Schmidt

Discuss Schmidt article, Go!

I found this one to be another interesting debate between the pluralists and assimilationists, however this time in regards to U.S. policy on language. I feel it is a fine line and it is hard to define a clear opinion. On one hand the pluralists have a valid opinion in which it is completely within their right to advocate for a bilingual U.S. linguistic policy thus allowing them the basic civil and political rights of equality upon which this country has been founded. To take away their right to vote because they may not speak English fluently enough to read the complexity of a voting ballot or other political or legal documents is to a degree an attempt to eliminate the linguistic minorities political and civil power. While the United States is also seeing a rapid rise in immigration rates once again it seems unfit to deny someone who gains legal citizenship and are held to the national standards and expectations which are politically agreed upon by democratic vote the right to vote and thus add their voice to the collective opinion on how communities, states, and the nation is governed.

However at the same time, within the realm of education I do not feel it is the responsibility for the tax payers who fund public education to be responsible for providing a bilingual education for students when their own children are English speaking. This debate however crosses the boundary into other issues such as the rapid decline in public education in the USA. While I do feel it is pertinent for American schools to apply a larger bilingual base of education in terms of English speakers to learn key foreign languages to better prepare them for citizenship in a global community, as is the case in Europe where public schooling consists of a multi-lingustical education. Yet, I do not feel that that proposition is of the same argument.

A key question must be addressed when looking at the prospect of bilingual education, is it truly aiding someone in the aspect of becoming a citizen of the United States to be taught in their own native language? Or does it merely uphold a separation between native english speaking children and non native english speaking children? This is a very tough debate and I do not believe that a clear answer to this will appear any time soon. However, I do feel that in order to effectively go about finding any solution that will be collectively agreed upon that the political rights and public educational rights will have to be addressed independently. Bilingual political, legal, voting and basic civil spacing rights I can agree upon. But at the moment I cannot directly advocate for bilingual rights to public education while the public education system is currently in a state of rapid decline, I feel tax money can be better spent then by providing bilingual teachers for parents that do not wish to have their children learn in english.

Speaking from personal experience I have had many 1st and 2nd generational friends from many different nationalities throughout my basic education and rarely did I find that the children were unable to learn due to not understanding english. Most where fluent in both their native language and english speaking one at home and the other at school and with friends. I feel that if parents wish to have their children learn in their native language it should be through private education that is not pulling from public taxes.

Once again this is a very hard issue to face and one of the hardest things about facing bilingual policy **outside of political and legal systems** is how do you then deem which languages are allowed bilingualism and which are forced to assimilate which further pushes the boundary of segregation and racism more so then simply placing the educational standard within a primarily english setting with a focus on teaching native english speakers foreign languages.

~Addison