Pockets of English-only ideologies swept through other areas of the US territories as time passed and land was conquered. Meanwhile, Louisiana maintained bilingualism rigorously, despite once struggling against an imposed English-only governor in the mid-1800s. Native Americans were aggressively stripped of land and their languages to the point where language loss is significant and troubling even today (Del Valle, 2003; McCarty, 2004; Weinberg, 1995). The 'civilize the savage' notion was born, in part, out of nationalist-oriented sentiment, and the language policies surrounding actions against the Native population were highly repressive in nature and ideologically driven (see, especially, McCarty, 2013, on language policies affecting Native Americans; also Wiley, 2007, 2010). The Spanish-speaking population in California was also denied land, as greaser laws came into effect (Crawford, 2000a, 2000b; see also Del Valle, 2003). Under the California Land Act of 1851, English was used as a means of dominance, requiring Californios to demonstrate land ownership via English-only courts. In Hawai'ian schools, children were routinely assigned to certain schools based on their English proficiency (Lippi-Green, 2012; Wiley, 2010; Wilson, 2014). Hawai'ians succeeded to some extent, however, in maintaining their language while also adding English as a language of wider communication. Beginning with the First World War of the 20th century, xenophobic sentiments spread the idea that to be a 'Good American' one must have 'Good English' (Crawford, 2000a, 2000b). Thus, those who were seen as non-English-speaking were persecuted (e.g. Germans, Japanese) and in some cases even placed in internment camps on American soil.

Sociohistorical trends over the past couple hundred years demonstrate tendencies toward repression- and restrictive-oriented language policies throughout US history, as evidenced by some language policy scholars who have attempted to make sure policy lessons are learned from history (Wiley, 2007, 2013; also Crawford, 2000a, 2000b; Gándara et al., 2010), particularly in regard to discussions on the history of bilingual education in the States (e.g. Wright, 2011; also García, 2009). The adage of history repeating itself when unknown is exemplified by the most recent 30 years of language policy and bilingual education in the United States. This recent wave of English-only sentiment began in a traditionally liberal state (California), and has touched one of the country's first states which had previously championed bilingualism (Massachusetts). This more current surge of attempts at bolstering the position and use of English in the US has been primarily aimed at education, and is known as the English-Only Movement (Crawford, 2000a, 2004).

The English-Only Movement

The English-Only Movement was largely initiated, funded and propagandized by the group known as US English in the early 1980s (Cashman, 2006; Crawford, 2000a, 2004; Del Valle, 2003). Spearheaded by the late Senator S.I. Hayakawa and Dr J. Tanton, the main focus of this organization was to make English the official language of the United States. In 1981,...

Details zur Ausgabe

• Verlag: Multilingual Matters
• Erscheinungsdatum: 2014
• Sprache: Englisch
• ISBN 10: 1783091940
• ISBN 13: 9781783091942
• Einband: Gebundene Ausgabe
• Anzahl der Seiten: 180
• Herausgeber: Moore Sarah C. K.
• Kontakt zum Hersteller: preigu GmbH & Co. KG; mail@preigu.de; ; Lengericher Landstr. 19; Osnabrück; Niedersachsen; 49078; Deutschland