Language, Politics,
and Education
BEF 585, Spring
2011
|
Instructor: John Petrovic, PhD. Office: 323C, Graves Hall Email: petrovic@bamaed.ua.edu Phone: 348-0465 Office Hours: By appointment I.
Catalogue
description This course covers the history and politics behind the
English-only movement and its effect on education policy for language
minority students. Informed by international comparisons, second language
acquisition theory, and effectiveness studies, the pros/cons of bilingual and
English-only policies are analyzed. II. Course Overview: The course will provide students a broad overview of language policy and planning: What language policy and planning are, their different foci (e.g., status, corpus, and acquisition planning), the different political tacks taken in their pursuit, and the assumptions that underlie them. This will include study of official language policies (the English-only movement in the US, official bilingualism in Canada, and the three-language Constitutional requirements in India, e.g., and the politics of their opponents and proponents. The idea of one-nation / one-language will be deconstructed, first through the ideal of linguistic human rights, which will, in turn, be deconstructed in light of contemporary post-liberal notions of language and language policy. This political foundation will underlay later discussions of acquisition planning which will problematize the distinction between language and dialect and received notions of biliteracy/bilingualism. The course will culminate in consideration of the implications for educational policy as informed by both political theory and empirical research. III.
Reading: · Required Textbooks: Petrovic, J. E. (Ed.). (2010).
International perspectives on bilingual education: Policy, practice, and
controversy. Charlotte: Information Age Press. Shohamy, E. (2006). Language policy:
Hidden agendas and new approaches. New York: Routledge. · Recommended: Ricento, T. (Ed.)(2006). An
introduction to language policy: Theory and method. Malden, MA: Blackwell
Publishing. · Additional Readings Additional readings are
available online and linked in the schedule of readings below. IV. Course Requirements: 1. This course will be run as a seminar,
i.e., informed discussion will be our basic modus operandi. Therefore, you
must keep up with the readings. In such a small class, failure by just a few
to do the readings will quickly bring our discussion to stagnation. 2. Following from #1, you must
participate in class. Note that you can’t participate if you don’t come. (My
subtle way of saying attendance matters to your grade.) 3. There are several listservs that you
will subscribe to: BILING@asu.edu and ELLADVOC@asu.edu. Also, for updates on
language policy issues from around the world, join the Consortium
for Language Policy and Planning
and get on the listserv. The
postings from these various lists should keep you up to date on issues of
language policy and education around the country and world. They should be of
great help in determining the content and audience of your final project.
Also, note that following the postings should raise questions for you and
give you issues to report on or raise in class. We will begin each class with
"postings" updates. 4. Present regularly (as per the
schedule of topics below) on a country or region of linguistic interest to
you. Each presentation should include a one page (or less) handout. 5. Complete a final research project.
This will be a 15-20 page paper on a topic of your choice. Papers should be
double-spaced in 11-12 point font. Standard APA referencing style should be
applied. While
staying within the content and purpose of the course, you should feel free to
develop a paper that best serves your academic interests and needs. Papers
should not only provide a review of the literature (certainly necessary and
required) but also should follow a research question and provide an argument.
Possible topics include but are not limited to the ones listed below. Note
that any of the topics may be related back to your oral reports, which could,
then function as background information in your final paper. Possible
research paper topics A profile of the language policies [overt and
covert] and linguistic culture of a given country or region. The country or
region chosen can be the same as the one reported on in the oral presentations. A profile of a given ethnic or religious group and
the language policies and practices that affect and characterize the group
and affect language loyalty in whatever polity the ethnic group lives. A comparative discussion of two or more regions or ethnic/religious
groups. A discussion of diglossia in a particular language.
A comparative discussion is also possible here. A discussion of a particular piece of legislation, a
particular court decision, etc. that affects language. This should be discussed
from legal and social perspectives. The paper should explore the question of
who supported it and who opposed it. The short and long-term consequences
should be discussed. (E.g., The ‘English Only’ movement could be discussed
under this topic or various initiatives across the country to ban bilingual
education.) A discussion of a particular education practice that
relates to language. Again, this discussion should be situated within the
legal framework and linguistic practices of the polity that has utilized it.
The effects, short and long-term, of the policy should be discussed. [E.g.,
the controversy surrounding bilingual education could be discussed under this
rubric. Some relevant studies on effectiveness should be reviewed.] A discussion of language/dialect maintenance and the
media. One possible question might be: How do the instruments of the mass media either
promote or discourage the maintenance of minority speech communities? A discussion of a particular instance of corpus
planning. You could discuss the means by which a particular language acquired its standard
orthography, grammar, etc. as a result [wholly or partly] of the intervention
of a state. You could also discuss a particular instance of orthographic,
lexical, or grammatical reform. (This topic may require more linguistics
background than most of you have.) A discussion of a particular instance of status
planning. You could discuss the means by which a particular language acquired [or lost] its official
status. A
discussion of the interplay between nationalist feelings or theories of
nationalism and language. A
discussion of the distinction between language and dialect (and other
linguistic forms, e.g., pidgins, creoles, etc.) and their status
(politically, educationally, etc.). V. Grading: Attendance
and Participation: 10 points Research
presentation:
20
points Oral
presentations:
30 points Research
paper: 40 points Final grading:
100-90=A, 90-80=B, and so on… VI. General
Policies Absences—High and chronic absenteeism also affects the dynamics of
the class. Your attendance is required and absences will negatively affect
your participation grade since you cannot participate if you do not attend.
One absence will not affect your grade. Barring some sort of emergency or
illness, all others will. Regardless of the reason, all absences beyond the
first must be made up by completing a short paper in which you answer class
discussion questions based on the readings for that week. Your third
absence will result in your grade being lowered by ½ a letter grade. Each
absence beyond the third will result in the same penalty. (Note that
completing the required paper, although still required, will not restore your
grade in these instances.) Statement
of Equal Treatment and Disabilities – The instructors and students in this course
will act with integrity and strive to engage in equitable verbal and
non-verbal behavior with respect to differences arising from age, gender,
race, nationality, language, physical ability, religious preferences, and
sexual orientation. If you are registered with the Office of Disability
Services, please make an appointment with the instructor as soon as possible
to discuss any course accommodations that may be necessary. If you have a
disability but have not contacted the Office of Disability Services, please
call 354-5175 or visit Osband Hall to register for services. Academic Misconduct—Academic misconduct, especially plagiarism, will not be
tolerated and will result in referral to the Associate Dean for further
action. Please consult your student handbook and familiarize yourself with
the University policy on and description of plagiarism. |
VII. Schedule of
readings and discussions
NOTE: With prior
notice (of at least a week), I reserve the right to change the order of topics
and to add to or change the readings.
reading from required text
reading available as individual pdf (click on the author’s
name)
reading available in pdf with all other purples (click HERE)
|
CLASS
DATE |
ASSIGNMENT DUE |
CLASS TOPIC |
READING
TO BE COMPLETED |
|
|
Jan. 24 |
none |
Introductions and syllabus
negotiation What is language policy? |
Ricento |
|
|
Language policy and planning:
Theory and method In the first couple
of weeks, we will come to understand the general field of language policy and
some of the theoretical perspectives that inform it. What is language policy?
What is language planning? What are the political issues/questions involved? |
||||
|
Jan. 31 |
Choose a country or region
to report on |
Language and the
nation-state |
Anderson
(Intro, Chs. 3 & 5) Blommaert Shohamy,
Ch. 2 |
|
|
Feb. 7 |
Report the languages
spoken in your area |
Models and “orientations”
in language planning |
Ruiz Shohamy,
Chs. 3-4 |
|
|
Feb. 14 |
Report on the
various ethnic (indigenous or otherwise) groups living in the area and their
language affiliation(s) |
Theoretical lenses through which to view language policy: Critical
theory and postmodernism |
Hornberger Tollefson Pennycook |
|
|
Feb. 21 |
Political theory and language policy: Language
rights |
Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights Schmidt Skutnabb-Kangas Ricento
and Cervatiuc |
||
|
Feb. 28
|
Report on the
linguistic culture of your area (the nature and extent of bi/multilingualism
& diglossia, and varieties spoken, how these are treated |
Language rights and language shift Can/should language shift be avoided? Through
language rights? On what political grounds are such rights justified? |
May Heinze-Balcazar
Video: In the white man’s image |
|
|
March 7 |
Theorizing “language” and rethinking language rights |
Shohamy,
Ch. 1 Stroud |
||
|
The politics of acquisition
planning (or language policy in education) Our lack of any
reasoned or systematic approach to language policy in the United States has
direct ramifications for education. If we are to be a monolingual society,
what is the best way to educate children? If we respect families’ rights to
their own language and culture, need we supply the resources to promote them?
If we want to respect private bilingualism but promote societal
monolingualism, how should we educate language minority children? There seems
to be a link and progression, albeit an often hazy one, between the political
English-only movement and the educational English-only movement. Jim Crawford
(2000) likes to lump both movements as reactions against a generic notion of “bilingualism.”
But, in fact, politicians go to great pains to try to separate these things
in various rhetorical ways (read: often insincere ways). Most sponsors of
English-only legislation, for example, do not mention or specifically except
bilingual education. This is a pragmatic political maneuver since bilingual
education has become a volatile issue and has historically been supported by
groups being wooed by those sponsoring the legislation. As we shall see,
despite the growing body of research demonstrating the effectiveness of
bilingual education, its political support continues to decline. |
||||
|
March
21 |
Report on examples
of status planning (overt and covert), what institutions are involved and
how, and how constructions of “nationalism” factor into planning. |
What is acquisition
planning? Historical overview of language policy in education in the U.S. |
Bratt-Paulston
& Heidemann Petrovic |
|
|
March 28 |
Report on the role
of international languages and/or the hegemony of English |
Language policy and
programming in education |
Shohamy,
Ch. 5 |
|
|
April 4 |
Schools as
discursive sites of linguistic emancipation or oppression…What is language?
What is proficiency? |
Shohamy,
Ch. 6 MacSwan
& Rolstad |
||
|
April 11
|
We will not meet on this day. Please use this time to
prepare for the presentation of your final paper. |
|||
|
April 18 |
Report on how the educational
system deals with the linguistic situation (and/or other issues institutions
involving questions of acquisition planning) |
Educational
programs for linguistic diversity: Bi/multiliteracy |
Vila
I Moreno Video: Walkout |
|
|
April 25 |
Presentations
1-5 |
Aspects and methods
of the development of biliteracy: Some international perspective |
Escamilla
and Hopewell Rao
et al |
|
|
May 2 |
Presentations
6-11 |
Final thoughts:
Language Policy, mechanisms, and activism |
Shohamy,
Chs. 8, 9, and Ep |
|
|
May 6 |
Final projects in
formal written form are due by noon. |
|||
|
For on-line
resources dealing with bilingual education and language policy, see my links/resources
page. Additional Readings
and Sources: Anzaldua, G.
(2007). Borderlands/La frontera: The
new Mestiza [3rd ed.]. San Francisco: Aunt Lute Books. Baetens Beardsmore,
H. (1993). An overview of European models of bilingual education. Language, culture and curriculum,
6(3), 197-208. Baugh, J. (2000).
Beyond Ebonics: Linguistic pride and racial prejudice. Oxford: Oxford
University Press. Brice Heath, S.
(1983). Ways with words: Language, life, and work in communities and
classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Crawford, J. (1990,
winter). Bilingual education: The effectiveness debate. Equity and choice, 37-45. Crawford, J.
(1992). Language loyalties: A source
book on the official English controversy. Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press. Crawford, J.
(2000). At war with diversity: U.S.
language policy in an age of anxiety. Clevedon, U.K.: Multilingual
Matters Ltd. Cummins, J. and
Genzuk, M. (1991). Analysis of final report longitudinal study of structured
English immersion strategy, early exit, and late-exit transitional bilingual
education programs for language-minority children. CABE Newsletter, 13(5). Cummins, J.
(2000). Language, power and pedagogy:
Bilingual children in the crossfire. Clevedon, U.K.: Multilingual Matters
Ltd. Delpit, L. (1988).
The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating other people’s
children. Harvard Educational Review,
58(3), pp. 280-298. Delpit, L. (1998).
