Rebecca Fundator Dr.

Beardall CI 403 26 September, 2012 Expository Response: Language and Power America has a long and notorious history of resisting change associated with different cultures especially non-English speakers, even though its population is composed almost entirely of immigrants and descendants of immigrants. When secondary schools gained popularity in early twentieth century in middle to upper class families, controversy about who should be educated and how arose; however in 1918 the Bureau of Educationissued a publication in support of a comprehensive high schoolAmerican public high schools were to be framed tounify students of diverse backgrounds, abilities, and aspirations (Faltis, 4-5). While the Bureau of Educations assertion was to bring unity to Americas youth through education, there was no concern for including English and non-English speakers through language acquisition. In this sense, there was no place for immigrants in the newly emerging inclusive education system because schools were taught solely in English. Furthermore, the American government impeded on immigrant Americans ethical rights to inclusive education when government officials, such as President Theodore Roosevelt defended the need for English as the United States official language, claiming, we musthave but one languagewe cannot tolerate any attempt to oppose or supplant the language and culture that has come down to us from the builders of this Republic (Faltis, 5). In this sense, since immigrants who did not speak English were denied an education since they could not learn in their native language, they were also denied efficacy because acquiring education is a main source of power in this country and the world. Although non-English speakers have been unjustly considered inferior, illiterate, docile, lacking in self-reliance and initiative (Faltis, 6), there have been specific moments in American history when speaking an additional language other than English has been beneficial and deemed powerful. When America was gripped with the fears of communism in Cuba, the United States stepped up its involvement in Central and South America, resulting in the need forSpanish-

English bilingual government employees (Faltis, 9). Additionally, when President Lyndon Johnson was in office, the government involvement in bilingual education reflected his belief that the way to win the War on Poverty was through increasing educational spending on programs geared toward improving education for the nations poor (Faltis, 9). In these two examples, language acquisition, specifically being bilingual, was considered a source of power. In the example of fear of communism in Cuba, bilingualism granted America increased communication abilities with a country that speaks a different language; in the example of the War on Poverty, the ideology is that teaching students Englishthe primary language in the United Stateswill give them better access to education, which in turn will grant individuals more power. In regards to language as power in todays society, the ideologies of the past have not drastically changed; Americans still believe that English acquisition (either as a primary or secondary language) and application is a meaningful source of power because it is vital for quality education. Although schools are required to offer bilingual education if there are English Language Learning (ELL) students, many argue that not enough ELL students are placed in classrooms appropriate for optimally acquiring a second language and teachers are not prepared to the extent necessary to teach those students who may even fall below grade level in their native language reading ability. While there are more opportunities for English Language Learning students to access quality education because of Newcomer Schools and other programs, which offer greater opportunities for participation in classes, more cultural sensitivity to ELL students, and a collective sense of belonging between the students, there are some major drawbacks to these modern programs. For example, one could interpret Newcomer schools and programs as linguistically and socially isolating, apt to force labels onto ELL students, and potentially separate but unequal. A potential solution to avoid the possibility of inequitable educational experiences for non native-English speaking students is for all teachers to follow the Universal Design of Learning and differentiate their instruction. By basing how they plan their lessons and curriculum on their students various responses to their curriculum and by offering multiple pathways with varying levels of support to meet the specific needs of students, educators have the ability to provide an inclusive educational environment that successfully integrates ELL students into the general curriculum. Overall, these various programs, as well as school and teacher initiatives to improve the quality of education for ELL students demonstrates

that acquiring the common language of their country is vital for quality education and education generally correlates with power.