CHAPTER FOUR:
Bilingual Education in the United States, Canada, and Other Countries

In the previous chapters, we have looked at the context in which the Tibetanization Program was proposed to be implemented. In this chapter we will examine few cases and findings of the bilingual education in the United States, Canada, and other Education Programs Involving Three Languages. The examination of the feasibility of the Tibetanization Program (to be discussed in the next chapter) is primarily based on review of bilingual education in the United States. As in the case of Tibetan students in the India, minority language children in the United States face an educational system, which predominantly uses the English language. Both the situations face the same issue: Should the language of instruction in school be the student's native language? Despite the fact, that there is so much difference in the social, political and economic contexts, in which the student of the United States and Tibetan students in India, receive their education through English, which make it difficult to compare the two situations. I believe, that there are some generic issues and similarities concerning the education of minority language children in both the cases.

Literature on bilingual education in the United States has been most accessible to me for examining issues related to native language instruction. Bilingual education in Canada has been examined because many ideas for bilingual education in the United States have originated from experiences of bilingual education in Canada. This chapter also examines experiences of those involving three languages.

Two main questions addressed in this chapter are:

1. Do non-English speaking or limited English proficient (LEP) children have better academic achievement when they are instructed in their native language in comparison to the academic achievement of the English-speaking children? and
2. What are different educational models and programs used in serving the needs of minority language children in the United States?

Major Theories and Hypotheses on Second Language Acquisition

The debate on native language education is based on two main views on second language acquisition. First, the Vernacular Advantage Theory says that there are good reasons for children who do not know the language of the school to be instructed in their native language for an extended period of time while they are learning a second language (Porter, 1990, p. 59). This theory supports the argument that children can't learn in a language, they don't understand (Cummins, 1991, p. 186).

The Vernacular Advantage Theory is based on the Linguistic Interdependence Principle, proposed by the Canadian linguist, Jim Cummins. This principle says that formalized learning of mother tongue enhances not only the global verbal skills of the minority language child, but also the child's cognitive, socio-affective and academic development (Danesi, 1991, p. 651). In essence, it means that the linguistic skills acquired by a child in his/her native language could be transferred to learning a second language (Hakuta, 1991). Danesi (1991) maintains that the Linguistic Interdependence Principle has been so dominant and persuasive in the last few decades that it has removed two myths about second language acquisition:

1. the maximum exposure myth which claimed that children who were deficient in the school language needed maximum exposure and intensive instruction in that language,
2. the neurological space myth which claimed that instruction in the native language of the minority child would congest the space in his brain that would be required by the school language in order to process and store conceptual information in an efficient and unobstructed manner. Porter, however, claims that the Vernacular Advantage Theory is still a hypothesis in search of legitimacy, and not a documented, empirically proven, successful method of second-language learning (1990, p. 63).

Second, the Time-on-Task argument says that maximum time exposure to the target language is a central component of a successful program for the learning of a second language (Cummins, 1991). Porter (1990) claims that education research has supported this argument. But Cummins argues to the contrary and says that research studies, on French immersion programs in Canada, have concluded that there was no relationship between achievement in English and instructional time spent through English. In that students taught for substantial amount of time through French do not suffer in English academic growth (1991, p. 196).

Bilingual Education in the United States

Next, we examine bilingual education in the United States. Questions addressed in the following sections are:

1. How many people in the United States do not speak English or lack English proficiency?
2. How is native language instruction implemented in the United States? and
3. What do research studies say about the effectiveness of bilingual education in the United States?

According to the Census, out of the total population Eighty percent speak only English at home, but as many as 25 different languages are spoken at home (Table 5.1) (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1990a, p. 1). An accurate estimate of the number of children who do not speak English at all or who are limited-English-proficient (LEP) is critical to the development of effective federal policies toward language minority children. According to the U.S. Department of Commerce (1990a), about 14 million persons of age 5 and above (equal to 5.6 percent of the total population of the United States) did not speak English very well (p. 1). Approximately 2.4 million of these 14 million persons were between the ages of 5-17. Considering these sources, there may be at least 2 million school-age children in the United States who lack English language proficiency.

