Join us at World Language Expo in San Diego
Visit our booth (#2322) at ACTFL’s World Languages Expo in San Diego, California November 20-22 and take part in our scavenger hunt to win a prize!
Latest Edition
November 2009
Two is Always More Than One
As we near the end of President Obama’s first year in office, we are reaching a crucial point for the future of language education in the U.S. Federal education funding is at an all-time high and there is a general consensus that a revamped Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) needs to be in front of Congress in the next few months.
Prior to his election, the President stated that he would like to see young Americans grow up to be bilingual, or even trilingual, and, during their campaign, Obama and Biden voiced their support for transitional bilingual education. Now, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan is saying that the U.S. is disadvantaging its children by not helping them become bilingual (see News, p.11).
Duncan said at the end of last month that he believes the current economic crisis is as good a time as any for leaders at the state and national levels to make long-term positive changes to America’s educational system. “This is an amazing time to be working in education in this country,” Duncan said. “We are going through a crisis, we have the worst economy since the Depression, we are fighting a couple of wars and we also are fighting an educational crisis.”
The best ideas on how to do this, Duncan said, are not going to come from Washington, but from educators at the state and local levels, “The best ideas come from great principals, great teachers, great superintendents and great districts making a difference in students’ lives,” Duncan said. “We have this amazing opportunity to invest in what works and erase the achievement gap and raise the bar to a different level for our children.”
The administration is clearly being pragmatic in its approach to the current lack of language skills in the U.S. and the effect of this on future prosperity by recognizing that we not only need to train English speakers in other languages but we also need help English Language Learners retain and develop ability in their mother tongues.
We also need to be pragmatic in our campaign to encourage multilingual education and recognize that world language educators, bilingual educators, and English language teachers must work together to promote the common goal of improved literacy in all languages. We need to embrace all the means in which we can reach this goal, such as bilingual programs, dual-language schools, two-way immersion, exchange programs, and online initiatives. And, at the same time, we should recognize that, due to political exigencies, one means may be promoted ahead of another, but we must persevere with our common goal of creating an education system suitable for a multilingual, multicultural society.
The government is finally recognizing that educators have the best ideas about education reform, and it has already secured the funding to make a difference, so make sure that your voice is heard by contacting your representatives, attending meetings, and sharing your experience.
IN THIS ISSUE:
Pop Culture Curriculum
Elif Bengu illustrates how the success of manga and anime in the Japanese classroom is an example for all language arts educators
Kate Sommers-Dawes offers all teachers the means to take advantage of one of education’s most effective tools: dual-language theater
Methodology is Dead
Doug Evans argues that language teachers should not adhere to any one methodology but be open to them all
Jennifer Rosen analyzes the challenge of learning Arabic
Guillermo Piñon relays a personal insight into the language of Morocco’s Atlas Mountains
Magical Mexico
Adia Suricate succumbs to the allure of Mexico for Spanish immersion
Chinese Independent Study
Language Magazine’s guide to Mandarin self-study programs
Kate Sommers-Dawes gives us a glimpse of the artistic wealth that Spain offers immersion students
Last Writes
Richard Lederer with Teacher’s Topics “Excuses Excuses”
Plus all the latest news in language learning technology, book reviews, and source information on language funding
November 2nd, 2009 | Leave your comments
Language Magazine Supports PRIDE Act
Language Magazine is urging its readers to ask their representatives to approve legislation introduced by Representative Raúl Grijalva (D–AZ) to expand access to and support for dual-language educational programs for children in low-income and ethnically diverse communities. The “Providing Resources to Improve Dual-Language Education (PRIDE) Act” would provide more resources to develop students’ reading and speaking skills in two languages.
“The ‘PRIDE Act’ is a powerful tool in our efforts to eliminate the achievement gap between high- and low-income children. As Congress will soon consider reauthorization of the No Child Left Behind Act, it is important that we develop more innovative strategies to support Latino and English language learner students. Research has shown that dual-language programs can change the trajectory of Latino student achievement,” said Delia Pompa, National Council of La Raza’s vice president of Education and former executive director of the National Association for Bilingual Education.
