• Author / Uploaded
• TimothyIller

Citation preview

Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc. (TESOL)

Reexamining English Only in the ESL Classroom Author(s): Elsa Roberts Auerbach Source: TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Spring, 1993), pp. 9-32 Published by: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc. (TESOL) Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3586949 . Accessed: 22/06/2014 18:02 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc. (TESOL) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to TESOL Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

TESOL QUARTERLYVol.27, No.1, Spring1993

Reexamining EnglishOnlyin the ESL Classroom ELSA ROBERTS AUERBACH

atBoston University ofMassachusetts

Despite widespreadoppositionto theEnglishOnly movement,supportforbilingualeducation,and advocacyforlanguagerights,many U.S. ESL educatorscontinueto upholdthenotionthatEnglishis the withintheconfinesofthe onlyacceptablemediumofcommunication ESL classroom.Althoughthe exclusiveuse of Englishin teaching ESL has come to be seen as a naturaland commonsensepractice whichcan bejustifiedon pedagogicalgrounds,thisarticlearguesthat it is rootedin a particularideologicalperspective, restson unexamined assumptions,and servesto reinforceinequitiesin the broader socialorder.Evidencefromresearchand practiceis presentedwhich suggeststhattherationaleused tojustify Englishonlyintheclassroom is neitherconclusivenor pedagogicallysound. Further,the article detailsa growingbodyofevidenceindicatingthatL1 and/orbilingual but necessaryforadult ESL students optionsare not onlyeffective withlimitedL 1literacy orschoolingand thatuseofstudents'linguistic resourcescan be beneficialat all levels of ESL. Accountsfroma numberof projects,includingtwowithwhichthe authorhas been involved,documenta rangeof uses forthe nativelanguagein both initialliteracyand ESL instruction for adults. Finally,because the issue of languagechoiceis so intimately linkedwithissuesof power, thearticlecallsforreconceptualizing thenotionofexpertiseto legitimatethe knowledgeand experienceof nontraditional expertsfrom the communitiesof the learners. To me,thewholeRodney is Kingcaseand therioting provedthatthere noAmerican dreamofopportunityfor peopleofcolor," saidJesus Vargas, enrolled inajob training inEastLos 17, a highschooldropout program Angeles. We are treated likegarbage.I keptgetting becausewhenI suspended theteachers I wasdisrespecting spokeSpanishwithmyhomeboys, thought them. metospeakinEnglishbecause I wasinAmerica. Theykepttelling I wasn'tgoingtotakethat..... So I leftand neverwentback.Someof teachers those don'twantus.Thathurts, thatreally hurts. (Ribadeneira, 1992, p. 7) 9

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

s a field,we face an unwitting yetpervasiveschizophrenia.On the one hand, we like to see ourselvesabove or beyondthe kind ofpracticesdescribedbyVargasin theepigraph,takenfromtheBoston Globe.Althoughsome ESL educatorssupportand have organizational ties to the EnglishOnly movement,manyothersadvocate language repression,and oppose rightsand bilingualeducation,decrylinguistic thepoliticalagenda ofU.S. English(see,e.g.,Judd,1987).The TESOL organizationitselfhas passed a language rightsresolution(TESOL, 1987) supporting"measureswhichprotectthe rightof all individuals A

to preserve and foster their linguistic and cultural origins ...

[and

opposing]all measuresdeclaringEnglishthe officiallanguage of the ithas issueda statement UnitedStatesofAmerica ... ." Morerecently, opposing discriminationin hiring based on language of origin (TESOL, 1992). On the otherhand,withintheconfinesof theESL classroom,many of thosewho mayoppose theEnglishOnlymovementon a policylevel insistthattheirstudentsuse Englishas thesole mediumofcommunication; teachersdevise elaborategames,signals,and penaltysystemsto ensurethatstudentsdo notuse theirL1 andjustifythesepracticeswith theclaimthatuse of the L1 willimpede progressin theacquisitionof English.Even officialTESOL publicationslend supportto thisview withthe publicationof articleslike a recentone (Weinberg,1990) extollingthe virtuesof finingstudentsforusingtheirLi. The author classroom.If humorouslytellsher students,"This is an English-only or Rusor Vietnamese or Mandarin or Cantonese Spanish you speak sian or Farsi,you pay me 25 cents.I can be rich"(p. 5). The axiom seemstobe that underlyingthesepractices,assumedtobe self-evident, ESL classroom. in the used be should and only English English To the extentthatthisaxiom is widelyacceptedamong ESL educators,it needs to be reexamined.Whereasthe politicalagenda of the EnglishOnly movementmayseem obviouson a macrolevel,the ways are less thisagendaon a microlevel inwhichour ownpracticesreinforce visible,and yet,as Vargas says,whathappens insideand outsidethe classroomare twosidesofthesamecoin.Whetheror notwesupportthe use oflearners'Lls is notjust a pedagogicalmatter:It is a politicalone, is botha mirrorof and the waythatwe address it in ESL instruction and a rehearsalforrelationsof powerin the broadersociety.

SITUATING COMMONSENSE PRACTICES IN AN IDEOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK Power,accordingto Fairclough(1989), is exercisedbythedominant

groups in two main ways: through coercion (the use of force) or 10

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

throughconsent(willingacquiescence).Consent,however,isnotalways the resultof conscious choice; rather,it comes about throughthe unconsciousacceptanceof institutional practices: whichpeopledrawuponwithout Institutional oftenemthinking practices whichdirectly or indirectly bodyassumptions legitimize existingpower inthedominant canoftenbe showntooriginate relations. classor Practices thedominant bloc,and to havebecomenaturalized. (p. 33) In otherwords,practiceswhichare unconsciouslyaccepted as the naturaland inevitablewayof doing thingsmayin factbe inherently with political,servingto maintainthe relativepositionof participants to to each relations. other-theyhelp perpetuateexistingpower respect These everyday,taken-for-granted practicesconstitutewhat Fairone of calls the centralmechanisms ofensuring ideological power, clough controlbyconsent.He arguesthatlanguagehas a particularly imporand powerare manifested tantroleinexercisingthiscontrol:Authority practicesaround language use. by institutional Severalrecentanalysesdocumentthewaysthatlanguagepoliciesin general,and policiesaround the impositionof Englishin particular, functionas tools of dominationand subordinationon a global level. Tollefson(1991) arguesthatlanguagepoliciesare a centralmechanism in ensuringthat vast numbersof people will be unable to acquire the kinds of language competencerequired by modern social and As he says,"Languageis one criterionfordetermineconomicsystems. which will ing completedifferentlevelsof education.In this people a forrationingaccesstojobs withhighsalaries" is means way,language thus (pp. 8-9), creatingunequal social and economicrelationships. and defines (1988) callsthistypeofcontrollinguicism Skutnabb-Kangas itas "ideologiesand structures whichare used tolegitimate, effectuate, and reproducean unequal divisionofpowerand resources(bothmaterial and nonmaterial)betweengroupswhichare definedon the basis oflanguage"(p. 13). Phillipson(1988, 1992)situateslinguicism withina broadertheoryoflinguistic that imperialism, arguing Englishlinguistic imperialism(in which"thedominanceof Englishis assertedand maintainedbytheestablishment and continuousreconstitution ofstructural and culturalinequalitiesbetweenEnglishand otherlanguages"(1992, "Whereas p. 47)) has come tobe a primarytoolofpostcolonialstrategy: once Britanniaruled the waves,now it is Englishwhichrules them" (1992, p. 1). Whereas the mechanismsof ideologicalcontrolexercisedthrough on a globallevel,they languagepolicyhavebeen examinedextensively have been less fullyexplored on the level of day-to-dayinteractions

between teachers and learners. What I want to show in this paper is that the insistence on using only English in the classroom represents ENGLISH ONLY IN THE ESL CLASSROOM

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

11

and naturalizedeverydaypracpreciselythekindof taken-for-granted ticewhichFaircloughdiscusses:Althoughithas come to bejustifiedin pedagogicalterms,it restson unexaminedassumptions,originatesin the politicalagenda of the dominantgroups,and servesto reinforce existingrelationsof power.Preciselybecause itsmechanismsare hidden, it is a primeexampleof Fairclough'snotionof covertideological control.This paper, thus, is meant not as an attackon those who to advocatethemonolingualuse of English,butratheras an invitation reexaminethese practicesin lightof theirofteninvisibleideological and theirimplicationsfor the roots,theirpedagogical effectiveness, ESL professionas a whole.

