• Complain

Bigelow Martha(Editor) - The routledge handbook of educational linguistics

Here you can read online Bigelow Martha(Editor) - The routledge handbook of educational linguistics full text of the book (entire story) in english for free. Download pdf and epub, get meaning, cover and reviews about this ebook. City: London;New York, year: 2014;2015, publisher: Routledge;Taylor and Francis, genre: Home and family. Description of the work, (preface) as well as reviews are available. Best literature library LitArk.com created for fans of good reading and offers a wide selection of genres:

Romance novel Science fiction Adventure Detective Science History Home and family Prose Art Politics Computer Non-fiction Religion Business Children Humor

Choose a favorite category and find really read worthwhile books. Enjoy immersion in the world of imagination, feel the emotions of the characters or learn something new for yourself, make an fascinating discovery.

Bigelow Martha(Editor) The routledge handbook of educational linguistics

The routledge handbook of educational linguistics: summary, description and annotation

We offer to read an annotation, description, summary or preface (depends on what the author of the book "The routledge handbook of educational linguistics" wrote himself). If you haven't found the necessary information about the book — write in the comments, we will try to find it.

The Routledge Handbook of Educational Linguisticsprovides a comprehensive survey of the core and current language-related issues in educational contexts. Bringing together the expertise and voices of well-established as well as emerging scholars from around the world, the handbook offers over thirty authoritative and critical explorations of methodologies and contexts of educational linguistics, issues of instruction and assessment, and teacher education, as well as coverage of key topics such as advocacy, critical pedagogy, and ethics and politics of research in educational linguistics. Each chapter relates to key issues raised in the respective topic, providing additional historical background, critical discussion, reviews of pertinent research methods, and an assessment of what the future might hold.
This volume embraces multiple, dynamic perspectives and a range of voices in order to move forward in new and productive directions, makingThe Routledge Handbook of Educational Linguisticsan essential volume for any student and researcher interested in the issues surrounding language and education, particularly in multilingual and multicultural settings.

Bigelow Martha(Editor): author's other books


Who wrote The routledge handbook of educational linguistics? Find out the surname, the name of the author of the book and a list of all author's works by series.

The routledge handbook of educational linguistics — read online for free the complete book (whole text) full work

Below is the text of the book, divided by pages. System saving the place of the last page read, allows you to conveniently read the book "The routledge handbook of educational linguistics" online for free, without having to search again every time where you left off. Put a bookmark, and you can go to the page where you finished reading at any time.

Light

Font size:

Reset

Interval:

Bookmark:

Make
Part 5
Language Teacher Education
32
Looking Back, Sideways, and Forward

Mara E. Torres-Guzmn and Ester J. de Jong

Introduction

With more than 6,000 languages distributed over 200 nations, multilingualism continues to be the norm in the world today. Following Wildsmith-Cromarty (2009), multilingualism needs to be defined broadly, acknowledging that some situations may call for the oral knowledge of more than one language, for the knowledge of more than one literacy, and for understanding what multiple languages mean to others. In this chapter, we will trace the historical developments in our conceptualizations of multilingualism and education in the United States.

To organize our discussion, we apply a tri-part framework. The macro sociopolitical (Ricento 2000) refers to events and processes at the national and global level that serve as a backdrop to the role of linguistic and cultural diversity in schools. In particular, by focusing on the conceptualization of the relationships between language, culture, race, and poverty, we can understand the flows of local, national, and international events and how they reflect different sociocultural contexts of multilingualism. The onto-epistemological (Barad 2007) refers to the nature of knowledge and also to knowing as being, as we know because we are of the world (185). We use this lens to show how our collective views of multilingualism have evolved over time. Lastly, our analysis highlights the images and metaphors the different historical periods embodied in the media, scholarly work, and in everyday language. We begin each historical period by presenting the localized experiences of the individual bilingual learner.

Through the vignette and the three lenses, we will explore the flows of understanding of language, learning, and multilingualism in schools in order to understand the theoretical and research tasks of the present and the future. We realize that any attempt to distinguish the historical periods is necessarily arbitrary in nature. Moreover, we do not propose linearity, as there are traces of each of the periods in the others; oftentimes they co-exist. Acknowledging the different multilingual threads in United States history, this chapter specifically explores the conceptual construction and reconstruction of multilingualism in K12 schools from post-World War II to the present.

Period I: From Sink or Swim to the Dawn of a New Era
Vignette

The child who used multiple languages in his/her everyday life was still in a situation in the world known as sink or swim, which had characterized public education for immigrant children and adults since the early 1900s (Higham 1955; Berroll 1995; Pavlenko and Blackledge 2004). The child entered an all-English environment that made little room for the different languages and cultural experiences that the child brought to school. Educational and social statistics show that only some children succeeded in American life, while the majority failed schooling, even when learning the language and assimilating into the dominant culture (Perlmann 1990).