The “PRIDE Act” would benefit both native English-speaking students and English language learners (ELLs) by increasing the number of classrooms in low-income communities that provide them with content and literacy instruction in two languages. Dual-language models have proven effective in developing English-language proficiency for ELLs and bilingualism for English speakers. Studies have shown that knowing more than one language increases students’ abilities.
Despite these proven benefits, few dual-language programs include low-income students and ELLs. For example, of the 332 dual-language programs in the U.S., only 11% of them serve a significant number of Black children, and only one-third of programs nationwide report that more than half of the children enrolled are low-income.
“We applaud Congressman Grijalva for his work on behalf of all students, but especially for being a champion of those who most need a boost in their academic performance,” concluded Pompa. “The ‘PRIDE Act’ is just another example of Congressman Grijalva’s leadership. We urge Congress to pass this legislation now.”
October 23rd, 2009 | Leave your comments
Free Bilingual T-Shirt Offer
Limited Time Offer. Subscribe to Language Magazine for $26.95 and get a Free T-Shirt.
October 15th, 2009 | 2 Comments
October 2009
Expert Investment Advice
Any suggestion that we should be spending more on education right now is usually met with derision as state and local governments struggle to maintain services. However, when the recommendation comes from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), even the most fiscally conservative hardliners should take notice.
Founded in 1961, the OECD grew out of the Marshall Plan, which engineered the economic reconstruction of Europe after World War II, and now provides a setting where the governments of thirty countries committed to democracy and the market economy compare policy experiences, seek answers to common problems, identify best practices, and coordinate domestic and international policies.
For more than 40 years, the OECD has been one of the world’s largest and most reliable sources of comparable statistics and economic and social data.
According to the latest edition of the OECD’s Education at a Glance, growing advantages for the better educated and likely continuing high levels of unemployment as economies move out of recession will provide more and more young people with strong incentives to stay on in education.
Governments need to take account of this recommendation in planning educational funding policies. “As we emerge from the global economic crisis, demand for university education will be higher than ever,” OECD Secretary-General Angel Gurría said. “To the extent that institutions are able to respond, investments in human capital will contribute to recovery.”
Education pays dividends in later life through higher salaries, better health and less vulnerability to unemployment, OECD analysis shows. The report calculates the returns on investment in education by balancing the costs of education and of foregone earnings against prospects for increased future earnings as a result of higher educational attainment. According to these calculations, in the U.S., a male graduate can expect to earn more than $367,000 extra over his lifetime and a female graduate more than $229,000 (reflecting the disparity between male and female earnings) compared to non-graduates.
And the benefits don’t stop there; the average net financial public return across OECD countries from providing a male student with a university education, after factoring in all the direct and indirect costs, is almost $52,000. That is before nearly twice the average amount of money originally invested.
In most countries, the number of people who leave school at the minimum leaving age is falling, but the U.S. is one of only six OECD countries where their numbers continue to rise.
Immigrants and English language learners are particularly susceptible to cuts in education spending as their families often lack the resources to make up for shortfalls, but there are ways in which we can help to redirect funds — last month, there was a very successful “Back to School Day of Action” to build support for the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act (S.729) and the American Dream Act (H.R. 1751), bipartisan proposals that would remove barriers that prevent immigrant students from attending college and establish a path to legal status for those who satisfy higher education or military service requirements.
A group of senators also introduced the Graduation Promise Act, which would authorize $3 billion to combat the dropout problem. About $2.4 billion would create a fund to help states develop systemic, differentiated ways of bolstering struggling high schools.
In our News section (page nine) is an article on the proposed U.S. and the World Education Act, which would encourage global partnerships and fund world languages.
All of these measures need public endorsement, so it is important for representatives to hear that their constituents support them. Only then will they be inclined to sign on to such legislation. Readers may find their legislator online at www.house.gov and www.senate.gov.