HISTORICAL ROOTS OF ENGLISH-ONLY INSTRUCTION Historicalaccounts of language education in the U.S. show that monolingualapproachesto the teachingof Englishhave byno means alwaysbeen the norm(Baron, 1990; Crawford,1991; Daniels, 1990); in policyoftendetermined rather,therehave been cyclicalfluctuations In the 19thcentury,for factors. than rather pedagogical by political controlled nature of public and the decentralized locally example, in withthepolitiaccordance education for allowed bilingual schooling cal powerofparticularethnicgroups.It wastheresurgenceofnativism inthelate 19thcenturythatsignaled and antiforeign politicalsentiment the decline of bilingualeducation.The adventof World War I, the fromSouthernand EasternEurope, and the increasein immigration in the labor movementcontributedto an role of immigrants growing xenophobicatmosphereintheearly20thcentury;"foreign increasingly influence"wasblamedforthenation'spoliticaland economicproblems movementwaspromotedas a meansofcountand theAmericanization became a vehicleto enhanceloyinstruction ESL influence. this ering the and the both to country,withcompanieslike the company alty Ford MotorCompanyrequiringemployeesto attendAmericanization classes (Crawford,1991, p. 22). Englishwas associatedwithpatriotism-speaking"good" Englishwasequatedwithbeinga "good" American (Baron, 1990, p. 155). Childrenwereencouragedto professlanguage loyaltythroughoaths such as one thatbegan as follows: I lovetheUnitedStatesof America.I lovemycountry's flag.I lovemy country's language.I promise: 1. That I willnotdishonormycountry's speechbyleavingoffthelast ofwords. syllables 12

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

2. That I willsaya goodAmerican "yes"and "no"in placeofan Indian and "nup-um" or a foreign "ya"or "yehand "nope." grunt"um-hum" (Robbins,1918,p. 175,citedin Baron,1990,p. 155) in thefirst quarter AccordingtoBaron,thespreadofESL instruction ofthe20thcenturywasa directoutcomeoftheAmericanization movetime that direct methods oral it at this was ment; stressing English gained favorover methodswhichallowed the use of the students' nativelanguage,and Englishonlybecamethenormin ESL classes.In the early 1920s, Henry Goldbergerdeveloped an approach to adult whichfocusedon teachingpracticalEnglishincluding ESL instruction lessons on opening bank accounts,visitingthe doctor,makingpurchases, askingdirections,and showinggratitude.He recommended thatEnglishbe the sole mediumof instruction, and, in groupingstuto "warned teachers the formation of 'nationalcliques' dents, prevent whichwoulddelaytheworkofAmericanization" (Baron, 1990,p. 160). Hand in hand withinstructional approachesdesigned to promote U.S. valueswereformalizedgate-keeping practicesdesignedtoexclude from the ranks of the teachingprofession:Speech testswere foreigners those who failed the and sectionsweredenied instituted, pronunciation licenses. Many statespassed laws requiringteachersto be citizens. Accordingto Baron (1990),countryoforiginand nativelanguagewere more importantforteachingESL thantraining:"As a resultof these efforts to homogenizethelanguageoftheteachingcorps,schoolteachers remainedbyand largemonolingualEnglishspeakersuntrainedin any methodologyto teachEnglishto non-anglophonesand unable to empathizewiththe non-anglophonestudent"(p. 162). Althoughthisis notthe place to proceedwitha detailedaccountof the subsequentdevelopmentof ESL methodologies,I presentthis slice of historyto show that practiceswe take for grantedas being pedagogicallygroundedhave antecedentsin overtlyideologicaltendencies. Much of the discourse fromthe Americanizationperiod is mirroredin the discourse of present-day"innovative"approaches whichfocuson survivalEnglishin an English-only classroom,withthe notable differencethat,at thattime,the politicalagenda was more explicit. Phillipsonargues thatmore recentglobal rootsof commonlyheld assumptionsabout Englishlanguageteaching(ELT) can be tracedto Britishneocolonialpolicies.He claimsthatthedevelopmentof ELT as a professionwasitselfa directresponsetoa politicalimperative. English was seen to be a keycomponentof theinfrastructure requiredforthe spread of Britishneocolonialcontroland, as such, therewas a vast infusionof fundingto supportthe developmentof ELT in the late 1950s and early 1960s. A conferenceheld at Makere Universityin ENGLISH ONLY IN THE ESL CLASSROOM

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

13

of dominanceand depenUganda in 1961articulatedthisrelationship dence betweenthe developed and developingcountriesthroughthe ways ELT expertisewas to be shared and disseminated.Five basic tenetsemerged fromthisconferencewhich,accordingto Phillipson and yetunchallengeddoctrineunderlying (1992), becamean unofficial much ELT work.These tenetsare: * Englishis besttaughtmonolingually. * The idealteacherof Englishis a nativespeaker. * The earlierEnglishis taught, thebettertheresults. * The moreEnglishis taught, thebettertheresults. * Ifotherlanguagesareusedtoomuch,standards ofEnglishwilldrop.(p. 185) Phillipsonargues thatthese tenetshave become the cornerstonesof thehegemonyofEnglishworldwide.Thus, althoughtherootsofmonolingualapproaches to ESL have been largelyobscured,and despite thefactthattheyare based on argumentswhichhavebeen challenged by research,theyhave come to be seen as naturaland commonsense.

COMMONSENSE ASSUMPTIONS AND TAKEN-FOR-GRANTEDPRACTICES theextenttowhichthesesametenetsunderliecurrent To investigate attitudesamong ESL educatorsin the U.S., I recentlypassed out a briefsurveyat a statewideTESOL conferenceasking,Do you believe thatESL studentsshould be allowedto use theirLl in the ESL classroom? Only 20% of the respondentsgave an unqualifiedyes to the question;30% gave an unqualifiedno, (withcommentssuch as, "It's a school policy"and "No ... but it's hard"); the remaining50% said sometimes(withcommentssuch as: "Usuallynot,but if I have tried severaltimesto explainsomethingin Englishand a studentstilldoesn't understand,then I allow anotherstudentwho speaks the same language to explain in thatlanguage"; "They'regoingto do it anyway"; "As a lastresort").The essenceof thesecommentsis capturedby the followingresponse: "In generalESL studentsshould be encouraged to use Englishas much as possible,but in realitythisdoesn't always work."Thus, despitethe factthat80% of theteachersallowedtheuse axiomis so strongthattheydidn't of the Li at times,the English-only trusttheirown practice:They assigneda negativevalue to "lapses" into the L1, seeing themas failuresor aberrations,a cause forguilt. The rationalefor thisview is oftenframedin pedagogicalterms: The more studentsare exposed to English,the morequicklytheywill learn; as theyhear and use English,theywillinternalizeit and begin 14

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

to thinkin English;theonlywaytheywilllearnitisiftheyare forcedto view:Because thegrammaruse it.There seemstobe an all-or-nothing translation methodhasbeen widelydiscreditedand concurrenttranslaof whatis said in thetargetlanguage into tion(immediatetranslation theL1) shownto be ineffective (Legaretta1979),no alternative except thecompleteexclusionof the L1 in theESL classroomis seen as valid.

