Call It What It Is: Monolingual Education in U.S. Schools

Abstract

In the U.S., non-bilingual education designed for English speakers goes by many names – mainstream, regular, normal, English, and others. Drawing from research on discourse, normality, and framing, this conceptual paper examines each of the popular labels for English-medium education in the U.S., and demonstrates their unsuitability. Inspired by the discursive shift toward the term emergent bilinguals, a more accurate label is proposed for these non-bilingual programs and classrooms: monolingual education, highlighting the one feature they have in common. Naming classrooms as monolingual can reveal their subtractive nature, and embrace a discourse that positions bilingual and multilingual programs as normal, or even superior. A number of implications are addressed, for students, schools, and the education system.

Notes

¹ I recognize that the “native English speaker” category is problematic and value-laden (Ruecker, 2011), involving issues beyond the scope of this paper. I use the term here to refer to people who grow up speaking English, in communities that primarily use English. Status as a native English speaker is relevant because the U.S. school system has long been designed around them, to the exclusion of others (Baron, 1992; Leibowitz, 1971; Wiley, 1999). Most native English speakers are monolingual. Those who are bilingual or multilingual find their other languages neglected within schools.

² This inscription was originally documented by Howard (1784), above the entrance to a correctional facility (p. 136).

³ This is not just about English proficiency. The moment a student actually uses multiple languages, she may be judged as inferior (Karabenick & Noda, 2004). At best, students are being asked to feign monolingualism.

⁴ Some suggest we abandon the idea of normal altogether; Baglieri et al. (2011) criticize the construct of the “typical child,” and Sakellariadis (2012) argues that “abnormal” conditions such as autism are not pathologies, but different expression of the human condition.

⁵ ESL can use first-language support and can exist at schools where immigrant students develop biliteracy, through AP Spanish. My argument focuses on programs that fall more clearly into the monolingual/bilingual dichotomy.

⁶ Los Angeles, Dallas/Ft. Worth, Phoenix, Las Vegas, Albuquerque, San Antonio, Houston, and others have majority-minority districts where native English speakers are less than 50% of the population at numerous schools.

⁷ See Alonzo (1998), Crawford (1989), Jenkins (1971), and Ovando (2003). From the 1700s to the 1900s: New York schools taught Dutch, Yiddish, Hebrew, and Italian; Texas schools taught indigenous languages alongside Spanish, then later taught Spanish, Czech, and German; Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Maryland taught German; Louisiana and Maine taught French; Arkansas and Oklahoma taught Cherokee; Michigan taught Dutch; Nebraska and Illinois taught Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, and German; New Mexico taught Spanish, Navajo, Pueblo, and Apache; Wisconsin taught Swedish, Norwegian, and Polish; Arizona taught Spanish, Tohono O'Odham, Navajo, and other indigenous languages; Hawai'i taught Hawaiian.