IN THIS ISSUE:
Wordly Possession
Katharine Davies Samway and Dorothy Taylor offer strategies for developing word consciousness in English Learners
Student Achievement in California Two-Way Immersion Programs
Steve Charbonneau, Delia Gomez, Danielle Waite, and Kay Vang study how California Two-Way Immersion (TWI) programs impact student achievement
Matching Styles to Students
Melissa Perna, Rita Dunn, and Andrea Honigsfeld examine which methods work best for language learners
Teaching to Reach Every Child
Stephen Haag discovers how recognizing different learning styles can solve an educator’s challenge
Kate Sommers-Dawes explores the regions the comprise Germany for in-depth immersion programs
Language Magazine’s latest round up of Intervention Materials
Last Writes
Richard Lederer with Teacher’s Topics “Excuses Excuses”
Plus all the latest news in language learning technology, book reviews, and source information on language funding
September 30th, 2009 | Leave your comments
September 2009
The Assessing Situation
- September 2009 Cover
The confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor are affording the American people an invaluable insight into the ingrained prejudices that prevail in our society, as well as the procedural anomalies that assist in their continuance.
Beneath the disturbing questioning of the validity of being a “wise Latina” and Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn’s puerile and astonishingly inappropriate impersonation of Ricky Ricardo, informing Sotomayor that she had “some ‘splainin’ to do,” there exists an underlying concern that Sotomayor’s interrogators are oblivious to their task of determining whether or not she has the requisite intelligence and experience for the role, and would rather score points by demeaning her. On top of which, there is considerable doubt about the validity of so-called expert testimony which not only undermines these confirmation hearings, but also calls into question the opinions of the Supreme Court itself.
The criticism of the Judge’s statement that her personal experience has shaped her thinking is contrary to the fundamental principle that we should learn from our experiences, but it seems to indicate that education, intellect, and expertise count for little in politics.
These hearings, like most Washington hearings, rely heavily on “expert” testimony but the choice of these experts seems to be based on proving a point rather than a desire for the truth. For example, over the last few weeks, the Center for Equal Opportunity, a small conservative think tank opposed to affirmative action and bilingual education, has been blessed with at least two opportunities to make its voice heard in the highest chambers. Linda Chavez, its chairman, a Reagan appointee, and a political analyst for Fox News, delivered testimony in opposition to Sotomayor’s appointment, claiming that the Judge “made dubious arguments in support of bilingual education and more broadly in trying to equate English language requirements as a form of national origin discrimination.” The organization was also called in to assist the Supreme Court in its decision to side with Arizona officials who said the federal government should not be supervising the state’s spending for teaching non-English-speaking students (Horne v. Flores, see p.9). Justice Alito’s majority opinion cited an amicus brief filed by the Center: “Research on [English-Language Learner] instruction indicates there is documented, academic support for the view that [structured English immersion] is significantly more effective than bilingual education.”
Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion — Chavez served as president of U.S. English, an English-only organization —and we all know that research and statistics can be manipulated to serve several different points of view, however a Supreme Court Justice has a duty to seek out a balance of research before coming to an opinion, and, in this case, Alito has chosen to ignore the wealth of research which suggests that bilingual education is more successful than English-only.
Our representatives should be the best and the brightest, not simply people who agree with us. We have a President who graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School, and deserve representatives in all sectors of government who recognize the value of research, education, and true expertise.
In this issue, like every September, we publish a focus on assessment but never before has nearly all of our news section been devoted to the same subject. Testing has become a very contentious issue and nowhere is it more controversial than in the English language learning arena.
At the same time, the Obama administration has just unveiled the core of its education program. The centerpiece of the administration’s education reform efforts is the $4.35 billion Race to the Top Fund, a national competition which is intended to highlight and replicate effective education reform strategies in four main areas, including the adoption of internationally benchmarked standards and assessments that prepare students for success in college and the workplace. According to the President, “This competition will not be based on politics, ideology, or the preferences of a particular interest group. Instead, it will be based on a simple principle — whether a state is ready to do what works. We will use the best data available to determine whether a state can meet a few key benchmarks for reform — and states that outperform the rest will be rewarded with a grant. Not every state will win and not every school district will be happy with the results.”
The idea that standardized testing can easily gauge the performance of teachers and schools, and thus shape policy seems so simple and logical that it is not surprising that it attracts so many supporters. Like most things in life, the reality is a lot more complicated and standardized tests tell only part of the story.