Goal & Purpose of Bilingual Education in the U.S.

The main purpose of bilingual education programs in the United States is to assist minority language children to effectively participate in the regular English-speaking school environment. The teachers perceive that it is most important for the LEP students to learn English and learn it well (Paulston, 1991, p. 300). Moll (1992) maintains that in general, the dominant issues in bilingual education are related to English language learning and assimilation of students into the mainstream, with scant attention paid to academic development or broader social and instructional dynamics (p. 20). Fillmore & Valadez (1986) share a similar view and state that the real test of bilingual instruction has been in how well it helps students adjust to instruction in English (p. 678).

Adaptability of Canadian French Immersion in the United States

The first adaptation of the Canadian French immersion program in an American setting took place in Culver City, California (Genesee, 1985). The rationale for supporting Structured Immersion (English Immersion) in the United States is based on the following observations:

1. that the English-speaking students in French immersion programs in Canada did not suffer academically and therefore, English Immersion might be a plausible alternative to the bilingual education programs in the United States (Cummins, 1991); and
2. that the findings of studies on immersion programs would suggest that it is possible to teach the entire curriculum directly in a second language if conditions are right (Fillmore & Valadez, 1986). The adaptation of the Canadian immersion program to the American setting is, however, criticized by some authors.

The Canadian French immersion programs allow maintenance of the both L1 (English) and L2 (French) by allocating the same instructional time for each, while Structured Immersion programs in the United States operate only in English (Paulston, 1991).

Studies on Effectiveness of Bilingual Education Programs

Many studies have been done to evaluate the effectiveness of bilingual education programs in the United States. The following is a sample of studies. Baker & de Kanter (1983)

Baker & de Kanter addressed the following questions in their study:

1. Does TBE (transitional bilingual education) lead to better performance in English?
2. Did TBE lead to better performance in non-language subject areas?
3. Was there a sufficiently strong case for the effectiveness of TBE for learning English and non-language subjects to justify legal mandate for TBE?
4. Were there any effective alternatives to TBE? That is, should one particular method be exclusively required if other methods also are effective? (p. 33).

Thirty-nine out of the several hundred studies covered by the review that fulfilled the following methodological criteria were accepted:

1. True experiments in which students were randomly assigned to treatment and control groups,
2. Studies using non random assignment that controlled for possible pre existing differences between the groups either by matching students in the treatment and comparison groups or through using statistical procedures. They concluded that the literature makes a compelling case that special programs in schools can improve the achievement of language-minority children. There is no evidence, however, that any specific program should be either legislated or preferred by the federal government (p 49). Baker and de Kanter further noted that in general, findings of no significant differences predominate, and negative effects for TBE are almost as frequent as are positive effects (p. 50) Genesee (1985)

Genesee (1985) did a comparison study of immersion programs at four different locations in the United States. The locations and the program description at each of these are :

1. Culver City, California Immersion was in Spanish and English was introduced into the school curriculum for the first time in grade 2 when English language arts were taught. By the end of elementary school, instructional time was split equally between English and Spanish;
2. Four Corners Elementary School, Montgomery County, Maryland. Immersion was in French in grades K-2, with the exception of physical education and music, which were taught by English-speaking specialists;
3. San Diego, California Immersion took place in Spanish; and
4. Cincinnati Public School Immersion was in French.

