Search

At the core of contemporary U.S. language education policy is the dichotomous dividing of bilingual students into English learners, who are entitled to extra support, and non-English learners, who are not entitled to this support. In this article, we genealogically trace the normative assumptions that have gone into this framing of the issue. We begin by examining the historical development of this dichotomous grouping of bilingual students within the remedial framing of the Bilingual Education Act that, building on the verbal deprivation theory that was prominent at the time, reproduced raciolinguistic ideologies that framed the language practices of bilingual students from low-income families as deficient and in need of remediation. Next, we examine how this remedial framing provided incentives for proponents of bilingual education to advocate for limited English proficiency to be defined as broadly as possible to ensure that more students were deemed eligible for these programs. We then examine contemporary vignettes that point to the tensions that this ideological underpinning has created for contemporary U.S. language education policymakers. We end with a discussion of ways of reconceptualizing U.S. language education policy that reject the remedial orientation that has informed this dichotomous framing and is responsive to the tensions illustrated in these vignettes.

At the core of contemporary U.S. language education policy is the dichotomous dividing of bilingual students into English Learners (ELs) who are entitled to extra support and non-ELs who are not entitled to this support. In this article, we genealogically trace the normative assumptions that go into this framing of the issue. We begin by examining the historical development of this dichotomous grouping of bilingual students within the remedial framing of the Bilingual Education Act that, building on the verbal deprivation theory that was prominent at the time, reproduced raciolinguistic ideologies that framed the language practices of racialized bilingual students as deficient and in need of remediation. We then examine how this remedial framing provided incentives for proponents of bilingual education to advocate for limited English proficiency as broadly as possible to ensure that more students were deemed eligible for these programs. We then examine contemporary vignettes that point to the tensions that this ideological underpinning has created for contemporary U.S. language education policymakers. We end with a discussion of ways of reconceptualizing U.S. language education policy that reject the remedial orientation that has informed this dichotomous framing and is responsive to the tensions reported by these educators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]