parents in 'an uproar' over teaching social studies in Spanish

[WI_DEM]

Being taught about famous people and events in Wisconsin history in Spanish is not how some Waunakee parents want their fourth-graders learning social studies at school.

"We as parents have been in such an uproar over this," said Keith Wilke about the district’s elementary language program in which students learn Spanish by having the language integrated into social studies lessons for 30 minutes three days a week in first through fourth grades. "They’re force-fed Spanish."

This is the third year for the program, which has added one grade a year since 2006 and is designed to continue until fifth grade.

"A fair amount of (social studies instruction) has been in Spanish," said Wilke, who has a daughter in fourth grade. "The kids are to the point where they don’t understand it."

Concerns over teaching more complex topics in Spanish isn’t a surprise to district leaders and a meeting Thursday has been set to address those issues.

"We realized the area that we were going to have the most concern ... was the fourth grade," said Randy Guttenberg, district superintendent, who also said that administrators have monitored the fourth-grade program all year. "The content in social studies becomes more complex at that point."

Topics covered during social studies in the younger grades, such as community and family structure, fit well with learning a language, he said.

But once students start tackling more specialized topics such as Wisconsin history — including information about landforms — adding a foreign language to the mix can make learning more challenging.

http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/local/437383

[mzteris]

1. ijuts . . .

they should be very very glad that their children are receiving immersion methodology for language.

[WI_DEM]

5. They should have to learn our language, but as Amurikans we don't have to learn theres!

is how a lot of these people feel, I believe.

[kiva]

13. It sounds like the real problem is that parents believe that

the kids don't have a good enough grasp of Spanish to properly understand their social studies lessons, not that they oppose their kids learning Spanish:

While some parents object to the program, they do support teaching the subjects separately.

"We would love to see them fit it in," parent Jean Magnes said of teaching Spanish, but "people are furious" with the current model.

Magnes, who has two daughters in the Waunakee district — one in sixth grade who hasn’t participated in the language program and one in fourth who has — said "there is a tremendous difference in learning from one child to another."

"I’m seeing my (younger) child lose significant education in social studies because of this immersion."

Magnes said because of how the subject has been taught, students aren’t learning Spanish or history.

I teach history, and it irritates me that public schools are always willing to throw history under the bus--you notice that there's no discussion of teaching math or science in Spanish, because god forbid that that kids need to know those subjects! No, let's use history, because it really doesn't matter if they miss the main points, or all of, the lessons. If I was one of those parents, I'd be provoked too...if the children aren't understanding the subject, they will be at a disadvantage later.

[Chulanowa]

15. History does get the short end of the stick, after the arts.

A child will have to use math. And we can't beat the ruskies if they don't know the answers to science tests. But htey might actually learn something from history.

America's education system seems to be fascism with a smile and lunch at 11:30.

[kiva]

24. I love the last sentence...fascism with a smile indeed.

My other pet peeve is when high school coaches are drafted to teach history--let's see, English is too hard, math and science are too important...I know, let's have them teach history so all they have to do is make the students memorize a list of names, dates, and places!

Seriously, I teach American history in college and the vast majority of my students say they hated history in high school because it was all about memorization. This is sad, because the real challenge (and fascination) in history is understanding why, not reading a laundry list of names and dates.

And yes, you're right that arts take an even bigger hit than history...after all, creativity is soooo unimportant.

[kentauros]

28. Hell, the Arts take a hit

even into college and university. As soon as budgets start to shrink, the arts are the first to be cut

[Chulanowa]

35. Well, the reason they use coaches is pretty simple...

In a lot of high schools, history is pretty much degraded into a variety of ways to say "WAR IS BADASS! OOH RAH!" so naturally they draft (no pun intended) the school's, ahem, "general" to teach that stuff.

High school history textbooks are so thick with whitewash that they're better-off being recycled for newsprint; Same vapid bullshit, but at least we save a tree or two. It's the one place in the damn world where I've actually seen that conservative canard of "political correctness" in action. Anything that could possibly offend - or worse, provoke discussion is sanded out. Just some factoids off the top of my head from my memory of high school history.

Andrew Jackson was president during the period of Indian Removal. No mention is made of his very, very personal and often violent involvement in the process.
Richard Nixon was accused of a crime and stepped down from the Presidency. No mention of what the supposed crime was, and no validation is given to the claim.
The French had a revolution because they wanted freedom. No mention is made of what they wanted freedom from - that's class warfare and thus taboo!
The Babylonian Captivity (Catholic, not Jewish) is worth an entire chapter of names and dates and frequent (very, very frequent) reminders of "why it matters." Eleven Crusade's worth of mass murders and hapless peasantry dying in droves warrants a mention in the previous chapter.
We still aren't sure if Columbus discovered America, did you know that? Of course whether he did or not, he's a hero, rather than the genocidal slavemaster of the Arawak and Taino.
Conversely, the fall of the Aztec empire is seen as "unfortunate" while no mention is made of exactly why the neighboring tribes were so happy to slaughter them like pigs. Somehow, the whole "they killed hundreds of people a day so the sun wouldn't go out" thing is scrubbed out...
Africa didn't exist until Portugal needed people to hack sugar cane in Brazil, apparently. We found out later that there were empires in Africa, because the entire breadth of African history is placed after the chapters about the age of exploration and the start of the slave trade.