Genesee found that:

1. the immersion students generally lagged in English language literacy skills development during the period when English language arts were not taught, but these students achieved the same level of proficiency as English controls within one year of receiving English language instruction;
2. students at Culver City and Montgomery County had no difficulty assimilating new academic knowledge and skills even though they were taught through a second language (Genesee, 1985, p. 557) when their academic achievement was compared with English controls; and
3. many Black students at Cincinnati Public School who spoke a nonstandard English appeared to have no difficulty mastering literacy skills in the standard English dialect despite the task of coping with a second language (French). Ramirez,Yuen, & Ramey (1991)

Covering a period of eight years (1983/84-1990/91), the study sought to compare relative effectiveness of:

1. structured English immersion strategy,
2. early-exit Transitional Bilingual Education (TBE), and
3. late-exit Transitional Bilingual Education (TBE). According to the authors, the aim of these three programs is the same: acquisition of English language skills so that the language-minority child can succeed in an English-only mainstream society (p. 1).

They noted that the study results are relevant to those programs serving Spanish-speaking-minority students, because Spanish and non-Spanish-speaking students acquire English differently. The description of the three different programs were as follows:

1. Immersion Lasted for two to three years. All instruction was in English, but L1 was used to clarify English instruction. Teachers were qualified to teach LEP students; they had teaching credentials in Bilingual Education or English-as-a-Second-Language and strong receptive skills in the student's primary language (L1); Students were mainstreamed after the first or second grade.
2. (Early-exit TBE lasted for two to three years. Thirty to sixty minutes of native language instruction have been used daily for the introduction of initial reading skills; all other instruction was in English. Students were mainstreamed into English-only classes after the first or second grade;
3. Late-exit TBE lasted for about seven years. A minimum of 40 percent of the total instructional time was used for Spanish (Spanish language arts, reading, and other content areas such as math, social studies, and science).

The main findings were:

1. When tested in English, the relative effectiveness of immersion and early-exit TBE showed no difference in the level of achievement or rate of growth in achievement in math, English language or English reading after four years in their respective programs (i.e., at the end of grade three);
2. students in the late-exit TBE continued to increase their achievement in content areas such as math, while they were acquiring their skills in English. In contrast, students who were quickly transitioned into English-only instruction (in immersion and early-exit TBE) tend to show slower academic growth (pp. 37-39).

II. Bilingual Education in Canada

The adaptability of the Canadian Immersion model to the American situation has been discussed above. The following is a brief discussion of the origin and structure of French Immersion in Canada.

Origin of Immersion Program

In 1960s, the Canadian province of Quebec, home of the largest concentration of French-speaking population in the country, became the arena for a separatist movement that, among others, sought to revive French-language pride (Porter, 1990). The 1977 Charter not only promotes French as the official language of the province, but also declares that Quebec must be a solely French-speaking province. The new charter imposes exclusively French-language education on all children in the province, no matter what language their families speak at home (Porter, 1990, p. 107). Swain (1981) on the other hand, does not agree that the French language was imposed on the English-speaking population in Quebec, and claims that the first immersion program in the public sector began as a result of considerable pressure and agitation by a group of English-speaking parents in Quebec whose common concern was that their children become highly proficient in French (p. 16). Both Porter (1990) and Swain (1981) agree that the origin of the French immersion schooling is a result of political and economic forces.

The success of the French Immersion program started in 1965 in St. Lambert, Montreal, Canada (Barik & Swain, 1975). The French Immersion program primarily serves as a form of bilingual instruction for English-speaking students in Canada (Dolson, 1985).

Early Total Immersion Program is most frequently cited in the literature on bilingual education in Canada. Typically, the early total immersion program is designed to cover kindergarten through grade 12 (Dolson, 1985). French is exclusively the language of instruction in the early grades (Genesee, 1985; Swain, 1981), although it is the student's second language. Teachers, who are required to be fluent in both English and French (Porter, 1990; Swain, 1981; Cummins, 1991), have no difficulty in communicating with their students, who initially speak only English. Genesee (1985) describes the student-teacher interaction in immersion classes as that of negotiation of meaning and says that it is through the comprehension of both the teacher's verbal messages and nonverbal significance of events that the students come to learn the target language ultimately, and to use it effectively (p. 543). French is not only taught as a second language, but it is also used to teach other school subjects (Dolson, 1985). With the introduction of English language instruction in the third grade (Porter, 1990), the amount of instructional time for English is progressively increased through the subsequent grades. By the end of the fourth grade, both English and French receive equal instructional time (Porter, 1990; Genesee, 1985). By the end of the eighth grade, English receives more instructional time than French.

