Issues in U.S. Language Policy
Controversy over the
National Research Council Report:
Does Bilingual Education Really "Work"?
Has research proved the effectiveness of bilingual
education in teaching limited-English-proficient (LEP) students? Conversely,
has it shown that native-language instruction diverts children from learning
English? Or does the scientific evidence remain inconclusive? As the news
media constantly remind us and the politicians continue to complain, "the
experts are divided."
But are they really so divided? Do researchers remain seriously
at odds over the central question for educators, parents, and policymakers:
Are LEP students likely to benefit from bilingual instruction?
It came as a revelation to me, when starting to cover this beat
for Education Week in 1985, that the issue was not at all controversial
among researchers in applied linguistics – that is, among experts in both
language and education. Of course, there were a few academic skeptics, largely
from fields like sociology and political science. And there were powerful
political opponents, such as then-Secretary of Education William Bennett,
not to mention a growing corps of English-only militants.
Yet it was well nigh impossible to find an authority in second-language
acquisition who argued that bilingual instruction was, in itself, ineffective
– much less a diversion from English. No one claimed it was a panacea. Or
that it would work in every school with every student from every background.
Simply that it was a valid and promising approach – if not the only
approach – to overcoming the language barriers that long denied LEP children
an equal chance to learn.
In theory, the experts expressed no doubt that bilingual education
was a major improvement over "sink-or-swim." In practice, virtually all agreed
that the design and quality of bilingual programs varied substantially. Moreover,
they viewed the language of instruction as only one variable among many in
determining failure or success for LEP students.
A 1997 study by the National Research Council, Improving
Schooling for Language-Minority Children: A Research Agenda, continues in this tradition. Produced by a 12-member
expert panel, the 487-page report found considerable evidence for the merits
of bilingual approaches, while also noting some English-only program successes.
At the same time, it criticized the politicization of research findings by
advocates on both sides as an obstacle to progress in school reform. "As
a result," says the panel's chairman, Kenji Hakuta,
"important areas are ignored, such as how to enable these
students to meet rigorous academic standards. Rather than choosing a one-size-fits-all
program, the key issue should be identifying those components, backed by solid
research findings, that will work in a specific community."
Undaunted by this complaint, an anti-bilingual advocacy group –
the so-called Institute for Research in English Acquisition and Development
(READ) – quickly issued a Research
and Policy Brief. It congratulated the NRC panel for conceding, among
other things, that there is "no evidence" that bilingual education works.
READ's political "spin" on the NRC report has been circulated to
school boards and educational administrators throughout the country. John
Silber, chairman of the Massachusetts State Board of Education, sent it at
taxpayer's expense to every principal in his state. It is also being used
extensively in California to promote a statewide anti-bilingual
initiative for the June 1998 ballot.
Kenji Hakuta has responded in a memorandum
criticizing READ's attempt to exploit the NRC report for partisan purposes.
In addition, on behalf of the NRC's panel, Hakuta and study director Diane
August have written a point-by-point rebuttal of READ's
distortions. These documents are reproduced here, with permission of the
authors, in the interest of wider distribution.
© 1997 by James Crawford. Permission is hereby granted to reproduce
this page for free, noncommercial distribution, provided that credit is given
and this notice is included. Requests for permission to reproduce in any other
form should be emailed to email@example.com.
But before writing, please read my permissions FAQ.