EVIDENCE AGAINST ENGLISH ONLY IN THE CLASSROOM Evidence fromboth researchand practice,however,suggeststhat the rationaleused to justifyEnglishonlyin the classroomis neither conclusivenor pedagogicallysound. Althoughthereis extensiveand widelyacceptedresearchsupportingbilingualeducationforchildren (e.g., Ramirez,Pasta,Yuen, Billings,& Ramey,1991; Snow, 1990),the relevanceof thesefindingsforeitherESL instruction or thelanguage educationof adults is rarelyexamined.Bilingualeducationand ESL are seen to be separatebeastswithdifferent underlyingassumptions. Even those who fullysupportbilingualeducationoftenjustifytheir own practiceswithintheconfinesof theESL classroomwithreference (eitherimplicitor explicit)to studiesof childrenwho have become bilingualthroughimmersionprograms.Yet, as Irujo (1991) shows, claims for the relevanceof the immersionmodel for ESL must be monoqualified.First,manyoftheimmersionprogramsused tojustify ESL in instruction are fact to the extent that students lingual bilingual are initiallyallowed to use theirL1 to communicatewitheach other and the teacher;theteacherunderstandsthelearners'languageeven if s/hedoesn't produce it. A recentstudyof effectiveinstructional and culturally diversestudents(Garcia,1991) practicesforlinguistically foundthatpreciselythispracticecharacterizedtheclassroomsof academicallysuccessfullearners:"In classeswithSpanishspeakers,lower grade teachersused bothSpanishand English,whereasupper grade teachersutilizedmostlyEnglish.However,studentswere allowed to use eitherlanguage" (p. 4). Allowingthe use of the L1 in earlyESL acquisitionwascriticalto latersuccess;use ofbothlanguagesfacilitated the transitionto English. Furtherevidencesuggeststhatstronginitialliteracyis a keyfactor in successfulsecondlanguageacquisitionand academicsuccess(Cummins,1981). Whereasresearchindicatesthatimmersionprogramscan be effectivein the developmentof languageand literacyforlearners fromdominantlanguage groups,whose L1 is valued and supported bothat homeand in thebroadersociety,bilingualinstruction seemsto be moreeffective forlanguageminority whose students, languagehas ENGLISH ONLY IN THE ESL CLASSROOM

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

15

less social status(Tucker, 1980). This findingclearlyindicatesthat relationsof power and theiraffectiveconsequencesare integralto language acquisition.Acquiringa second language is to some extent contingenton the societallydeterminedvalue attributedto the L1, which can be eitherreinforcedor challengedinside the classroom. As Phillipson(1992) says,"The ethos of monolingualismimpliesthe rejectionof theexperiencesofotherlanguages,meaningtheexclusion of thechild'smostintenseexistentialexperience"(p. 189). Prohibiting thenativelanguage withinthecontextof ESL instruction mayimpede language acquisitionpreciselybecause it mirrorsdisempoweringrelations. rationaleforbilingual Rivera(1988, 1990)arguesthattheunderlying adults.Yet educationforchildrenappliesequallyto languageminority of for adult until these education have, findings quite implications recently,been virtuallyignored.Despite the factthata growingpercentageofstudentsin adultESL classescomefrompreciselythegroups shownto benefitmostfroma bilingualapproach-subordinated minoritylanguage groups and those with limited L1 literacybackgrounds-relativelyfewprogramsnationwideprovidenativelanguage foradults.A surveyof proliteracyor bilingualadult ESL instruction to instruction adultsand outminority linguistic literacy gramsoffering of-schoolyouthconductedbytheNationalClearinghouseforLiteracy Education(NCLE) indicatedthatonly68 of thealmost600 programs who returnedthe questionnaireofferclasses in learners'nativelanguages; of these,all but 10 have been startedsince 1980 (Gillespie, 1991). Althoughresearchon adult biliteracyhas increasedin the past decade (see, e.g., Spener,in press),much of it focuseson ethnographic and workdescriptionsof literacypracticesin the home,community, their of and educational on issues than rather implicaacquisition place tions.The NCLE surveywas able to identify onlytworesearchstudies (Robson's 1982 studyof Hmong refugeesin Thailand and Burtoff's 1985 studyof HaitianCreole speakersin New YorkCity)investigating of initialnative-languageliteracyforadult students. the effectiveness of these studiespointtoward"the beneficialeffectof both Although initialliteracyin the nativelanguage on subsequentoral and written (Gillespie,1991, p. 2)," therehas been Englishlanguage proficiency littleresearchto followup on thesepreliminary findings.Thus, until furtherresearch is undertaken,we need to look to accounts from practiceand to related(but perhaps less direct)researchto ascertain of nativelanguageand bilingualapproachesto adult the effectiveness ESL. In the remainderof this article,I will supplementresearchdata and withpublishedand unpublishedaccountsfrombothpractitioners 16

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

learners,includingevidenceemergingfrommyown workat the Uniin twoadultliteracytrainingprojects. versityof Massachusetts/Boston The firstof these,the StudentLiteracyCorps project,trainedundergraduateESL studentsas tutorsand placed themin community-based adult literacyprogramswheretheyworkedwithlearnersfromtheir own language groups.The second,theBilingualCommunityLiteracy of MassachuTrainingProject,a collaborationbetweentheUniversity settsand threecommunity-based adult literacycenters(theJacksonMann CommunitySchool,East Boston HarborsideCommunityCenter,and the Haitian Multi-Service Center),trainedpeople fromthe communities of thelearnersto teachESL, Spanish,and Haitian(Creole literacy,respectively. evidenceagainstmonolingualadultESL comes Perhapsthestrongest fromexaminingwhatactuallyhappenswhenthisal)pproach isenforced in the ESL classroom.Veryoften,Englishand literacyskillsare not in intakeassessmentand placement.Literacyis equated differentiated with English literacy,and English proficiency is equated withoral The result is thatstudentswith Englishproficiency (Wiley,1990-91). littleL1 literacybackgroundare grouped withthosewho are literate in theirL1 buthavebeginningoralESL proficiency. Forthosewithlittle and the effect is to completely often schooling, L1 literacybackground and the precludeparticipation progress,causing "revolvingdoor syndrome"in whichstudentsstarta course,fail,startagain,and eventually giveup (Strei,1992). Community-based programslikeCasa Azatlanin that the of students who drop out of ESL Chicago report majority classesare preciselythosewhoare unableto read and writein theirLi (1985 surveyreportedin Gillespie& Ballering,1992). In one of the of Massachusetts University projects,studentswithminimalLi literacy in monolingualESL classesoftentold theirbilingualtutorsthatthey had no idea what was going on in class: "I am alwayslost. I waste mytime."SimilarlyKlassen's(1991) ethnographicstudyin Toronto's foundthatmonolingualESL classeswere Spanish-speaking community inaccessible to the virtually beginning-literate Spanish speakers.Detheir lack of the he wereable spite Spanishliteracy, people interviewed to manage in virtuallyeverydomain of theirlives exceptin theESL classroom; there,theyreportedbecomingcompletelysilenced,making no virtually progress,or droppingout: Angela... said thatshe had nevergonebackto an ESL classshe once started becausetheteacher embarrassed herbyaskingheraboutthings she hadneverlearnedbefore.MariaandDofiaLuciadescribed their spending timeinclass"drawing" letters and wordstheycouldnotunderstand while elsereadthewordsandlearned.Mariasaidsheleftclassknowing everyone no morethanwhenshefirst came..... Pedroand Rebeccabothsaidthat, becausetheydid not"knowSpanish"(meaningthattheydid notknow ENGLISH ONLY IN THE ESL CLASSROOM

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

17

theESL teachers' proper"schooled"Spanish),theycouldnotunderstand aboutgrammar, verbs.(p. 52) especially explanations Moreover,the people Klassen interviewedreporteda strongsense of exclusionin theirEnglishclasses. Two of them"experiencedthe classroomas a place whereteachersisolatedthemfromotherstudents" (p. 53), a responseperhapsbased on teachers'ownsenseof frustration at being unable to communicateor being forced to reduce lesson contentto the mostelementary,childlikeuses of language. The students'sense of exclusionwithinthe classwas compoundedbythe fact thatitled to exclusionin theoutsideworldas well:The lackof Spanish in thehigherlevelESL courses literacywas an obstacleto participating into for entry job trainingprograms,which,in turn,limited required theiremploymentpossibilities. forstudentswith Thus, the resultof monolingualESL instruction or not they is often whether and minimalL I literacy that, schooling in of terms their severe self-esteem; consequences drop out,theysuffer de either are is reinforced because facto sense of powerlessness they excluded fromthe classroomor because theirlife experiencesand language resourcesare excluded. This, in turn,has consequencesfor and perpetutheirlivesoutsidetheclassroom,limiting job possibilities the fact that Given monolingualESL classes atingtheirmarginalization. adultswillbe literatelanguageminority assurethatminimally virtually all but the most menial to and excluded fromaccess English employment,one has to wonderwhyfederaland statefundingforbilingual and nativelanguagemodelsis so limited;perhaps,as Faircloughwould suggest,this lack of fundingexemplifieshow the dominantgroups maintaintheirstatusthroughinstitutional practices.