Studies on Immersion Programs

While the Immersion programs in Canada have highly been acclaimed, in the literature, on bilingual education, Genesee (1985) gives a modest account of his study and findings, by writing that the academic, general cognitive and social-psychological development of immersion students have been found as normal in comparison with the carefully selected groups of control students attending all-English (p.544).

In one study, Barik & Swain (1975) compared school performance of pupils in K-2 of French Immersion program in Ottawa public schools with that of pupils in regular English Program. They found that:

1. by the end of kindergarten, both groups (the immersion students and the regular English-only students) were equally ready for grade 1;
2. by the end of grade 1, the immersion group lagged behind the English-only group in English language skills involving English reading, but showed some ability to transfer reading skills from French to English;
3. by the end of grade 2 (following introduction of one-hour-per-day instruction in English language Arts), immersion pupils generally caught up to their regular program peers in English language skills;
4. throughout K-2, both groups showed the same level of cognitive development; and
5. Immersion pupils revealed a considerably higher level of achievement in French than pupils of corresponding or higher grade levels receiving daily instruction in French-as-second language, and did reasonably well in comparison with native French-speaking pupils.

Studies on Education Programs Involving Three Languages

Swain (1991) studied three groups of eighth grade students enrolled in an English-French bilingual program in Toronto. The first group consisted of students whose native language was English; the second group consisted of students whose native language was a Romance language (Italian); and the third group was comprised of students whose native language was non-Romance (e.g., German, Greek, Polish). Swain compared their French language proficiency and found that:

1. the two minority language groups (whose native languages were other than English) performed significantly better than the English-speaking group;
2. between the two minority language groups, the Italian group (Romance language) consistently performed better than the non-Romance group, although the difference was not significant. The author concluded that acquisition of native language skills helped the minority language students learn a third language (Swain & Lapkin, 1991).

In another study involving a third language, Genesee & Lambert (1983) compared the development of English language skills for students who have had single immersion (immersion in French) and those who went through double immersion (simultaneous immersion in French and Hebrew). The authors found that students who participated in the double immersion programs did not have any adverse effects on their normal development of English language skills as well as their academic achievement. The authors suggested that the more complex linguistic demands in double immersion relative to a single immersion might promote general language learning strategies that are transferable from one second language to the other. (p. 112).

Chapter Summary

This chapter examined the origin of bilingual education in the United States and implementation of educational programs for minority language children who are either non-English speaking or who lack English proficiency. The studies in the United States that have been reviewed here are inconclusive about the effect of native language instruction on academic achievement of the program participants. All the studies examined here have addressed almost the same questions: (a) Do participants in bilingual programs learn the English language better? (b) Do program participants show better academic achievement than regular English-speaking students, when tested in English? In Canada, studies on immersion programs have shown that students who have been educated through the French (a second language) in their early grades become bilingual and they achieve better students who have been educated monolingually. Here, it may be helpful to look at Table 5.4 for the difference in the context of language use in the three situations :

1. bilingual education programs in the United States,
2. immersion bilingual programs in Canada,
3. bilingual education of Tibetan children in India.

The context of language use in Tibetan schools bears a closer resemblance to that in United States schools than to that in Canadian schools. The immigrant status of the target students in United States and Tibetan schools also make them more comparable than those in Canadian and Tibetan schools.

By co-relating and comparing the situations and the research conclusions on the effectiveness of bilingual education in the United States and Canada, it may be concluded that

1. bilingual education research findings in the United States have a greater potential for its implications on Tibetan schools, but the research conclusions are inconclusive; (b) the bilingual education research in Canada show a consistent findings but they are not easily applicable to Tibetan schools in India.