Testing is a very important step toward improving schools, teaching practice, and educational methods through data collection. Schools and teachers have always used assessments to determine not only the progress of their students but also the efficacy of their teaching. However, high-stakes testing where the results affect funding, jobs, school closures, and careers is much more prone to manipulation —
discrepancies result from current state standardized testing practices, including problems with test validity and reliability, and false correlations due to statistical paradoxes. Some school districts have even been accused of encouraging underperforming students to drop out to improve their test stats.
Another problem is that standardized tests enforce a mandatory curriculum be placed on schools without public debate and without any accountability measures which contradicts the basic democratic principle that control of schools’ curricula is the responsibility of local school boards.
There is also evidence that standardized tests encourage “teaching to the test” at the expense of creativity and in-depth coverage of subjects not on the test. Multiple choice tests can only assess certain skills. Basing teacher pay and advancement on student test results will further aggravate these problems.
Of course, our students, teachers, and schools need to assess progress, and this progress needs to be monitored by school boards and policy makers. Thankfully, there is a wide range of assessments available (including alternatives like portfolio assessment) to help monitor progress but we also need to look at the bigger picture of what we expect our schools to produce. Standardized tests only enable us to view a small part of that picture.
IN THIS ISSUE:
Multilingualism in New Mexico
Mary Jean Habermann-López uses her state’s unique history to illustrate the importance of multilingualism
No Assessment Fits All
Candace Kelly and Adelina Alegria question the value of high stakes testing for English Learners
Communication in a Crisis
Wade Calhoun introduces a voluntary organization that breaks down language barriers when disaster strikes
Raising the Bar
Language Magazine’s pick of linguistic and literacy assessments
Spanish with Altitude
Kate Sommers-Dawes travels the Andes in search of Spanish immersion highlights
Going the Course
Language Magazine’s guide to the latest core programs for English learners
Plus all the latest news in language learning technology, book reviews, and source information on language funding
September 1st, 2009 | 2 Comments
August 2009
Suckering the Supreme Court
- August 2009 Cover
The confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor are affording the American people an invaluable insight into the ingrained prejudices that prevail in our society, as well as the procedural anomalies that assist in their continuance.
Beneath the disturbing questioning of the validity of being a “wise Latina” and Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn’s puerile and astonishingly inappropriate impersonation of Ricky Ricardo, informing Sotomayor that she had “some ‘splainin’ to do,” there exists an underlying concern that Sotomayor’s interrogators are oblivious to their task of determining whether or not she has the requisite intelligence and experience for the role, and would rather score points by demeaning her. On top of which, there is considerable doubt about the validity of so-called expert testimony which not only undermines these confirmation hearings, but also calls into question the opinions of the Supreme Court itself.
The criticism of the Judge’s statement that her personal experience has shaped her thinking is contrary to the fundamental principle that we should learn from our experiences, but it seems to indicate that education, intellect, and expertise count for little in politics.
These hearings, like most Washington hearings, rely heavily on “expert” testimony but the choice of these experts seems to be based on proving a point rather than a desire for the truth. For example, over the last few weeks, the Center for Equal Opportunity, a small conservative think tank opposed to affirmative action and bilingual education, has been blessed with at least two opportunities to make its voice heard in the highest chambers. Linda Chavez, its chairman, a Reagan appointee, and a political analyst for Fox News, delivered testimony in opposition to Sotomayor’s appointment, claiming that the Judge “made dubious arguments in support of bilingual education and more broadly in trying to equate English language requirements as a form of national origin discrimination.” The organization was also called in to assist the Supreme Court in its decision to side with Arizona officials who said the federal government should not be supervising the state’s spending for teaching non-English-speaking students (Horne v. Flores, see p.9). Justice Alito’s majority opinion cited an amicus brief filed by the Center: “Research on [English-Language Learner] instruction indicates there is documented, academic support for the view that [structured English immersion] is significantly more effective than bilingual education.”
Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion — Chavez served as president of U.S. English, an English-only organization — and we all know that research and statistics can be manipulated to serve several different points of view, however a Supreme Court Justice has a duty to seek out a balance of research before coming to an opinion, and, in this case, Alito has chosen to ignore the wealth of research which suggests that bilingual education is more successful than English-only.
