Professors question English immersion

Two Tufts professors who specialize in bilingual education disapprove of ending its practice in Massachusetts public schools. But after a ballot question approved the replacement of bilingual programs with English immersion, their opinions have seemingly been ignored.

One of Governor-elect Mitt Romney's campaign promises was to abolish bilingual education. Instead of a three-year, gradual literacy program, Romney suggested non-English speaking students should enter into a one-year, English immersion program.

This design, Romney promised, would accelerate English comprehension and make it easier for non-native students to eventually enter the workforce. Those students who are unable to obtain proficiency in one year would be placed in remedial programs and be separated from other students.

But experts at Tufts, like Education Professor Dr. Adriana Rodriguez, questions any child's ability to develop English proficiency in one year.

"The research indicates it takes from six to seven years for children to develop a second language," said Rodriguez, a specialist in bilingual education and special education who has spent 20 years as a bilingual school psychologist.

The problem with Romney's plan is that there is a difference between surface fluency and academic proficiency, Child Development Professor Dr. Calvin Gidney explained.

"Children can achieve surface fluency... the ability to interact in typical social situations... in a language in a relatively short period of time," said Gidney, who teaches courses in language development and bilingual education. But, he said, it often takes longer to be able to use a second language well enough to do well academically.

A key problem with English immersion, both professors said, is that non-English speaking students are often simultaneously developing their native language as well. "It's much easier to become literate in your native language first and then take on literacy acquisition in a second language," Gidney said.

"If they don't have good language skills developed in the native language, it's hard to do two things at once," Rodriguez said. The benefit of bilingual education, she said, is that the language skills developed in the native language can easily be transferred to English.

The removal of bilingual education may also impact learning in other school subjects, due primarily to the lack of vocabulary. Bilingual education benefits students by allowing them to learn in their native language, Gidney said.

They "make progress in subjects such as history and science without being held back by their lack of mastery of English," he said.

Rodriguez and Gidney also questioned the isolation of the English immersion program from the rest of the school because the students enrolled the program will have only limited interaction with English speakers and that could hinder their language development.

On the other hand, while isolation is bad for non-English speaking students, it could be just as harmful to completely immerse them in English-speaking classrooms, Gidney said.

The treatment of children who are unable to learn English in one year will not be proper under English immersion, Rodriguez said. If "they don't develop English well, they end up with the label of learning disability," she said. Failure of students to complete a seven year task in one year is not a learning disability, Rodriguez said.