EVIDENCE SUPPORTING USE OF THE NATIVE LANGUAGE On the flipside, when the nativelanguage is used, practitioners, researchers,and learnersconsistently reportpositiveresults.Rivera the L1 intoinstrucfor models various outlines (1990) incorporating tion,includinginitialliteracyin the L1 (withor withoutsimultaneous but separate ESL classes) and bilingualinstruction (where both lanof suchprograms first benefit The one within utilized are class). guages at the beginninglevels is that theyattractpreviouslyunservedstudents-students who had been unable to participatein ESL classes because of limitedLl literacyand schooling.For example, because Creole literacyis now being offered,Boston's Haitian Multi-Service Center reportsthat formerstudentswho had dropped out are re18

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

turning.Teachers at CentroPresente,a bilingualprogramforCentral Americansin Cambridge,Massachusetts, reportthatcurrentstudents oftensay theydropped out of monolingualESL classes in the past because theyfeltintimidated.The data fromthiscommunity-based nativelanguage literacyprogramwere gatheredthroughinterviews unlessotherwiseindicated. withteachersand administrators barriers A second benefitof usingthe L1 is thatitreducesaffective to Englishacquisitionand allowsformorerapidprogressto or in ESL. Hemmindinger(1987) likewisefound that a bilingualapproach to and nonschooledHmongrefugeeswasmore initialESL fornonliterate effectivethan monolingualapproaches had been; althoughstudents made almostno progressin 2 to 3 yearsof monolingualsurvivalESL classes,once a bilingual,problem-posingapproach was introduced, progresswas rapid. She attributesthis in part to the fact that the bilingualapproachallowedforlanguageand cultureshocktobe allevithe effectiveness ated. Similarly,in a studydesignedto investigate of tutors to nonlitteach bilingual using"pedagogicallyunsophisticated" erateCambodians,D'Annunzio(1991) reportsthatthestudentsmade shorttotalinstructional time, rapid gains in ESL. Despite a relatively in were results attained and vocabspeaking,reading, highlysignificant ularyas indicatedbypre-and posttestscoreson a numberof standardized tests,portfolioanalysis,and ongoinginformalassessment.Strei (1992)reportsthata pilotnative-language literacy programforHaitians in Palm Beach Countyresultedin thedramaticincreaseoftheirretentionrateonce theyenrolledinESL classes.The drop-outratedecreased from85% priorto the programto only 10% afterit was started. Further,contraryto theclaimthatuse of theL1 willslowthetransitionto and impedethedevelopmentofthinking in English,numerous accountssuggestthatit mayactuallyfacilitatethisprocess.Shamash (1990), forexample,describesan approach to teachingESL used at the InvergarryLearningCenternear Vancouverwhichmightbe consideredhereticalbysome: Studentsstartbywriting abouttheirlivesin theirL1 or a mixtureoftheirL1 and English;thistextisthentranslated intoEnglishwiththehelp of bilingualtutorsor learnersand, as such, provides"a naturalbridge for overcomingproblemsof vocabulary, sentencestructure and languageconfidence"(p. 72). Ata certainpoint in thelearningprocess,accordingto Shamash,thelearneris willingto experimentand take riskswithEnglish.Thus, startingwiththe L1 providesa sense of securityand validatesthe learners'lived experiences, allowingthemto expressthemselves"whileat the same time providingmeaningfulwrittenmaterialto workwith"(p. 75). Similarly,teachersat Centro Presentereportthat use of the L1 naturallygiveswayto increasinguse of English.Their studentsoften say, "I can't say this in English, but I really want to say it"; once they ENGLISH ONLY IN THE ESL CLASSROOM

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

19

have expressed their ideas in Spanish, the group helps them express them in English. Centro Presente teachers argue that since students don't startby thinkingin the second language, allowing forthe exploration of ideas in the L1 supports a gradual, developmental process in which use of the L1 drops off naturally as it becomes less necessary. Likewise, Strohmeyer and McGrail (1988) found that allowing for the exploration of ideas in the L1 served to enhance students' ESL writing. When students were given the choice of writingfirstin Spanish, they went on to write pieces in English that were considerably more developed than their usual ESL writing.These findingsfrom practice are supported by Garcia's (1991) more formalresearch on effectiveinstructional practices which found that (a) academically successful students made the transition from Spanish to English without any pressure from teachers; and (b) they were able to progress systematicallyfrom writingin the native language in initial literacyto writingin English later. These findingsconcerning use of the L1 are congruent withcurrent theories of second language acquisition. They show thatitsuse reduces anxiety and enhances the affectiveenvironment for learning, takes into account sociocultural factors,facilitatesincorporation of learners' life experiences, and allows for learner-centered curriculum development. Most importantly,it allows forlanguage to be used as a meaningmaking tool and forlanguage learning to become a means of communicating ideas rather than an end in itself.As such, according to Piasecka (1986), teachingbilinguallydoes not mean a returnto the GrammarTranslation method,but rathera standpointwhichacceptsthatthe thinking,feeling, and artisticlifeof a personis verymuchrootedin theirmothertongue.If thecommunicative approachis to liveup to itsname,thenthereare many occasionsin whichthe originalimpulseto speak can onlybe foundin the mothertongue.Attheinitialstagesoflearninga newlanguage,thestudents' repertoireis limitedto thosefewutterancesalreadylearntand theymust constantlythinkbeforespeaking.When havinga conversation,we often becomefullyawareof whatwe actuallymeanonlyafterspeaking.We need to speak in orderto sortout our ideas,and whenlearninga new language thisis oftenbest done throughthe mothertongue.(p. 97)

USES OF THE LI BEYOND BEGINNING LEVELS Even those who acknowledge the usefulness of a bilingual approach to beginning ESL acquisition often find it counterproductive beyond the very beginning stages, arguing that overreliance on the L1 will interferewith ESL acquisition. However, evidence fromboth research 20

