Bilingual education in England

Bilingualism in England is a very different issue from current debates in Wales, Ireland and
Scotland. In the three Celtic countries. Bilingualism usually, but not exclusively, concerns
protection and restoration of the indigenous minority language. In England bilingualism refers to
the great number of ethnic minorities who maintain their mother tongue in the home, temple,
mosque, church or by voluntary education.
The minority languages of England include Arabic. Bengali, Can-toncsc. Gujerati, Greek. Hindi.
Italian. Punjabi. Polish, Portuguese, Spanish, Turkish, Ukrainian and Urdu (Linguistic Minorities
Project, 1984. I985). The bilingualism which the presence of these languages invokes is found in
school, work, religious affiliation, culture and mass media. The issues of bilingualism and bilingual
education in England tend to have more in common with the USA than with the Celtic nations
nearby.
Within Wales. Ireland and Scotland it is perhaps indifference rather than antagonism that
characterizes the viewpoint of large numbers of inhabitants towards the heritage language. In
England, while it is wrong to generalize and stereotype, there appears to be comparatively more
antagonism, prejudice and distrust of bilingualism and bilingual education.
This may stem in part from the nineteenth-century British imperialistic and colonialist viewpoint
which regarded English as a superior language (Brook, 1980). Immigration into Britain in the period
following World War I has instigated a growing debate about the place of these minority
languages in British society in general, and within schools in particular.
The debate, long and well rehearsed in the USA and parts of Europe is being re-invented in
England. One element in the debate about bilingual education concerns the historical, economic
and educational dominance of the English language.
Martin-Jones (1984:426-7) summarizes the situation well:
English is the majority language not only in terms of numbers of speakers and users, but, more
importantly, in terms of legitimized power and control. The relationship between English and
many minority languages in Britain, new and old, is embedded in a long history of colonization,
with English as the language of rule. In Britain in the 19805, English remains the dominant
language of literacy in education, in the media, in the workplace. in government and in all aspects
of British life. The ability to read and write Standard English is regarded as a crucial measure of
educational performance, and as such it also serves as a means of discrimination in the labour
market. Minority languages and literacies only have a legitimized place within minority institutions
such as the home. The temple, church, mosque or the local community association. They also have
a place within the marginalized sectors of the economy such as the rag' trade or in small family
businesses: the corner shop or the fast food business.
The attitude to minority languages in education in England has resultingly been assimilationist and
transitionalist. The response to increasing linguistic diversity since the 195os was to increase
provision for the teaching of English as a second language (Viv Edwards, 1984). A Government
pamphlet English for Immigrants (Ministry for Education, 1963) urged separate provision
(withdrawal) of non-English speaking children within a school for intensive English language

teaching. Concern was often expressed by parents and politicians that normal classes were
being disrupted by the presence of a number of non-English-speaking pupils. Dispersal policies
were developed with the notion that the integration of the immigrants is more easily achieved, if
the proportion of immigrant children in a school is not allowed to rise too high" (HMSO,1965,para.
42).
BILINGUAL EDUCATION IN BRITAIN AND IRELAND 61
In the last two decades, policy and philosophy. provision and practice have begun to project a
slightly more pluralistic position. Recent reports and research as well as recent active measures
and changes in classroom practice suggest a small movement towards a more multilingual and
multicultural society. The evidence for this movement will now be considered.
However, the rhetoric, the views of progressive educationalists and researchers tend to hide the
probability that amongst the populace. rejection and antipathy to minority languages in England
has changed little.
The white majority viewpoint is likely still to be assimilationist and antagonistic to bilingual
education. The pluralist movement is some light-years ahead of the public mind. This is not to
argue that one viewpoint is right and the other wrong. As is examined in Chapter 4 when
considering the USA, a variety of ideologies exist with different political, cultural and social
assumptions.
There are three types of evidence suggesting that, in the last 20 years new directions in
bilingualism and bilingual education have emerged: reports, research and provision. Each of these
will now be considered in turn.
Reports
The Bullock Report, A Language for Life (1975), was a milestone in an official viewpoint on minority
languages. No child should be expected to cast off the language and culture of the home as he
crosses the school threshold and the curriculum should reflect those aspects of his life" (paragraph
20.5). Every school with pupils whose original language is not English should adopt a positive
attitude to their bilingualism and wherever possible help maintain and deepen their knowledge of
their mother tongue" (paragraph 20.17). These two quotations illustrate a new and seemingly
enlightened viewpoint of the intelligentsia.
In the same year, 1975. a Draft Directive from the Council of European Communities (EEC)
requested Member States to teach within the school curriculum, the mother tongue and culture of
the country of origin of EEC migrant workers. The Directive was passed in July 1977, allowing such
education to be in accordance with national circumstances and legal systems. When the British
Government relayed the Directive to local education authorities in July 1981,'it became translated
into exploring ways in which mother tongue teaching might be provided. Such provision could be
during or outside school hours, but tuition was not to be considered as a legal right of an
individual.
62 KEY ISSUES IN BILINGUALISM AND BILINGUAL EDUCATION