Our representatives should be the best and the brightest, not simply people who agree with us. We have a President who graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School, and deserve representatives in all sectors of government who recognize the value of research, education, and true expertise.
The confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor are affording the American people an invaluable insight into the ingrained prejudices that prevail in our society, as well as the procedural anomalies that assist in their continuance.
Beneath the disturbing questioning of the validity of being a “wise Latina” and Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn’s puerile and astonishingly inappropriate impersonation of Ricky Ricardo, informing Sotomayor that she had “some ‘splainin’ to do,” there exists an underlying concern that Sotomayor’s interrogators are oblivious to their task of determining whether or not she has the requisite intelligence and experience for the role, and would rather score points by demeaning her. On top of which, there is considerable doubt about the validity of so-called expert testimony which not only undermines these confirmation hearings, but also calls into question the opinions of the Supreme Court itself.
The criticism of the Judge’s statement that her personal experience has shaped her thinking is contrary to the fundamental principle that we should learn from our experiences, but it seems to indicate that education, intellect, and expertise count for little in politics.
These hearings, like most Washington hearings, rely heavily on “expert” testimony but the choice of these experts seems to be based on proving a point rather than a desire for the truth. For example, over the last few weeks, the Center for Equal Opportunity, a small conservative think tank opposed to affirmative action and bilingual education, has been blessed with at least two opportunities to make its voice heard in the highest chambers. Linda Chavez, its chairman, a Reagan appointee, and a political analyst for Fox News, delivered testimony in opposition to Sotomayor’s appointment, claiming that the Judge “made dubious arguments in support of bilingual education and more broadly in trying to equate English language requirements as a form of national origin discrimination.” The organization was also called in to assist the Supreme Court in its decision to side with Arizona officials who said the federal government should not be supervising the state’s spending for teaching non-English-speaking students (Horne v. Flores, see p.9). Justice Alito’s majority opinion cited an amicus brief filed by the Center: “Research on [English-Language Learner] instruction indicates there is documented, academic support for the view that [structured English immersion] is significantly more effective than bilingual education.”
Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion — Chavez served as president of U.S. English, an English-only organization — and we all know that research and statistics can be manipulated to serve several different points of view, however a Supreme Court Justice has a duty to seek out a balance of research before coming to an opinion, and, in this case, Alito has chosen to ignore the wealth of research which suggests that bilingual education is more successful than English-only.
Our representatives should be the best and the brightest, not simply people who agree with us. We have a President who graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School, and deserve representatives in all sectors of government who recognize the value of research, education, and true expertise.
IN THIS ISSUE:
Putting Students Behind the Wheel
Edo Forsythe recommends collaborating with students to get the most from new technologies
The Great Divide
Lance Knowles confronts the challenge of mixing teachers with technology
Tools for Teaching English
Language Magazine’s selection of technology products for the ESL classroom
Español en la Naturaleza
Kate Sommers-Dawes finds Spanish natural in Costa Rica
Busting Student Stress
Carmen Gloria Garrido Barra offers advice on how to reduce anxiety in the language classroom
Plus all the latest news in language learning technology, book reviews, and source information on language funding
August 2nd, 2009 | 4 Comments
July 2009
Searching for the Silver Bullet
July 2009 Cover
Everyone seems to have the solution to improving public education and closing the achievement gap. More rigorous standards and even more testing are touted by some as the keys to success, while others seek salvation in technology, results-based teacher pay structures, universal preschool, or charter schools. Like most things in life, there is not a single solution but we can be sure that the most important factor in the success of our schools is the service provided by our teachers.
The latest report from the Center on Education Policy claims the mandates of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) have been largely successful and that, contrary to widespread concerns, have not sacrificed the needs of the highest and lowest achieving students in favor of those in the middle “proficient” level. However, Stephen Krashen points out, “The report was limited to the years 2002 through 2008, in other words, scores since NCLB went into effect. Previous analyses (Fuller et al, Lee) compared the rate of growth before NCLB and since NCLB went into effect, and reported that there was no increase in the rate of growth in reading scores. In other words, test scores have been going up for a long time. The question is whether NCLB made a difference. This study does not address this question. Nor does the study mention that NAEP reading scores have in general not improved since NCLB has gone into effect.”
