Implementational and ideological spaces in bilingual education language policy

Abstract

This paper presents results from an ethnography of language policy which examined language policy appropriation for bilingual learners in a large urban US school district. The purpose of this article is to explore the space left by current US language policy for developmental bilingual education and, specifically, the focus is on how a group of educators appropriate top-down language policies while engaging in their own local language policy creation. The process of creating the policy illustrates how spaces for bilingual education are pried open by a community of educators who fostered an ideological space which supported multilingualism as a resource for all students. A strong characteristic of this ideological space is the empowerment of bilingual teachers to take ownership of language policy processes and appropriate language policy in a way that benefits bilingual learners.

Keywords:

• language policy
• bilingual education
• developmental bilingual education
• ethnography
• critical discourse analysis
• NCLB

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to all of the educators in the School District of Philadelphia who participated in this study.

Notes

1. Pseudonyms are used for all research participants while real names are used for those who were not connected directly to the study. For example, the name of the CEO of the SDP is well known. I do not use a pseudonym for the ‘SDP’ or 'OLCA'because I want the work done by educators therein to be recognized.

2. I use the word ‘text’ to refer to productions of written or spoken discourse for the purpose of analysis.

3. It is interesting to note that a majority of the nine senators who voted against NCLB were Republicans.

4. This department is responsible ‘for the administration of new formula grants and for providing technical assistance to State and Local educational agencies’ http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/aboutus.html

5. See ed.gov/programs/sfgp/nrgcomp.html

6. See http://www.pde.state.pa.us/k12/cwp/view.asp?A=11&Q=45272

7. It is unclear how Pennsylvania policy is defining ‘developmental’ here and why dual language is not considered a developmental program.

8. See http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/ender/227.html

9. Unlike Pennsylvania policy, they classify dual language as ‘developmental.’