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

and practiceagain suggeststhatthe L1 may be a potentialresource ratherthan an obstacle.On the researchside, forexample,a recent studybyOsburneand Harss-Covaleski(1991) suggeststhatthewidely frownedupon practiceof writingfirstin the L1 and thentranslating into the L2 is not detrimentalto the qualityof the writtenproduct. wisdomthatstudentsshouldbe discouraged Theycitetheconventional fromtranslatingas thiswill"cause themto make more errors,result in rhetorically inappropriatetexts,and distractthemfromthinkingin affectthequality that all thesefactorswould negatively English-and of theirwriting"(p. 5). To investigatethe validityof thisclaim,they compared ESL compositionswrittendirectlyin Englishwithothers writtenfirstin the L1 and thentranslatedinto English;theirresults differencein the qualityor quantityof the indicatedno significant writtenproducts.They conclude,"It seemsthenthatthereis no need for teachersto become overlyanxious if studentschoose to employ as a composingstrategy translation attimes"(p. 15). Friedlander(1990) citesnumerousotherstudiesreportingthebeneficialeffectsof using the L1 forL2 composing;hisown studyprovidesfurthersupportfor L1 use in planningESL writingwhenknowledgeof thetopichas been acquired in the L1. use of rarelyadvocatethe nondiscriminate Althoughpractitioners theL1, theydo reportfindingtheselectiveand targetedintegration of the L1 useful;accountsfrompracticeidentify a multiplicity of clearly delineated functionsfor such use. Piasecka (1988), for example includes the followingin herlistof "possibleoccasionsforusingmother tongue"(pp. 98-99): negotiationofthesyllabusand thelesson;recordkeeping;classroommanagement;scenesetting;languageanalysis;presentationof rules governinggrammar,phonology,morphology,and or prompts; issues; instructions spelling;discussionof cross-cultural of and assessment of errors; explanations comprehension. Collingham (1988) concurswithmanyof theseuses, adding the following:to develop ideas as a precursorto expressingthemin the L2; to reduce or affective inhibitions blocksto L2 production;to elicitlanguageand discoursestrategiesforparticularsituations;to provideexplanations of grammarand languagefunctions; and to teachvocabulary.G. Dove sees Ll use as a wayto value cultural communication, 1992) (personal as students teach each other diversity vocabularyor expressionsin their own languages. Osburne(1986) describesan instructional in whichstudents strategy are invitedto reflecton theirown Ll writingattitudesand practices; comparethesewiththoseof otherESL writers;writea compositionin the L1; analyze theirLi writingprocesses,strategies,and strengths based on this composition;and discuss implicationsfor writingin English. In thiscase, the L1 is utilized to develop metacognitiveaware-

ENGLISH ONLY IN THE ESL CLASSROOM

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

21

ness of the writingprocess; as studentsidentifysimilarities between themselvesas writersin theirnativelanguages and in English,they approachcomposingin Englishwithmoreconfidence.Brucker(1992) toidentify describesusingtheL1 as a toolforinitialassessment, student needs and goals. She writes: toanswerthisevaluation I encouragedthestudents inSpanish.Although I don'treadSpanishwell,I canalways finda staff teacher personoranother to translate forme.Thisextrastepis worthmytimebecausestudents can me that is to more accurate and more "true," answers, say, complete give andletme usingtheirfirst language.Theyfeelfreertoexpressthemselves nativelanguage knowwhattheywant.Italsogivesmea senseofthestudents' in orderforme to understand wherestuThis is important competency. dentsare starting. (p. 37) There are two revealingaspectsof the studiesand programsdescribedhere whichreinforcethe notionthatthequestionof language choice is, in essence,a questionof ideology.The firstis the factthat manyof thosewho advocatenativelanguageor bilingualapproac:hes to adult ESL do so because theysee languageacquisitionas intimately connectedwithaddressingthe problemslearnersface in theirlives outsidethe classroom.Hemmindinger(1987), forexample,identified an empoweringapproach to use of the L1 as criticalin implementing ESL in her classesbecause it allowedstudentsto discussvitalissuesin theirliveswhichtheywerethenable to addressin English.As she says, "The class membersthusstilllearned new languagetheyneeded, but moreimportant, theyused thatlanguageto attemptto solveproblems, incidentwheretheywerecheated"(p. 20). such as in [a work-related] of these programssupport Paulo Freire'sapproach to adult Many education in whichcurriculumcontentis drawn fromparticipants' experiences and invitesreflectionon these experiences.Goals are framedin termsof challengingand changingoppressiveconditionsill learners'lives. As Rivera (1988) says,"The role of educationin this approach is to empowerlearnersto use theirnativelanguage actively in order to generatetheirown curriculum,and, therefore,theirown knowledge"(p. 2). Thus, a monolingualapproach to ESL is rejected notjust because it mayslow the acquisitionof Englishbut because it denies learnersthe rightto draw on theirlanguage resourcesand byforcinga focuson childlikeuses of languageand excludstrengths; feed intothe it mayultimately of criticalreflection, the possibility ing the outside of of relations classroom, reproducinequality replication and least do the least skilled who can of stratum a only people ing As (1988) says, Collingham jobs. language/literacy-dependent oflanguageis toacceptthe as iftheyknownothing To treatadultlearners tocolludewithinstitutional ofpowerand so ultimately imbalance racism; 22

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

to adopta bilingualapproachand to valuetheknowledge thatlearners to to that is have and, already begin challenge unequalpowerrelationship toacquiretheskillsandconfidence enablelearners onehopes,thereby they in theworldbeyondthe need to claimbackmorepowerforthemselves classroom. (p. 85) The second revealingfactis thatmanyof theadvocatesforL1 usage citedhere come fromoutsidethe U.S.-from Canada, Australia,and ratherthanEnglishonlyis England,countrieswheremulticulturalism stressedin the wider politicaland policycontext.ESL teacherswith whom I spoke on a recenttripto Australiaexpressedsurprisethat in the using the Li in ESL classes mightbe consideredcontroversial studentsto use theirLl since U.S.; theytold me thattheyencourage teacherevaluationis based in parton theextentto whichthestudents' culturesand languagesare valued in the classroom.AlthoughI certainlycannotgeneralizefromthesecomments,I mentionthisto show is byno meansthetaken-for-granted thatmonolingualESL instruction normeverywherein the world.The factthatso manyof the studies exploringthe use of the Ll are publishedoutsidethe U.S. (see, e.g., referencesin Hopkins,1989,and Nicholls& Hoadley-Maidment, 1988) to that ESL be may monolingualapproaches again suggests ideologicallyrooted.

CLASSROOM REALITIES: LANGUAGE CHOICE IN MULTILINGUAL CLASSES Howeverappealing the notionof a bilingualapproach to ESL may sound in theory,the prospectof implementing it in the classroomis oftenmet by resistance;teachersrespond withunderstandableconcerns: "How can I incorporatemystudents'firstlanguageswhenhalf of themwantme to enforceEnglishonly,theycome from20 different language backgrounds,and I don't speak theirlanguages?" However,each oftheseconcerns,I think,has ideologicalimplications relatingto how issuesof powerare embeddedin classroomrelations. The issue of languagechoiceis reallypartof thebroaderquestionof teacher-student roles-who getsto decide whatshould happen in the classroom.Traditionally,the teacherdetermineswhatis best forthe studentsbased on his/herstatusand knowledgeof the field.But, as Freire(1970) argues,centralto acquiringtheskillsand confidencefor claimingmore poweroutsidethe classroomis a shiftof powerinside the classroom.For example,veryoftentheissue of L1 use is a source of classroomtension,withsome studentsfeelingthatit wastestimeor creates bad feelingsand others seeing it as a necessarysupport. Whereas beginning-level studentsoftensay theyprefera bilingual ENGLISH ONLY IN THE ESL CLASSROOM

