So, in my last post I discussed grappling with surprising feelings of pessimism that stemmed from some of the stark perspectives posed in my recent reading assignments. After chewing over some of these ideas, I think I’ve stumbled upon the heart of this angst: I have a hard time reconciling such enthusiastic idealism with the reality of the United States public school system.
Take the education of English Language Learners (ELLs), or folks who grew up with a native language other than English. As I’ve read it, the strategy for educating ELLs breaks down into three main categories: immersion (where students are forced to participate in all their classes using only English), “ESL Education” (where ELL students meet for some time every day, for coaching in English, and tutoring is available from multilingual teachers), and multilingual education (where all students are educated in classes using more than one language, whether English is their native language or not).
From the idealist perspective, multilingual education clearly carries the greatest advantage. Students whose native language isn’t English would be placed on similar footing as the English-native students, or put in the position of greater ease due to their own native fluency. And the English-native students have the benefit of leaving their Secondary education as bilingual, or multilingual individuals.
Yet this raises the question of logistics: on what scale could we implement this approach? Should all schools require all new hires to be at least bilingual? How many different languages should be represented within a given school system? Who makes those decisions? Can the current educational budget afford such a radical shift? All these questions garner a range of answers, all of which could likely be defended with equal veracity, letting alone the politicized issue of whether English should be considered the “Official Language,” thus barring teaching in non-English languages.
Untangling the myriad threads that stem from the simple question “How do we implement this ideal?” speaks, to me, as an indicator of the ridiculous complexity involved in organizing a nation’s education. The majority of educational researchers may agree (though they rarely do) on a single ideal, yet to instate such change takes time, effort, and a keen eye for the big-picture.
Take school de-segregation for example. More than half a century has past since the Roe v. Wade decision, yet many districts are more segregated than ever. What we can learn fro the de-segregation example is breakdown of such a process. At one point, someone had to ask, “Ok, given the complexity of this issue, what is the next logical step, assuming we want to carry through de-segregation of schools?” And somebody came up with an answer. Wrestling with such ideas as “democracy in the classroom,” or “deconstructing the school-to-prison pipeline,” the enormity of the posed problems is intimidating.
I can only guess, or hope, that by keeping the ideal solution in my mind, and tempering my understanding of such issues with my experience in the classroom, I can arrive at my own conception of “the next logical step.” My only remaining question is “Why haven’t I read this anywhere else?” Is it too local a concept? Does “the next logical step” only apply to an individual school, or are there trends that we can address in the national culture of education?
Uf, long post, but big ideas too. I hope I didn’t put anyone to sleep as they read this, but weigh in if you’ve got ideas to share.