The period immediately following World War II was dominated by the Cold War and the competition with the then-Soviet Union as well as an internal shift in racial relations. The need to respond to the USSR military program and the launching of Sputnik into space in 1957 fueled the idea that the United States needed to effectively develop its own human resources and the notion that national defense required the development of foreign languages amongst the nations school children. During this era, poverty was put forth as the dominant explanatory variable of underachievement of certain groups of children as it was tied to patterns of English language use and parents socialization practices that disadvantaged children in school (1953 Puerto Rican study of New York [Morrison 1958]).

Oscar Lewis Five Families: Mexican Case Studies in the Culture of Poverty (1959), Glazer and Moynihans (1963) Beyond the Melting Pot: The Negros, Puerto Ricans, Jews, Italian, and Irish of New York City , and the 1966 Coleman Report (Coleman 1968) firmly reinscribed the culture of the home and poverty as the main explanatory variables for school achievement. These studies were significant in shaping federal program responses, such as the Economic Opportunities Act of 1964 and Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, established to provide compensatory economic and educational services for those living in poverty. By extension, educational solutions focused on alleviating the deficits in the home through compensatory programs. While race, ethnicity, and language were integrally interwoven with poverty, these factors were viewed as subordinate and merely implicated.

Conceptualizing Bi/Multilingualism (Language, Mind, and Society)

Behaviorist conceptualizations of language and language acquisition came under severe critique during this period and were replaced by cognitive views of language development. Chomskys work stressed the internal, innate mechanisms of language acquisition (Mitchell and Myles 1998). With his framework (and influenced by earlier work by De Saussure), it was an idealized, native speaker whose competence (idealized grammar) rather than performance (actual use of the language) stood at the center of linguistic research. Influenced by these cognitive approaches to language and language acquisition, bilingualism was viewed as a characteristic of the individual. Bilinguals were individuals acquiring two monolingual systems and bilingual acquisition was researched as the systematic and separate development of specific linguistic features of each language system. Early scholarly works on multilingualism used only one term for both bilingualism and multilingualism (Haugen 1970; Weinrich 1953).

The centrality of the native-speaker, monolingual norm, as an integral part of the definition of bilingualism, was particularly evident in the treatment of and attitudes toward code-switchingthat is, the use of both languages within or between sentences. Code-switching was considered an indicator of immaturity of both linguistic systems. In schools, bilingual children who simultaneously used both languages were seen as being linguistically confused and, possibly, cognitively delayed.

In a similar vein, cultures were viewed as belonging to unique, bounded groups from exotic lands whose means of communication was not English. It was assumed that there was a one-toone relationship between language choice and national identity. Having one standard or national language was a precondition for political, social, and economic cohesion and national identity. In the United States, speaking English and giving up the language of your home country within three generations continued as a key marker of successful assimilation for immigrants (Hawley 1948; Jaffe 1954; Handlin 1959).

Conceptualizing Diversity Through Assimilation

As the one-way nature of (im)migration shifted, the traditional intergenerational pattern of language shift was challenged. Research focus on language use across generations was directly associated with the need to explain the persistence of Spanish-speaking groups, particularly, as in the southwest or on the east coast they appeared to retain their mother tongue beyond the third generation. Lopez and Staton-Salazar (2001) proposed that what was happening was that because a large number of Mexicano immigrants arrived during the Mexican Revolution of the 1910, by the 1960s a third generation was coming of age. In California alone, only 20% of the Latino state population at the time was foreign-born, and two thirds of the population was school-age children. Cuban refugees also raised the need for language maintenance in education, giving rise to the establishment of the first two-way bilingual program, as they had hopes of returning to their home-land someday. Samora (1962) and Sanchez (1962) proposed that language, race, poverty, and annexation were complicating factors related to assimilation. Another perspective was represented by Fishmans Language Loyalty: Its Functions and Concomitants in Two Bilingual Communities (1964), which proposed that language maintenance was a sign of identity and resistance (Blanton 2012).

Next page
Light

Font size:

Reset

Interval:

Bookmark:

Make

Similar books «The routledge handbook of educational linguistics»

Look at similar books to The routledge handbook of educational linguistics. We have selected literature similar in name and meaning in the hope of providing readers with more options to find new, interesting, not yet read works.


Reviews about «The routledge handbook of educational linguistics»

Discussion, reviews of the book The routledge handbook of educational linguistics and just readers' own opinions. Leave your comments, write what you think about the work, its meaning or the main characters. Specify what exactly you liked and what you didn't like, and why you think so.