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

23

approach (e.g., Hopkins, 1989; C. Howell, personalcommunication, 1991), more advanced studentsmayfeeluse of the Ll slowsEnglish acquisition.In cases like these,then,ratherthan the teachermaking thedecisionforthestudents(eitherforor againstL1 use), thequestion can be posed to studentsforreflection and dialogue.As such,theissue itselfcan becomecontentforlanguageand literacywork.Studentscan discusswhenitis and isn'thelpfulto use theL1 in Englishacquisition. Afterconsideringthe advantagesand disadvantagesof L1 versusL2 use and thefunctionsof each in different contexts,studentscan establishtheirown rulesfortheclassroom.Certainly, teacherscan contribute theirown knowledgeand opinionsin thisexchange,but whatis The teachermovesfrom importantis a shifttowardsharedauthority. a or solver arbiter of to a problemposer or tensions being problem facilitator of criticalreflection. Teachers I workedwithin theBilingualCommunity LiteracyTrainwho used this with several (BCLTP) ing Project approach beginning ESL classesreportedthateach oftheclassesarrivedat different conclusions; in some, studentsdecided to use the L1 as littleas possible;in whenitwasand wasn't others,theyenumeratedspecificfunctions/times each stuck to itsdecisionregardclass however, helpful.Significantly, less of the particularcontentof the decision.The teachersreported thattheyno longerhad to mediatedisagreements or actas theenforcer oflanguagechoicedecisions.Similarly, (1992) Chang reportsthatwhen studentsare invitedto regulatelanguage use themselves,theyconsciouslyuse the targetlanguage more,and the teacher'srole as ESL enforceror correctordiminishes.Of course,forbeginningESL classes, thiskindof discussioncan besttakeplace in theL1; yeteven reflecting on the waysthatboth languages are used to conductthisdiscussion can yieldinsightsintothe use of each language forvariousfunctions in othercontexts. The concern about L1 use in multilingualclasses can also be addressedthrougha dialogicalprocess,withstudentsexploringthe particularfunctionsand consequencesof usingthe L1 when severallanguage groups are present.The pedagogical bonus is that students awarenessof language learningstrategies;the develop metacognitive classroommanagementbonus is thatit takesthe teacheroffthe hot and tenseat; studentsdevelop empathyforeach others'perspectives, studentsgain a greatersense of sions are relieved.Most importantly, controlover theirown learning.Ultimately, the processof decision is even more than the outcome of thedecision,not important making because it is an effectivemechanismforclassroommanagement,but because it models a way of addressingproblemsand shiftingpower thatcan be extendedmorebroadly.The toolsthatstudentsdevelopfor and makingchoicesprepare exploringalternatives, thinkingcritically, 24

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

themforaddressingproblemsoutsidetheclassroom.The sameprocess can be applied withotherissuesof classroomdynamics.If thereare attendanceproblems,or problemswithunevenparticipation, involving studentsin analyzingthe underlyingissuesfostersa sense of control over theirown learningand, in turn,becomesa kindof rehearsalfor dealing withoutsideissues.

WHO'S THE EXPERT HERE ANYWAY? The questionof the teachernot knowingthe students'L1 and thus being unable to use it as a resourcein the classroomis also reallythe tip of a muchlargerideologicaliceberg,namely,thequestionof who should teach and whatcountsas qualificationsforteachingnon-Anassumptionin the fieldis thatESL glophones.The taken-for-granted teachersdon't need to knowstudents'languagesto teach ESL. When we're at a partyand someone says,Oh, you'rean ESL teacher,what languagesdo you speak?"the automaticresponseis "You don't need to knowthe learners'languagesto teachthemEnglish."The assumptionhereis thatnativeEnglishspeakerswithTESOL degreeshave the requisitequalificationsby virtueof theirlinguisticbackgroundand advanced study.What counts is knowledgeof English and second language theories,research,approaches,and methods. Yet,as Phillipson(1992) suggests,thetenetthattheideal teacherof Englishis a nativespeakeris a twinof the tenetthatEnglishis best Bothare aspectsofthesameunderlying taughtmonolingually. ideological orientationwhichprivilegesthe interests of the dominantgroups and reinforces strucinequalities.In thecase ofBritishneocolonialism, turaldependence is perpetuated"as the presenceof nativespeakers and books from[GreatBritain],and all thattheysignify, is necessary to implementthe nativespeakertenet"(p. 199). Even the termnative speakeritselfis an ideologicalconstructto the extentthatit impliesa single,idealizednativeEnglishalthoughthereare in factmanynative Englishes,someofwhichare valuedmorethanothersforsociopolitical reasons(Phillipson,1992); thetermhas de factobeen used to referto whiteBritonsfromthedominantgroups.Because thesenativespeakers are seen to be the model,speakersof English,Britishnormsof usage and language teachinghave become the universalstandard. This, in turn,has divertedattentionaway fromthe developmentof local solutionsto pedagogicalproblemsand impeded the processof buildingon local strengths,resultingin the creationof ideological dependence.In thecase oftheU.S., as we haveseen,theoriginsof the movement, native-speaker fallacycan be foundin theAmericanization where language instructionwas seen as a vehicle for the imposition

ENGLISH ONLY IN THE ESL CLASSROOM

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

25

of U.S. culturalvalues and nativeEnglishspeakersseen as the only appropriateconveyersof thesevalues.That thistenetis aliveand well in the U.S. today is demonstratedby the factthatmany statesstill requireteachersto be nativespeakers.For example,at thetimeof this teacherin Westfield, writing,therewas a move to oust a first-grade Massachusetts,because of his nonnativeaccent. Althoughthe pedagogicalrationaleforprivilegingnativespeakers is thattheirknowledgeof thetargetlanguageis better,examinationof currenttheorysuggeststhatbeing a model Englishspeaker is not a sufficientqualificationfor teachingESL and, in some cases, not a necessaryone. Of course,itis widelyagreed withintheprofessionthat it is wrongto assume thatjust because one speaks English,one can teach it; specializedtrainingis required.Phillipson(1992) claimsthat manyof thosequalitieswhichare seen tomakenativespeakersintrinsicallybetterqualifiedas Englishteachers(e.g.,theirfluency, appropriate usage,and knowledgeof culturalconnotationsof thelanguage)can be acquiredor instilledthroughtraining.Moreover,he argues,nonnative whichnativespeakersmaynot: speakerspossesscertainqualifications They have gone through"the laboriousprocessof acquiringEnglish as a secondlanguageand ... haveinsightintothelinguistic and cultural needs of theirlearners"(p. 195). I would go furtherin arguingthat,in the case of ESL (as opposed to EFL) where English is being taughtto immigrantsand refugees transplantedto a new country,it is notjust experienceas a language learner,buttheexperienceof sharingthestrugglesas a newcomerthat second language and is critical.If a centraltenetof state-of-the-art instruction around literacytheoryis theimportanceofcontextualizing in learnreal,meaningfulusage centeredon contentthatis significant ers' lives,who is betterqualifiedto draw out, understand,and utilize havehad similarexpelearners'experiencesthanthosewhothemselves riences?There is somethingabout havingactuallylivedtheserealities teachersto makeconnectionsthatare otherwhichenablesimmigrant wise not possible.For example,I once, spentmanyhours struggling to elicitdiscussionabout housingissuesfroma classof Haitianlearners while one of my students,a CentralAmericanundergraduatewith considerablyless "professionalknowledge,"was able, withseeming ease, to instantly igniteanimateddiscussionof the same topicjust by fromher own life dealing withan exploitative an anecdote sharing landlord.Her livedexperiencewas morepowerfulthanmyexpertise interaction. in unlockingthe doors to communicative much of the successof his D'Annunzio attributes (1991) Similarly, who tutors shared thestudents'experiof to "the use bilingual program ences"(p. 52). He arguesthat,witha shorttrainingperiod,"pedagogibilinguals(who,in the case his program,were callyunsophisticated" 26

