DIY History | Transcribe | Campus Culture | El Laberinto, 1971-1987 |

Transcribe
Translate

El Laberinto, 1971-1987

"The word bilingual conjures up negative connotations in the minds of some of the bureaucrats who want to do away with bilingual programs," said Professor Alfredo Benavides, director of the UI's bilingual education program. The opponents of the program believe that Spanish is emphasized over English, but Benavides commented that students should be taught in Spanish so they don't fall behind in critical areas. As their English skills gradually improve, then they moved into mainstream classrooms where they can more comfortably participate. The opponents prefer the "sink or swim!" method of learning English by placing the students in regular public English speaking classrooms before they are competent in the language.
In May, a bill will be sent to Congress to reauthorize the scope of bilingual education programs. "I don't think reauthorization will be a problem," said Benavides. He explained his optimism "it is an election year and President Reagan and George Bush have been delivering speeches advocating bilingual education programs. One of the things Hispanics should do, stressed Benavides, is to "write your congressman and tell him how important the bilingual education programs are and any attempt to diffuse them would be a vote in the wrong direction."
The following article is reprinted from the July 27, 1983 new York Times. It was written by Irma Herrera, director of educational programs for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. 

SAN FRANCISCO- In our not too distant past, 80 percent of all Mexican-American children in Texas had to repeat the first grade because they could not speak English. In New Mexico, one third of all Hispanic children sat idle in the first grade learning neither basic addition nor English. With bilingual education this waste of human talent would never have occurred. 
And yet, as Congress begins to consider reauthorization of the Bilingual Education Act of 1968, we hear again the insidious myth that most Hispanic children do not want to learn English and that their parents - as well as advocates of bilingual instruction - want them educated only in their native language. If we adopt bilingual instruction as an educational policy, they say, we will create a bilingual society. Nothing could be farther from the truth. 
I have never met a Hispanic parent who proposed delaying the acquisition of English. Parents who labor at dead end jobs because of poor language skills hardly wish this future on their children. No responsible person proposes that we keep English proficiency for our children. Even Mexican grandmothers, illiterate in English and Spanish will smile a crinkled smile and say: "El saber es poder" or "Knowledge is power"
Non English speaking children are eager to learn and are curious, but they cannot participate in education if they do not understand the instruction. Moreover, they cannot be expected to learn English simply by joining an English-speaking class and absorbing the language by osmosis. I could spend three years in  a classroom in China, listening to lessons in Cantonese and not learn Cantonese. Spanish-speaking children need instruction by people trained in second language acquisition. 
Yet today many students who don't understand English sit all day in classrooms, their presence required by law, listening to the noise of an unfamiliar language., These are the physically normal yet deaf-mute children whom many suggest we do no longer "pamper" with bilingual instruction.
Recently, the Twentieth Century Fund recommend that "the Federal Government promote and support proficiency in English for all children in the public schools." As advocates of bilingual education, we support their recommendation . We do not support they statement that the only way to teach non-English speaking students is by immersing them in English instruction. 
Those who would curtly dismiss bilingual education as a failure do not understand all the facts. For one thing, fewer than 20 percent of the several million limited-English students are served by bilingual education. The majority go through instruction that ranges from excellent programs in English as a second language to sink and swim methods. If our schools have so miserably failed to educate the non-English speakers, the fault is not with bilingual education. We must look at how we have traditionally served these students and whether English-language instruction, which was the norm prior to passage of the Bilingual Act, was successful. The figures suggest it was not. 
Before 1968, the dropout rate for Hispanic students was 52 percent nationwide. In 1982, it was slightly below 40 percent - still triple the rate for the white population but a slight improvement. Much of the progress can be traced to the growth of bilingual education. 
English-language development is the keystone of bilingual education. Bilingual

Saving...

"The word bilingual conjures up negative connotations in the minds of some of the bureaucrats who want to do away with bilingual programs," said Professor Alfredo Benavides, director of the UI's bilingual education program. The opponents of the program believe that Spanish is emphasized over English, but Benavides commented that students should be taught in Spanish so they don't fall behind in critical areas. As their English skills gradually improve, then they moved into mainstream classrooms where they can more comfortably participate. The opponents prefer the "sink or swim!" method of learning English by placing the students in regular public English speaking classrooms before they are competent in the language. In May, a bill will be sent to Congress to reauthorize the scope of bilingual education programs. "I don't think reauthorization will be a problem," said Benavides. He explained his optimism "it is an election year and President Reagan and George Bush have been delivering speeches advocating bilingual education programs. One of the things Hispanics should do, stressed Benavides, is to "write your congressman and tell him how important the bilingual education programs are and any attempt to diffuse them would be a vote in the wrong direction." The following article is reprinted from the July 27, 1983 new York Times. It was written by Irma Herrera, director of educational programs for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. SAN FRANCISCO- In our not too distant past, 80 percent of all Mexican-American children in Texas had to repeat the first grade because they could not speak English. In New Mexico, one third of all Hispanic children sat idle in the first grade learning neither basic addition nor English. With bilingual education this waste of human talent would never have occurred. And yet, as Congress begins to consider reauthorization of the Bilingual Education Act of 1968, we hear again the insidious myth that most Hispanic children do not want to learn English and that their parents - as well as advocates of bilingual instruction - want them educated only in their native language. If we adopt bilingual instruction as an educational policy, they say, we will create a bilingual society. Nothing could be farther from the truth. I have never met a Hispanic parent who proposed delaying the acquisition of English. Parents who labor at dead end jobs because of poor language skills hardly wish this future on their children. No responsible person proposes that we keep English proficiency for our children. Even Mexican grandmothers, illiterate in English and Spanish will smile a crinkled smile and say: "El saber es poder" or "Knowledge is power" Non English speaking children are eager to learn and are curious, but they cannot participate in education if they do not understand the instruction. Moreover, they cannot be expected to learn English simply by joining an English-speaking class and absorbing the language by osmosis. I could spend three years in a classroom in China, listening to lessons in Cantonese and not learn Cantonese. Spanish-speaking children need instruction by people trained in second language acquisition. Yet today many students who don't understand English sit all day in classrooms, their presence required by law, listening to the noise of an unfamiliar language., These are the physically normal yet deaf-mute children whom many suggest we do no longer "pamper" with bilingual instruction. Recently, the Twentieth Century Fund recommend that "the Federal Government promote and support proficiency in English for all children in the public schools." As advocates of bilingual education, we support their recommendation . We do not support they statement that the only way to teach non-English speaking students is by immersing them in English instruction. Those who would curtly dismiss bilingual education as a failure do not understand all the facts. For one thing, fewer than 20 percent of the several million limited-English students are served by bilingual education. The majority go through instruction that ranges from excellent programs in English as a second language to sink and swim methods. If our schools have so miserably failed to educate the non-English speakers, the fault is not with bilingual education. We must look at how we have traditionally served these students and whether English-language instruction, which was the norm prior to passage of the Bilingual Act, was successful. The figures suggest it was not. Before 1968, the dropout rate for Hispanic students was 52 percent nationwide. In 1982, it was slightly below 40 percent - still triple the rate for the white population but a slight improvement. Much of the progress can be traced to the growth of bilingual education. English-language development is the keystone of bilingual education. Bilingual