In terms of Report, the most recent more important and most considered is Education for All
(1985). popularly termed the Swann Report. A Committee was established in March 1979 initially
to report on West Indian children in school who were seen to be relatively less successful and
subsequently to report on the educational needs and attainments of children from ethnic minority
groups. The Report carefully considers the type of multiracial society that should not be and
should be fostered. Two notions are rejected and one is promoted. The traditional policy of
assimilation is rejected. In varying degrees and in differing respects, minorities should maintain
their distinctive nature. A policy of separatism is also rejected. A British society based on separate
education. for example, is seen as a contradiction in terms. The essence of society is seen as a
cohesive unity where shared experience and shared commitment to central values (e.g. justice and
the right of dissent) is paramount.
The Swann Report (1985) decided in favour of the aim of a pluralist multiracial society. Ethnic
minorities within this philosophy should be allowed and at times assisted, to maintain their own
language and culture.
If a pluralist society is not fostered at every level. The genuine risk of a fragmented society along
ethnic lines is considered possible. Threatening the stability and cohesion of British society.
Schools where there are no ethnic minority pupils are equally encouraged to teach about the
multicultural nature of British society. In one survey, schools almost without exception saw
multicultural education as remote or irrelevant to their needs and responsibilities. The Report sees
the necessity of changing the majority view that multicultural education is for "them" and not
us.
When the Swann Report (1985) considered a multilingual society as different from a multiracial
society, there is evidence of possible inconsistency in the high value given to minority languages
and the low value given to the place of such languages in the educational system. The Report calls
for the equal acceptance of all minority languages. Mother tongues are perceived as a key factor in
maintaining a community's identity and culture. Such linguistic diversity is also seen as an asset
and resource for a school. From the pluralist viewpoint and the equality of languages viewpoint
taken in the Report. a strong multilingual educational policy might have been expected. This does
not appear to be the case. However, initially, there are elements of educational policy that do
appear to follow logically from the stance taken. The Report is against separate language centres
for minority groups to learn English. Such separatism would be assimilationist in that a child learns
English in order to take his or her place in an unchanged mainstream school. Separate language
provision is seen as discriminatory in outcome rather than intent. (63) A similar case is made
against withdrawal systems within a school. Instead, learning English as a second but not foreign
language is seen as a necessary and integrated provision within the mainstream school.
In the role given to minority languages within mainstream education there is a surprise. In
essence. bilingual education is rejected. A distinction is made between three different possible
aims with regard to minority languages. Bilingual education is perceived as using the mother
tongue as a medium of instruction; mother-tongue maintenance is regarded as developing pupils
fluency in their own language; mother-tongue teaching is seen as the teaching of community
languages as part of a modern language curriculum (e.g. in a similar way that French and German
are taught in the secondary school). Bilingual education is rejected as the disadvantages are seen

to be more numerous than the advantages. Mother tongue maintenance is not seen to be a school
aim. Mainstream schools are not expected to take over the role of communities themselves in
continuing their ethnic languages. The third aim, mother-tongue teaching, is seen as worth
developing, with ethnic languages becoming a small part of the larger curriculum. Hence such
languages may become a subject within the curriculum but not a medium in teaching the
curriculum.
Despite being home languages. They should be given the same status as foreign languages in the
curriculum.
The recommendations of the Swarm Report (1985) include the view that minority languages
should be fostered, but not incorporated in any general way into the normal school curriculum.
Fostering translates into allowing the community to use school premises, and a bilingual
resource" in the primary school classroom lveing available to support pupils with little or no
fluency in English.
The Swann Report (1985) is a definite advance in official thinking about the nature of a
multiracial and multicultural society in Britain. It contains a wealth of data and argument that adds
very considerably to the minority language debate in England. With regard to bilingual education,
it may appear relatively unenlightened. What is missing is a world-wide comparative perspective
that evaluates traditions, initiatives, the evolution of policy and practice in countries such as
Australia. Canada. the USA and Wales. If such a comparative stance had been taken on board,
more positive attitudes to bilingual education amongst English educationalists might have
emerged.
Yet at the same time, the Swarm Report (1985) represents a middle way a traditional English
compromise. This is evident in the reactions to the Report which often attacked the
recommendations from wholly (64) opposite points of view. For some, the Report fails to
concentrate on the perceived necessity of assimilating the variety of ethnic groups into an
integrated, harmonious, unified and cohesive British society. For others, the Report fails to
consider ethnic needs, the benefits of pluralism and multiculturalism and the advantages of
bilingualism over monolingualism.
A two-directional perspective on Swarm (1985) is evident in the response of the National Council
for Mother Tongue Teaching (1985) and a retort by Vanikar & Dalal (1986). The National Council
for Mother Tongue Teaching criticizes the Swann Report for its over-emphasis on the English
language and British identity, its dismissal of bilingual education and the implication that ethnic
minority languages and cultures are divisive. Vanikar & Dalals reply is that children in Britain need
a shared identity, that bilingual education in England will serve to accentuate the heterogeneous
features of various sub-groups" (p. 424). will stop ethnic minority children from becoming
multicultural as they will only taste English and their own ethnic culture, will hinder the
development of English skills needed for academic and professional advancement, will give undue
prominence to the languages of predominant groups among ethnic minorities and will lead away
from a democratic society. As will be examined in Chapter 4 when considering the criticisms of
USA bilingual education, the issues are complex and controversial, political and polemical. Swann
(1985) tends, however, to provide a thoughtful, carefully balanced and well defended perspective,
though of necessity. valued and contentious.

Research
Research specifically on various forms of bilingual education in England is sadly minimal. The type
of research that has been successfully carried out in Canada and the USA, in particular on the role
of two languages in education, has yet to flow in England. The major research areas have included
surveys of the variety of languages and dialects in English schools, the possible underachievement
of minority groups; particularly West Indian pupils, and curriculum development projects to
further community languages and cultures. Thus research in London by Rosen & Burgess (1980)
and by the Inner London Education Authority (ILEA) (1979, 1982) and the Linguistic Minorities
Project (1985) in London and various areas of England provides important surveys of the hitherto
undocumented extent of bilingualism in parts of England. Tansley Craft (1984) surveyed mother
tongue teaching and support for primary age pupils in England and Wales, documenting mother
tongue policies within local education authorities and their support for community.
Key Issues in Bilingualism and Bilingual Education
Escrito por Colin Baker Pginas 59-61.