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

tutorsand trainers "onlyhighschoolgraduates")can becomeeffective of othertutors;thismodel "maybreakthechainof relianceon heavy professionalintervention"(p. 52). Hornbergerand Hardman's (in practicesin a Cambodianadult ESL class press)studyof instructional and a PuertoRicanGED (GraduateEquivalencyDiploma)classcorroborates the importanceof shared backgroundbetweenteachersand learners.In the case of the Cambodianclass,theyfoundthatdespite the factthatthe teacher(who had finished just 2 yearsof collegeand a vocationalprogram)triedto speak Englishexclusively, the students used Khmer to respond to her questionsand help each other; in addition,theteacherand studentssharedassumptionsaboutthelearnwereintimately connectedwith ing paradigm,and classroomactivities learners'other life activitiesand culturalpractices.Likewise,in the GED class, instructional activitieswere embedded in a culturaland institutional contextthat integratedand validatedlearners' Puerto Ricanidentity. Their studysuggeststhatthereinforcement of cultural made the shared cultural of possibleby identity, background learners and teachers,is criticalnotjust forL1 literacyacquisitionbut forESL acquisitionas well. BoththeBCLTP and theUniversity of Massachusetts StudentLiterwere based on notion the that,withtraining, acy Corps (SLC) project from the communities of the learners who are people usuallyexcluded fromteachingpositionsbyvirtueof a lackof formalcredentialing can become effectivelanguage and literacyinstructors. A comprehensive accountof the rationale,process,and outcomesof theseprojectswill be presentedat a laterdate; however,some mentionof theirresultsis relevanthere.In bothcases,througha multidimensional participatory trainingprocess,traineeswho were or had been ESL studentsthemselvesbecame tutorsor teachers.In the SLC project,tutorsnot only contributedtheirenergy,life experiences,and nativelanguage resources but were able to introduceinnovativestate-of-the-art apto theclassroomsofexperiencedteachproachesto literacyinstruction ers. The followingquote, takenfroma teacher'sevaluation,indicates the powerof thismodel: ofourstudents J.isa modeltutorbecausehe hasa genuineunderstanding basedon hisownexperience and hisability tolistentothem,andbecause he is able to followhisgutfeelings. His initiative is extremely valuable.I wishI knewhowtobringoutthatkindofleadership inothertutors. ability

In theBCLTP, internscamefroma rangeofbackgrounds,including some who had themselvesbeen beginningESL studentsa fewyears earlierand otherswhoweregettingtheirGEDs orwereundergraduate students.Despitethefactthattheymayhave highereducationin their home country,severalwere workingin jobs such as housecleaning, ENGLISH ONLY IN THE ESL CLASSROOM

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

27

factorywork,and so on, because of lack of credentialsand/orEnglish proficiency. They were trainedto become nativelanguage literacyor ESL instructors and teacher beginning throughworkshops, mentoring, As of a result their adult in students thenative work, sharingprocesses. who had classes been unable to write their names language literacy at intakewere writingdialoguejournals, letters,and articlesfor site At the Haitian Multimagazinesafterabout 6 monthsof instruction. ServiceCenter,internsdeveloped a Creole proverbbook for initial literacy;studentsin ESL classes wrote language experience stories about thecoup in Haitiand itseffectson theirlives,studiedthehistory of Haiti,and read and discussednewsstories.All of thiswas possible partof thelearners'comlargelybecause the teacherswereintegrally both and life munities,sharing language experiences. Even in mixedESL sites,liketheJackson-Mann School, Community wherestudentscome fromover 25 languagegroups,the factthatthe internswere themselvesfromthecommunitiesof the learnerswas an asset.In developinglessons,internsdrewon theirown experiencesas The adultlearners, languagelearnersand membersofthecommunity. of in the role teacher,assumed moreresponsibility seeingtheirpeers forthelearningofothers.In one case, forexample,a studentwhohad neverspoken in class began to participateactivelyafterbeing paired witha more advanced student;the advanced studentthen asked to remain in the class (even though he was ready for a higherlevel), because, as he said, "I can help here. You need me." These projectsdemonstratethatthebenefitsofhiringteachersfrom the communitiesof the learnerscan at least balance the benefitsof hiringnativeEnglishspeakers.Whereasnonnativespeakersof English educationalbackgroundscan be trainedin literacy/ withnontraditional ESL pedagogy,it is notclear thatthe reverseis true-that the understandingsthatcome throughsharedlifeexperienceand culturalbackground can be impartedthroughtraining.These are qualifications which may be trulyintrinsicto nonnativespeakers(althoughthese in themselvesto assure too are certainlynot sufficient characteristics good teaching).

IMPLICATIONS

FOR THE PROFESSION

The implicationsof the argumentspresentedin thisarticleare neiteachers credentialednative-English-speaking ther that traditionally shouldbe shouldcommitprofessionalsuicidenorthatESL instruction Rather,what I totallyabandoned in favorof Li literacyinstruction. to and expand one rethink on the we is that to want suggest hand, need, 28

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ESL teachersand, on the other the roles of native-English-speaking of the to hand, expand range optionsand uses forthenativelanguage I hope tohaveshownthatunveilin initialliteracyand ESL instruction. control can ultimatelystrengthen of mechanisms the ideological ing the fieldas a whole. By lettinggo of some of our unexaminedand studentsshould assumptionsabouthowESL/literacy taken-for-granted be taughtand who is qualifiedto teach,we can open thedoors to rich needsofimmigrants resourcesforaddressingthelanguageand literacy and refugees. ofthefactthatcommonly The firststepin thisprocessis recognition far classroom practices, frombeing neutraland accepted everyday have natural, ideologicaloriginsand consequencesfor relationsof and outside the classroom.As the evidence preboth inside power in the U.S. has as sentedhere indicates,monolingualESL instruction much to do withpoliticsas withpedagogy.Its rootscan be tracedto the politicaland economicinterestsof dominantgroups in the same way that the English Only movementhas been; the rationaleand researchused to justifyit are questionable;and there is increasing evidence thatL1 and/orbilingualoptionsare not only effectivebut necessaryforadult ESL studentswithlimitedL1 and schoolingbackgrounds.Clearlytheaccumulatedbodyofresearchand practicepoints towardthe need to expend much greaterresourcesin exploringLi literacyor bilingualESL programmodelsfortheselearners. of teaching Further,the evidencesuggeststhatcurrentdefinitions in reconsidered order to must be implementthisgoal. qualifications As withlanguageuse, thequestionof who is qualifiedto teachis more than purelya pedagogical matter.Insistenceon the irrelevanceof teachers'knowingthelearners'languagesmaybe de factoajustification formaintaining thestatusof nativeEnglishspeakers.Alternatively, by the expanding conceptionof whatcountsas expertiseto includeother kindsofknowledgebeyondthosetraditionally developedand validated institutions of ties betweenthe classroom through highereducation, and communitiesof thelearnerscan be strengthened. Evidencefrom a rangeof programssuggestsa newwayofthinking aboutcommunityclassroomrelationsin whichcommunitypeople are seen notjust as aides or culturalresourcesbut as expertsin theirown rightand as partnersin collaborativerelationships. Promotingthedevelopmentof thiscommunity-based does not expertise byanymeansimplyeliminatthe of role credentialed ESL teachers;thesetwokinds ing traditionally of expertisearen'toppositionalor mutuallyexclusive.Rather,credentialedESL/bilingualeducatorsand community-based bilingualeducatorscan worktogetherthrougha processof mutualtrainingto share theirknowledge,establishpartnerships, and learn fromeach others' ENGLISH ONLY IN THE ESL CLASSROOM

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

29

experiences.This may mean expanding the role of native English collabospeakersin theareas of teachertrainingand classroom-based rationswithnonnativeEnglishspeakers. Thus, returningto the opening epigraph,as Vargas suggestedin discussingthereactionsto theRodneyKingverdict,we need to recognize thatrespectforlearners'languageshas powerfulsocial implications.The extentto whichESL educatorsvalue participants' linguistic resourcesin teachingis a measureof our willingness to addressbasic inequitiesin the broader society.As we let go of the need to enforce Englishonlyin theclassroomand open our rankstocommunity expertise,studentswillgain greatercontrolof theirown learning.Each of thesechangesrepresentslimitedstepsthatwe can takeas a profession to contributeto strugglesforgreaterequityoutsidethe classroom.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thankEugenie Ballering,Sandra McKay, CatherineWalsh, Vivian Zamel, and an anonymous reader for theirsuggestionsabout how to strengthen thispaper. Portionsof thispaper were included in mykeynoteaddress, "ConnectingCommunityand Classroom,"at theFall 1991 MATSOL Conferencein Newton, MA.

THE AUTHOR Elsa Auerbach is AssistantProfessorin the Bilingual/ESLGraduate Studies Program at the Universityof Massachusettsat Boston. She has coordinated several literacycollaborations,includingthe Bilingual Community university-community LiteracyTraining Project,and, currently,the CommunityTraining forAdult and Family LiteracyProject. She is author of numerous articlesand books on adult ESL/literacy.

