Kylie Hiemstra

4-21-12

Language and Society

Research Proposal: Attitudes toward and Components of Bilingual Education

Introduction

Bilingual education is an important aspect of sociolinguistics and education because of

the increasing need for teachers to differentiate instruction for a diverse population of students.

In addition, some scholars believe that the growing number of dying languages means that we

must “retain language diversity, [which] requires intervention: language planning” (Baker, 2006,

p. 63). Baker (2006) argues that language planning must take place among today’s youth so that

languages can be passed on for social, cultural, and economic reasons. Thus, bilingual education

is important in this planning because “diversity is essential…languages express

identity…languages are repositories of history…[and] languages contribute to the sum of human

knowledge” (Baker, 2006, pp. 45-48). Bilinguals differ in their ability levels and domains of use

of their languages, however, especially in the context of a diglossia (Baker, 2006), and it is

difficult to implement programs that reach all students.

Purpose and Research Questions

The purpose of this research is to provide schools with the information needed to

effectively implement bilingual education programs based on sociolinguistic data. I will

examine the experiences and attitudes of bilingual students, bilingual teachers, and teachers of

bilingual education toward bilingual education programs. I will conduct and transcribe group

conversations and individual interviews in the United States and Finland, because I think it will

be useful to have an international perspective on the situation. With the help of previous

sociolinguistic studies that examine components of successful bilingual education, my research

will be conducted to improve the quality of bilingual education programs based on first-hand

accounts from bilingual students and educators. To achieve these goals, I will focus on two

research questions: “What are current bilingual students’ and teachers’ attitudes toward bilingual

education?” and consequently, “What are the components of successful bilingual education?”

Literature Review

Research shows that English language learners generally tend to be behind their

monolingual peers in academic performance; one study shows that only 18.7% of bilingual

students achieve state norms for reading in English, and other studies demonstrate that English

language learners are more likely to be placed in lower ability groups and drop out of school

(Baker, 2006). “Weak” bilingual education programs often produce students who score far

below average in English reading achievement, whereas “strong” programs “were found to be

more influential in higher achievement than student background variables such as socioeconomic

status” (Baker, 2006, p. 204). Programs tend to be considered “strong” if they incorporate the

student’s native language into instruction, rather than immediately dismissing the native

language and replacing it with the majority language. Such programs include dual language

learning and maintenance of the heritage language, both of which focus on the outcomes of

bilingualism, biliteracy, and biculturalism (Baker, 2006).

Alanís and Rodríguez (2008) studied the components of one successful dual language

program at City Elementary School in Texas. Students enrolled in this program are instructed in

both English and Spanish. Through observations, interviews with bilingual teachers and the

principal, and an analysis of standardized test scores in English reading, math, and science,

Alanís and Rodríguez (2008) found that the main factors that play a part in the overall success of

the program are “pedagogical equity, effective bilingual teachers, active parent participation,

[and] knowledgeable leadership and continuity” (p. 312). The students at City Elementary

repeatedly scored higher than other students in the district and state on state-administered

standardized tests, demonstrating that learning in two languages had positive effects on their

learning outcomes.

Unfortunately, foreigners are often taught to think that monolingual native speakers are

the only ones who can achieve a “native speakerness” level of competence (Pavlenko, 2003, p.

257). This viewpoint can lead to a major problem in education: if children are taught to be more

concerned with perfection in the written and spoken form of the majority language, they will not

focus on meaning and understanding and will most likely fall behind in academic performance.

In addition, their unattainable goal of gaining “native speaker” competence leads to a lack of

motivation in school. Positive classroom experiences and teaching strategies, however, can rid

students of these negative attitudes and increase self-esteem (Pavlenko, 2003). In order to

reframe identity and group membership, educators must give value to students’ native languages

and cultures and must emphasize that there is not one “right” way to speak a language.

I chose to study students and teachers in Finland because their education system is said to

be one of the best in existence, and recently Finnish students have ranked as some of the highest

performing students in the world (Partanen, 2011). Finland’s major focus of education is “the

idea that every child should have exactly the same opportunity to learn,” and thus their main goal

“was never excellence. It [is] equity” (Partanen, 2011). I plan to expand on this research by

specifically studying the effects of this educational equality on their bilingual education

programs.

Based on this previous research, I would like to examine the attitudes and personal

experiences of students and teachers immersed in these issues. I am interested in the qualitative

aspect of analyzing interview data, rather than the facts and figures about the lack of success of

students in these programs. Some scholars argue that “bilingual education, when effectively

implemented, is not the cause of under-achievement; rather it is the cure” (Baker, 2006, p. 206),

and thus my purpose is to learn what constitutes such effective bilingual education by examining

the attitudes and opinions of those who have first-hand experience with it.

Theoretical Framework

Based on my understanding of this research and the background of bilingual education in

the United States, implementing strong bilingual education programs is essential for the success

of bilingual students. I am also studying Elementary Education and have been learning recently

about bilingual education in schools, so this research proposal relates to my life from both a

linguistic and an educational perspective. I hope to gain useful insights from my data that I can

apply in order to ensure the success of all of my future students.

One idea that influences my knowledge base on this topic is the problem with the theory

of “World English,” which suggests uniformity in the processes of globalization; however, this

viewpoint “overlooks the crucial differences that such processes display” (Blommaert, 2010, p.