What should teachers do? In T. Perry and L. Delpit (Eds.), The real Ebonics debate, pp. 17-26.
Boston: Beacon Press. Fishman, J.
(Ed.)(2001). Handbook of language and
ethnic identity. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fishman, J. (1991).
Reversing language shift. Clevedon,
UK: Multilingual Matters. Fillmore, L. W.
(2000). Loss of family languages: Should educators be concerned? Theory into Practice, 39(4). Gersten, R., Baker,
S., Otterstedt, J. (1998). Further analysis of: A meta-analysis of the
effectiveness of bilingual education. Author: Unpublished. Greene, J. P.
(1999/1997). A
Meta-Analysis of the Rossell and Baker Review of Bilingual Education
Research. Bilingual Research
Journal, 21(2&3), 103-122.
Hornberger, N.
(1998). Language policy, language education, language rights: Indigenous,
immigrant, and international perspectives. Language in Society, 27(4), 439-458. Krashen, S. (1998).
A note on Greene’s “A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of bilingual
education. Author: Unpublished. Kymlicka, W. and
Patten, A. (Eds.)(2003). Language rights and political theory. Oxford: Oxford
University Press. Macedo, Donaldo
& Bartolome, Lilia I. (1999). Tongue-Tied Multiculturalism. In Dancing
with Bigotry: Beyond the Politics of Tolerance, pp. 34-78. New York: St.
Martin's Press. MacSwan, J. (2000).
The threshold hypothesis, semilingualism, and other contributions to a
deficit view of linguistic minorities. Hispanic
Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 22(1), 3-45. Magnet, J. (1990a).
Language rights as collective rights. In K. L. Adams and D. T. Brink (Eds.), Perspectives on Official English: The
Campaign for English as the Official Language of the USA, pp. 293-299.
Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Magnet, J.
(1990b).Canadian perspectives on official English. In K. L. Adams and D. T.
Brink (Eds.), Perspectives on Official
English: The Campaign for English as the Official Language of the USA,
pp. 293-299. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Martín Rojo, L. (2010). Constructing inequality in multilingual classrooms. New York: De Gruyter Mouton. Menken, K. (2008). English
learners left behind: Standardized testing as language policy. Clevedon, UK:
Multilingual Matters. Ovando, C. and
Collier, V. (1998). Bilingual and ESL Classrooms: Teaching in Multicultural
Contexts. Boston: McGraw Hill. Petrovic, J. E.
(1999/1997). Balkanization,
bilingualism, and comparisons of language situations at home and abroad. Bilingual Research
Journal, 21(2&3), pp. 233-254. Petrovic, J. E.
(2005). The conservative restoration and neoliberal defenses of bilingual
education. Language policy, 4,
395-416. Ramirez, J. D.,
Yuen, S. D., and Ramey, D. R. (1991). Final
report: Longitudinal study of structured English immersion strategy,
early-exit and late-exit transitional bilingual education programs for
language minority children. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Education and
Aguirre International. Rickford, J. R. and
Rickford, R. J. (2000). Spoken soul: The story of black English. New York:
John Wiley & Sons. Rossell, C. H. and
Baker, K. (1996). The educational effectiveness of bilingual education. Research in the teaching of English, 30(1),
7-74. Ruiz, R. (1984).
Orientations in language planning. NABE
journal, 8(2), 15-34. Ruiz, R. 1994.
Language Policy and Planning in the United States. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 14: 111-125. Schlesinger, A.
(1992). The Disuniting of America.
New York: W. W. Norton & Company. Skutnabb-Kangas, T.
(2000). Linguistic genocide in education or worldwide diversity and human
rights? Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Smith, E. (1998).
What is black English? What is Ebonics? In T. Perry and L. Delpit (Eds.), The real Ebonics debate, pp. 49-58.
Boston: Beacon Press. Spolsky, B. (2004).
Language policy. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. Soto, L. D. (1997).
Language, culture, and power: Bilingual
families and the struggle for quality education. Albany: State University
of New York Press. Wee, L. (2010). Language without rights. Oxford:
Oxford University Press. Zepeda, O. and
Hill, J. (1991). The condition of Native American languages in the United
States. Diogenes, 153, 45-65. |