REFERENCES New Baron, D. (1990). TheEnglishonlyquestion:An official languageforAmericans? Haven, CT: Yale UniversityPress. in Assessment, 2, Brucker, K. (1992, May). When asking isn't enough. Adventures 37-40. (Boston: MassachusettsSystemfor Adult Basic Education) Burthoff,M. (1985). Haitian Creole literacyevaluationstudy.(Final reportto the Haitian Centers Council). Washington,DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. Chang,J. (1992). Bilingual debates among Chinese students.TESOLJournal,2 (1), 37. Collingham,M. (1988). Making use of students'linguisticresources.In S. Nicholls 30

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

& E. Hoadley-Maidment (Eds.), Currentissuesin teachingEnglishas a second languageto adults(pp. 81-85). London: Edward Arnold. and practice(2nd Crawford,J. (1991). Bilingual education:History, politics,theory, Services. Educational Los ed.). Angeles: Bilingual Cummins,J. (1981). The role of primarylanguage development in promoting educational success forlanguage minoritystudents.In CaliforniaState Departstudents:A theoretical ment of Education (Ed.), Schoolingand languageminority (pp. 3-49). Los Angeles: California State University,Evaluation, framework. Disseminationand AssessmentCenter. America'smultilingual Daniels, H. (Ed.). (1990). Not onlyEnglish:Affirming heritage. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English. D'Annunzio, A. (1991). Using bilingual tutorsand non-directiveapproaches in A JournalofAdultLiteracy, ESL: A follow-upreport.Connections: 4, 51-52. Fairclough,N. (1989). Language and power.London: Longman. New York: Seabury Press. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogyoftheoppressed. Friedlander (1990). Composing in English: Effectsof a firstlanguage on writing in English in a second language. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Secondlanguagewriting (pp. 109-125). New York: Cambridge UniversityPress. and culturally diversestudents:Effective Garcia, E. (1991). Educationof linguistically instructional Santa Cruz, CA: NationalCenter forResearchon Cultural practices. Diversityand Second Language Learning. and ESL mother-tongue Gillespie, M. (1991). U.S. adult educationprogramsoffering Unpublished manuscript,Washington,DC: Center for literacy:1991 sunrvey. Applied Linguistics. A synthesis and Gillespie, M., & Ballering, E. (1992). Adultnativelanguageliteracy: and action.Unpublished manuscript,Washington,DC: Center planfor research for Applied Linguistics. and culturalsharing Jorusingproblem-posing Hemmindinger,A. (1987). Two models theHmongEnglishas a secondlanguageandfirstlanguageliteracy. inteaching Unpublished master'sthesis,St. Francis Xavier University,Antigonish,Canada. Hopkins, S. (1989). Use of mothertongue in the teachingof Englishas a second language to adults. LanguageIssues,2, 18-24. Hornberger, N. H., & Hardman, J. (in press). Literacyas cultural practice and cognitiveskill: Biliteracyin a Cambodian adult ESL class and a Puerto Rican in theUnitedStates.McHenry, GED Program. In D. Spener (Ed.), Adultbiliteracy IL & Washington,DC: Delta Systems& Center for Applied Linguistics Irujo, S. (1991). [Reviewof Forkedtongue:Thepoliticsofbilingualeducation].TESOL 25(1), 150-155. Quarterly, Judd, E. L. (1987). The EnglishLanguage Amendment:A case studyon language and politics.TESOL Quarterly, 21(1), 113-135. Klassen, C. (1991). Bilingual writtenlanguage use by low-educationLatin American newcomers. In D. Barton & R. Ivanic (Eds.), Writingin the community. (WrittenCommunicationAnnual No. 6, pp. 38-57). London: Sage. Legarreta, D. (1979). The effectsof program models on language acquisition by 13(4), 521-534. Spanish speaking children.TESOL Quarterly, Nicholls,S., & Hoadley-Maidment,E. (Eds.). Currentissuesin teachingEnglishas a secondlanguagetoadults.London: Edward Arnold. Osburne, A. (1986,March). Usingnativelanguage writingin theESOL composition class. TECFORS, 9(2), 1-5. (Universityof Houston) Osburne, A., & Harss-Covaleski,S. (1991). Translationin the ESOL composition class. Unpublished manuscript,Central Connecticut State University,New Britain.

ENGLISH ONLY IN THE ESL CLASSROOM

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

31

Phillipson,R. (1988). Linguicism:Structuresand ideologies in linguisticimperialism. In T. Skutnabb-Kangas & J. Cummins (Eds.), Minorityeducation:From struggletoshame(pp. 339-358). Clevedon, England: MultilingualMatters. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress. Phillipson,R. (1992). Linguisticimperialism. Piasecka, K. (1988). The bilingual teacher in the ESL classroom. In S. Nicholls & issuesinteaching E. Hoadley-Maidment(Eds.), Current Englishas a secondlanguage toadults(pp. 97-103). London: Edward Arnold. Ramirez,J. D., Pasta, D. J., Yuen, S. D., Billings,D. K., & Ramey, D. R. (1991). and late-exit Englishimmersion early-exit, Longitudinalstudyof structured strategy, children (Vols. 1-2, U.S. Departforlanguageminority bilingualeducationprograms ment of Education Report, ContractNo. 300-87-0156). San Mateo, CA: Aguirre International. Ribadeneira, D. (1992, May,9). Hispanics say plightignored in crisis.BostonGlobe, pp. 1,7. Rivera, K. (1988). Not "either/or"but "and": Literacyfor non-Englishspeakers. Focus on Basics, 1(3/4), 1-3. Rivera,K. (1990, October). Developing nativelanguage literacyin language minorityadult learners. ERIC Digest.(Washington,DC: National Clearinghouse on LiteracyEducation, Center for Applied Linguistics) Robson, B. (1982). Hmong literacy,formaleducation and theireffectson performance in an ESL class. In B. Downing & O. Douglas (Eds.), The Hmongin the West.Minneapolis, MN: Universityof Minnesota, Center for Urban and Regional Affairs. Shamash, Y. (1990). Learning in translation:Beyond language experience in ESL. Voices,2(2), 71-75. Skutnabb-Kangas,T. (1988). Multilingualismand the education of minoritychildren. In T. Skutnabb-Kangas & J. Cummins (Eds.), Minorityeducation:From struggletoshame.(pp. 9-44). Clevedon, England: MultilingualMatters. Snow, C. (1990). Rationales for native language instruction:Evidence from reIssues search. In A. Padilla, H. Fairchild,& C. Valadez (Eds.), Bilingualeducation: and strategies (pp. 60-74). NewburyPark, CA: Sage. in the UnitedStates.McHenry, IL & Spener, D. (Ed.). (in press). Adultbiliteracy Washington,DC: Delta Systems& Center for Applied Linguistics. Strei,G. (1992, Spring). Advantages of native language literacyprograms: Pilot p. 7. project. TESOL RefugeeConcernsNewsletter, and writingsby L. On FOCUS: & McGrail, B., (1988). Photographs Strohmeyer, students. Boston, MA: El Centro del Cardenal. TESOL. (1992, August/September).A TESOL statementon nonnativespeakers of English and hiringpractices,TESOL Matters,p. 23. TESOL. (1987, March). Resolution20: Language rights.Resolution passed at the 21st Annual TESOL Convention,Miami Beach, FL. Tollefson, J. (1991). Planning language,planninginequality: Languagepolicyin the Longman. community.London: EvidencefromCanadian Tucker, G. R. (1980). Implications forU.S. bilingualeducation: research(Focus No. 2). Rosslyn,VA: National Clearinghouse forBilingual Education. p. 5. Weinberg,J. (1990, June). Pennies from He Vinh. TESOL Newsletter, School Chicano T. G. literacy. ofEducation (1990-91). Disembedding Journal, Wiley, 8(1), 49-54. (California State University,Long Beach)

32

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.44 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:02:29 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions