Author:
Becky Rudeen
[ Edit | View ]
|
Date Posted: 22:39:06 02/05/02 Tue
I agree with you Kristin, especially in light of the success of the Canadian experience where students achieved higher levels of proficiency in the second language than students who studied it as an isolated subject(p15). When students receive instruction in their primary language in the usual core curriculum, they succeed academically and become more proficient in their primary language. Not only that but they have the added support at home where much of their work will be done. We know it takes about six years to become proficient in a second language, so instruction in the second language is gradually introduced until it comprises 50 percent of instruction, as in the Two-Way Immersion program (p16). The benefits are extraordinary. Not only do these students become bilingual and biliterate, but they maintain their proficiency, better still, improve their proficiency in their first language. Additionally, they succeed academically in the core curriculum.
Yes, this seems to be a win-win program and I, too , do not understand why it is not recognized for the success rate that it seems to show in Canada and other parts of the country. Clearly, it has its challenges like those you mentioned. It would also hurt students who do not have a strong proficient language in the home where support is critical for their academic success. But, like you said, what programs do not come with their challenges? The benefits certainly seem to outweigh the challenges in this case and are worth the extra expense and effort, in my opinion.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
|
Feedback: 