139). Making generalizations about this globalization thus leads to incorrect notions that similar

effects are caused by similar processes. This applies to the field of bilingual education because

oftentimes generalizations are made about the ways in which to implement special programs, but

in reality the programs should cater toward the needs and background of the specific student. In

my education classes, we have discussed cases in which bilingual students were placed in special

education classes because they were not learning English quickly enough; we also discussed

cases in which foreign students were enrolled in programs geared toward Spanish speaking

students because those were the only bilingual programs available. The prospected goal of these

diagnoses and programs is the same: to have students learn and understand English so that they

can excel academically. As Blommaert (2010) points out, however, the processes by which to

achieve this goal should not be generalized to every situation, but rather should be implemented

with the idea that differences in these processes are in fact necessary for success. Gathering data

from first-hand experiences of students and teachers involved in these processes will be

beneficial in examining the different kinds of effective bilingual education and the different

situations in which these programs are applicable.

In addition, one of my best friends is from Finland; she is fluent in both English and

Swedish (she lives in the Swedish community of Finland) and knows some Finnish, Danish, and

French. She lived in Finland until she was nine years old, then in Denmark for three years and

the United States for three years, and now lives in Finland again. When she moved to the United

States at age 12, she was already fluent in English, her second language, in addition to Swedish,

her native language. I think it is fascinating that she was able to speak English so well based

solely on her exposure to and instruction in English in a country where it is not even the official

language. Based on what I have learned and observed from her experience, this dual language

learning system proves to be quite effective for proficiency in both languages, and I am

interested to analyze how she and others view the apparent success of the Finnish system.

My previous knowledge and personal experiences influence how I am informed about

bilingual education, and my collection and analysis of data will be based on this understanding.

Methodology

I will collect data from fifteen bilingual American students and fifteen bilingual Finnish

students; fifteen bilingual American teachers and fifteen bilingual Finnish teachers; and fifteen

American teachers and fifteen Finnish teachers who are involved in bilingual programs (some of

these teachers may also belong to the bilingual teachers category). My participants will be

students or teachers of grades 3-12 in their country of origin. All of the American and Finnish

participants must speak English and Swedish as their native languages, respectively; it does not

matter what their other language(s) is. The American participants can be from anywhere in the

United States, and the Finnish participants must be from a Swedish-speaking part of Finland. I

will use a Swedish translator for the interviews with my Finnish participants.

For the first part of my study, I will record and transcribe group conversations among the

participants. They will be divided based on their category, so the American students will be

together, the Finnish students will be together, and so on. I will ask them to discuss their

personal experiences and how these affect their ideas about what “strong” bilingual education

means. I will analyze these conversations using conversation analysis, which looks in depth at

the organization and structure of conversation. This methodology investigates turn taking and

the different roles that the participants play throughout the conversation (Hutchby & Wooffitt,

1998). I will study how my participants use utterances to accomplish certain things and convey

meaning in conversation, which will allow me to determine how they construct their bilingual

identities and attitudes. I will conduct this part of my study first because conversation analysis is

based on the fact that participants are studied solely through their conversation data, rather than

any preconceived notions about who they are.

Taking these roles and identities in conversation into account, in the second part of my

study I will record and transcribe 30-minute individual interviews with my participants. I will

ask questions about their experiences with bilingual education and about the aspects of these

experiences that seem to help them or their students excel both academically and emotionally.

Similar to Pavlenko’s (2003) research, I will analyze this data through discursive positioning by

examining the lexical choices used when participants describe their experiences; this will reveal

their underlying attitudes and help me understand why their bilingual experiences were or were

not successful. I will also look at grammatical positioning, or changes in tense and change-of-

state verbs used when describing changes in their perceived identities. By analyzing their

responses in this way and by taking into account what they say, I will be able to learn about their

opinions on and ideas about bilingual education.

Through these methods, I will be able to determine current students’ and teachers’

attitudes toward bilingual education. Based on their personal experiences, I can establish the

components of bilingual education that make it effective in certain contexts. This will allow me

to deduce the ways in which schools should implement bilingual education programs that

advance academic achievement and help bilingual students excel.

Conclusion

Language diversity and accommodation for all students are important parts of the

discussion on bilingual education, and I want to conduct this research to gain knowledge about

the experiences of students and teachers who play a direct role in this topic. Current bilingual

students can provide insight into what makes them feel most comfortable and helps them thrive

academically, socially, and emotionally; bilingual teachers have the experience of what being

bilingual means and are able to incorporate this experience and knowledge into their classroom

identities; and teachers in bilingual education programs know what seems to help or hurt their

students’ performances, based on formal assessments and general observations of their well-

being. Especially in our increasingly international country, everyone must be aware of changing

the negative outlooks that we have on non-native speakers. Research on attitudes towards and

components of bilingual education can help us change our approaches so that we can accept,

accommodate, and promote a wide variety of language and culture.

References

Alanís, I., & Rodríguez, M. A. (2008). Sustaining a dual language immersion program: Features

of success. Journal of Latinos and Education, 7(4), 305-319. doi:

10.1080/15348430802143378

Baker, C. (2006). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism (4th

ed.). Tonawanda,

NY: Multilingual Matters Ltd.

Blommaert, J. (2010). The sociolinguistics of globalization. New York, NY: Cambridge

University Press.

Hutchby, I., & Wooffitt, R. (1998). Conversation analysis. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Partanen, A. (2011, December 29). What Americans keep ignoring about Finland’s school

success. The Atlantic. Retrieved from

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/12/what-americans-keep-ignoring-

about-finlands-school-success/250564/

Pavlenko, A. (2003). "I never knew I was a bilingual": Reimagining teacher identities in TESOL.

Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 2(4), 251-268.