Well what about those refugees and forced immigrants? Don't they have kids?Neither way, a school should satisfy the general population, not just the voluntary immigrants or the old population.
Ebonics is not an outcome of a no official language policy, if we were to put english as an official language it would prevent state and federal office from having literature about programs and legal paper work in multiple languages or translated. All children are taught English in schools, know there are differences of dialect depending on the location of the school but unless your f**king china you could not stamp out such regional differences. It's a question of access, do you want to take away access and hinder people because it conforms to your world view? English-only policies are an ardent form of xenophobia run amok. Please rethink your position because the only people accomodated by this is recent immigrants not their offspring, so it is a discontinuing circuit.
I hate my life, I was writing this great post and half way through I accidentally closed the window so I will only give you the shortened version. I'm a 1st generation Mexican American in the state of California, and in my experience children that are born in america to spanish speaking parents learn english in school and teach this to your parents. An English only policy does not provide for education of the parents through compulsory classes or free classes and as such would leave them outside the system unable to interact with it with full capacity. Miami is a different scenario as these are ungrateful arrogant Cuban americans that were and are coddled by the GOP and feel entitled to living their own way without conforming to the nation they come to. Everyone in my fathers family is an immigrant and each one of us speak english with some of us, like myself, that speak little to no spanish. Do you see how your perspective is anecdotal and incongruent of the pantheon of experiences. As far as your claims of sabotage do you think an immigrant barely learning english is some how going to enable their kids with their meager understanding of a new language. Yes, we children of immigrants would be at a disadvantage but your policy would do nothing to address our disadvantage it only would exacerbate an immigrants ability to operate the affairs of their lives.Xenophobia is defined as: a fear and hatred of strangers or foreigners or of anything that is strange or foreign; your worldview is that one day we would make others speak spanish. This totally ignores the pull of american culture that is killing off languages around the world by being the first to coin new words for the new objects we interact with. Addressing the mentality of those in Miami is what you should be doing but tell me how banning their language would help them achieve literacy or fluency in english if they have already formed an insulated enclave? As always if you want to discuss this via phone 408-491-5250 or you can email me at civicbuyer@yahoo.com.
I think that part of the message was uncalled-for. Sure you can rail against people moving to a country without learning how to speak an official language of that country but there's no need to get border-line racist like that.The rest of the message was a hoot, however. I wonder how many parents got the message.
First, lol @ "self discovery." That's sounds like some new age crap that gets people distracted from discussion on the real problems.Second, I never advocated memorization and regurgitation of textbook materials. It is possible to become proficient with the necessary skills and to understand the concepts reading the passages carefully for the latter and by following examples from the textbook and doing whatever exercises the student feels are necessary in the former case. Or, in this internet age, it would also be perfectly feasible for the student to look up online lectures of their subjects instead.Third, I agree that good teachers supplement the material. However, it does not necessarily need to be to the class and student's interest. First and foremost, the material must be correct and complete; "interesting" is an optimal extra, especially considering that, no matter the subject, somebody will find it boring. At any rate, I do not see how this contradicts my point; a student MIGHT learn more if they sit in class, but they do not necessarily, and the student should be allowed to do what works best for them. And this is all dependent on having good teachers, who are unfortunately a rare breed in lower education.
lipguoOct 3, 2009
Well what about those refugees and forced immigrants? Don't they have kids?Neither way, a school should satisfy the general population, not just the voluntary immigrants or the old population.
darkescaflowneOct 3, 2009
Ebonics is not an outcome of a no official language policy, if we were to put english as an official language it would prevent state and federal office from having literature about programs and legal paper work in multiple languages or translated. All children are taught English in schools, know there are differences of dialect depending on the location of the school but unless your f**king china you could not stamp out such regional differences. It's a question of access, do you want to take away access and hinder people because it conforms to your world view? English-only policies are an ardent form of xenophobia run amok. Please rethink your position because the only people accomodated by this is recent immigrants not their offspring, so it is a discontinuing circuit.
darkescaflowneOct 4, 2009
I hate my life, I was writing this great post and half way through I accidentally closed the window so I will only give you the shortened version. I'm a 1st generation Mexican American in the state of California, and in my experience children that are born in america to spanish speaking parents learn english in school and teach this to your parents. An English only policy does not provide for education of the parents through compulsory classes or free classes and as such would leave them outside the system unable to interact with it with full capacity. Miami is a different scenario as these are ungrateful arrogant Cuban americans that were and are coddled by the GOP and feel entitled to living their own way without conforming to the nation they come to. Everyone in my fathers family is an immigrant and each one of us speak english with some of us, like myself, that speak little to no spanish. Do you see how your perspective is anecdotal and incongruent of the pantheon of experiences. As far as your claims of sabotage do you think an immigrant barely learning english is some how going to enable their kids with their meager understanding of a new language. Yes, we children of immigrants would be at a disadvantage but your policy would do nothing to address our disadvantage it only would exacerbate an immigrants ability to operate the affairs of their lives.Xenophobia is defined as: a fear and hatred of strangers or foreigners or of anything that is strange or foreign; your worldview is that one day we would make others speak spanish. This totally ignores the pull of american culture that is killing off languages around the world by being the first to coin new words for the new objects we interact with. Addressing the mentality of those in Miami is what you should be doing but tell me how banning their language would help them achieve literacy or fluency in english if they have already formed an insulated enclave? As always if you want to discuss this via phone 408-491-5250 or you can email me at civicbuyer@yahoo.com.
hornyangelOct 4, 2009
I had a TRS III.
counterplexOct 5, 2009
I think that part of the message was uncalled-for. Sure you can rail against people moving to a country without learning how to speak an official language of that country but there's no need to get border-line racist like that.The rest of the message was a hoot, however. I wonder how many parents got the message.
Closed AccountOct 6, 2009
0
Closed AccountOct 7, 2009
First, lol @ "self discovery." That's sounds like some new age crap that gets people distracted from discussion on the real problems.Second, I never advocated memorization and regurgitation of textbook materials. It is possible to become proficient with the necessary skills and to understand the concepts reading the passages carefully for the latter and by following examples from the textbook and doing whatever exercises the student feels are necessary in the former case. Or, in this internet age, it would also be perfectly feasible for the student to look up online lectures of their subjects instead.Third, I agree that good teachers supplement the material. However, it does not necessarily need to be to the class and student's interest. First and foremost, the material must be correct and complete; "interesting" is an optimal extra, especially considering that, no matter the subject, somebody will find it boring. At any rate, I do not see how this contradicts my point; a student MIGHT learn more if they sit in class, but they do not necessarily, and the student should be allowed to do what works best for them. And this is all dependent on having good teachers, who are unfortunately a rare breed in lower education.
iboxOct 12, 2009
hey did you know each comment has a reply function at the lower right hand corner... jus take a look.