Bilingual Education

Re “How Do You Say ‘Catch-22’ in Spanish?” Commentary, Sept. 5:

As a bilingual teacher, I am constantly frustrated by fellow teachers who do not understand bilingual education and are constantly undermining the program. Unfortunately, opinions such as those stated by Douglas Lasken feed into a misunderstanding of bilingual education by the general public and erode support for it.

Lasken referred to a child who had “taught” herself to read in English and was being held back by having to continue in a bilingual program. The point that Lasken missed, along with many monolingual teachers, is the fact that children who have been taught to read in Spanish and have a strong foundation in that language easily transition to English reading. The reason she could read in English was because she was first taught to read in Spanish. She did not really teach herself to read as Lasken seems to believe. He also pointed out that this child had already read the material in Spanish but he was assuming that her comprehension was after reading it in English.

If we applied some of these opinions that teachers hold about bilingual education to ourselves, such as expecting ourselves to function well in Spanish after only two or three years, we would have a greater appreciation of the program and the wonderful progress that our students are making.

KIYOMI TAKAKI

Los Angeles

*

Lasken’s firsthand commentary on the Los Angeles Unified School District’s Bilingual Master Plan and its evolution from the 1974 Lau decision was outstanding and revealing. What we are doing is hiding the English language from thousands of non-English speaking children, the very ones who need it the most.

While bilingual education in some forms may be beneficial, the LAUSD plan is counterproductive and delays integration into our culture by years.

Is there any education benefit from the LAUSD bilingual education program? I beg to be enlightened. Has data ever been interpreted by someone not involved in bilingual education that shows that it is educationally beneficial? How many of our federal and state tax dollars are funneled into LAUSD to support bilingual education?

LAUSD is functioning true to form and putting the three Rs and the education of our children way down the priority list. Those running the bilingual education program are winning. Lasken, his student Irena and America are losing.

JAMES PERRY JASTER

West Hills

*

I hope that my professional colleague Lasken does not snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. His student Irena learned to read in her first language, and now has found it so easy to transfer that skill to English that she has managed to do so without formal instruction. That kind of transfer and motivation is exactly the effect that bilingual instruction is supposed to have.

The exact time to transition to English is something of an art, and it may well be the LAUSD is being unreasonably stringent. I have argued in the past that transition should be relatively early (and much more gradual). But I worry that some readers may conclude from Lasken’s essay that the primary language instruction was superfluous.

I ask those readers to compare Irena with Carlos, who comes to me late in the fourth grade. He doesn’t know how to read. He guesses at words; his guesses are wildly improbable. A look at the records reveals that Carlos (yes, I changed the name), from a Spanish-speaking home, was placed in English reading in first grade by a district not far from here. Four years later we have a kid who can’t read any language.

Even with delayed transition, Irena’s prognosis is favorable. She is gaining further reading skills in her primary language, which will hopefully transfer to English. Not so Carlos, who has now moved and will likely leave some other teacher wondering how a kid can spend four years in school and not be able to read.

JOHN SLAYTON

El Monte