An analysis of the significant jump in New York State test scores by Jennifer Jennings of Eduwonk suggests that the tests have grown less challenging and are more susceptible to test-prep manipulation.
Despite the general perception of charter school superiority, a new study by Harvard University finds a low cognitive demand placed on students in some high-performing charters, and suggests an emphasis on procedure over conceptual understanding.
While California Governor Schwarzenegger is proposing that text books be replaced by online content, seasoned educational experts are presenting evidence that tactual learning is the most effective method of language acquisition (see page 20).
Amongst all this conflicting evidence, there is something that we do know will help — improve teaching, and we know how to do it according to Linda Darling-Hammond, professor of Education at Stanford University, and one of President Obama’s educational advisors, “First, ensure that everyone who wants to teach is well-prepared. Second, ensure that salaries are competitive and equitable. Finally, create the conditions in which teachers can teach well. That means providing the mentoring and collaboration time, the professional development and working conditions that allow teachers to use what they know and to continually get better at their difficult and important work.”
While teachers across the nation are facing pay freezes and even cuts, and the efficacy of results-based pay systems is being challenged, a new charter school in a minority-dominant neighborhood of New York is being launched on the principle that great teachers make great schools, and paying them accordingly — at least $125,000 a year. In countries with admired educational systems, teachers are well-respected and highly-valued. It may not be the silver bullet but it will certainly put success within sight.
IN THIS ISSUE:
Shrinking Student Loans
Daniel Ward explains how teachers can combine student loan repayment programs to minimize qualification costs
Do As I Do
Rita Dunn and Lois R. Favre ask if we really know how to teach foreign languages
French in Fashion
Margot Steinhart explains why French is such a relevant language in the 21st Century
La Belle Epoque
Like many a Parisienne, Kate Sommers-Dawes faces the dilemma of choosing between the romance of the city and the captivating south of France
Mexico Makes Sense
Kate Sommers-Dawes explains why Mexico is a rational choice for Spanish immersion students
Plus all the latest news in language learning technology, book reviews, and source information on language funding
June 30th, 2009 | Leave your comments
June 2009
All Abroad
June 2009 Cover
During these difficult economic times, the idea of the government spending $800 million to help Americans study abroad may seem unrealistic. However, the benefits of a million Americans traveling abroad every year far outweigh the cost which, when compared to the bailouts, seems like a bargain.
Last month, the Senator Paul Simon Study Abroad Foundation Act was introduced by House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Howard Berman (D-Calif.) as part of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act (H.R. 2410). While the authorization bill’s primary purpose is to authorize funding for the operations of the U.S. Department of State, it also includes innovative programs like the Simon legislation that are critical to accomplishing U.S. foreign policy and public diplomacy goals.
June 1st, 2009 | 1 Comment
Tags: june 2009, MagazineMay 2009
Re-Tooling for the Information Age
Language Magazine May 2009 Cover
One of the few benefits of recession is that it begs us to question the policies that have led us to such a situation. Much has been said about economic decisions, lax regulation, and corporate greed but there has been less discussion about the societal structure which has fomented such economic turmoil. At the heart of our society is a sytem which fails to adequately prepare vast numbers of children to succeed in the Information Age.
A new study by the consulting firm McKinsey entitled “The Economic Impact of the Achievement Gap in America’s Schools” (available at www.mckinsey.com) estimates that if we had closed the racial achievement gap and black and Latino student performance had caught up with that of white students by 1998, U.S. GDP last year would have been between $310 and $525 billion higher. If the gap between low-income students and the rest had been narrowed, U.S. GDP in 2008 would have been $400 to $670 billion higher.
Matt Miller, one of the report’s authors, points out in stark terms that there are millions of kids in modern, suburban schools “who are being prepared for $12-an-hour jobs — not $40 to $50 an hour.” If this is the situation in the suburbs, imagine the future for which kids are being prepard in urban areas where minorities dominate.