Of course, the textbook in question did find the room to be partisan and biased regarding Communism. because who in Amurrika would ever argue for commies?

I've always been very interested in history - I blame my mother, she was piling archaeology books, national geographic, and such on me as soon as I could read. So history class always just pissed me off.

[kiva]

41. This is the reason, IMO, that it's important

for teachers have more than a passing knowledge of the subject. Even though textbooks have progressed from worshiping dead white guys, publishers are loathe to print anything 'controversial'. Since one of the biggest school markets for textbooks, Texas, is extremely conservative in what they will purchase, we end up with watered-down interpretations. A knowledgeable teacher (assuming they don't fear being fired) can use even bland texts to get at important questions in history.

And kudos to your mom :hi:

[Chulanowa]

61. Yup, yup

Picked up a book, "Lies My Teacher Told Me" by James Loewen. It goes into length about hte meekness of the school systems, the blandness of history books, and the bias of the printers. As it turns out, most of the authors named on history books have never seen the work in the books. They simply have a contract where they sign to give legitimacy to the thing. Some of those contracts are actually syndicated and the authors name keeps appearing on books decades after they've died.

[a la izquierda]

43. Hah, your mom sounds like mine...

and my grandma as well.
I had kick-butt teachers in high school. All of them combined are why I'm about to finish my PhD in history. I've loved the subject since I was about 5.

[Chulanowa]

59. I don't remember any of my High School teachers, except one

My Physical Science (dunno why we didn't call it chemistry...) teacher was an insane Nigerian woman. Mrs. Orouzu (that's pronounced, "MEEZ oh-ROO-ZOO!!!" yes, the exclamation points are part of the pronunciation) who had us lighting hydrogen on fire.

My middle school history teacher was okay. He put forth honest effort, but he had a degree in social sciences and they had him teaching 6th graders Phonecia and shit.

[EFerrari]

21. You think these residents of WI won't have enough opportunities

to learn WI history? :)

[enlightenment]

29. I teach history, too, and while I can see that

this opinion isn't DU-ey enough for most of the respondents in this thread thus far, I have to agree with kiva.

I have nothing against learning a second (third or fourth) language; I think it's high time we taught children other languages at a young age; but why not add an immersion language class instead of singling out ONE subject? Why social studies? Why not Math or Science - or even English? If the idea of immersion is to force a change in the syntactical pathways and help the learner 'think' in the language, then logically ALL the classes should be taught in the language. What this sounds like to me is a cheaper shortcut than having dedicated language classes for all the students.

People learn at different speeds and usually with different methodologies. Combining two subject areas shorts them both - would anyone consider it acceptable to combine biology and literature for new learners of those subjects? One hour a day for both - that's sufficient, right? No one should have a problem with that - those kids would learn just as much. Right?

There seems to be a perception here that these parents must be 'repukes' or idiots - and that their children must be stupid, too. Frankly, that is a ridiculous conclusion. Maybe, just maybe, they want their children to grasp the subject they are being taught, along with the language in which it is being taught. From the sound of the article, several fear that their children are grasping neither the subject nor the language.

Immersion is an incredibly effective method of language learning - it's an incredibly effective tool for learning, period. That's one of the reasons why we teach different subjects in discrete blocks; so student's can concentrate on the topic.

[dustbunnie]

33. Your post nails it! nt

[mzteris]

49. I live in Madison -

and while some of these peoplemay not mind the second language, but believe me when I say, they know it's not PC to publically admit they just don't want their kids learning esssssssspanyhole, doncha know.

I hear this sentiment expressed quite often - my son attends a Spanish Immersion school and people are SHOCKED, I tell ya - Shocked - "why in the world would you want your kid to learn Spanish for anyway?" :eyes:

[Still Sensible]

53. Absoulutely

what you said!

[Winterblues]

30. Which History do you teach, that written by Republicans or Liberals?

Or do you know? History is often written by the winning side of the argument and that means it might not be completely accurate. Math is accurate as is science. Do you teach how Native Americans did their farming or how they have been treated from day one after Spanish (Columbus) arrived upon our shores? Do you teach that virtually every single Treaty signed by the US Government with Native Americans has been broken? Do you teach how we stole California from Mexico by force of arms? History is just the winner's story.

[kiva]

37. Ummm, I think that my PhD in history sort of says

that I do know a bit about history--six years of postgraduate classes does provide one with some of those details you seem to think are so obscure. And if you've opened up a history text written in the last decade or so, you'd realize that even the worst of them have gotten past the "white man good/Native American bad" meme that you (rightfully) object to so fervently.

As to the notion that math and science are "accurate" subjects...exactly how is that a defense for treating history, literature, and the other arts like insignificant afterthoughts?

[Winterblues]

66. You are quite correct in that I haven't opened a history book in over four decades

As for suggesting History is any less important than either Math or Science, I hope I did not do that. I certainly do not feel that way and in fact I believe History to be one of the more important studies one can take. I was just trying to make a point that History can be subjective. I certainly hope that History in this day and age is far more accurate than when I studied it in the sixties.

[enlightenment]

38. Oh my. You've been out of the classroom for quite awhile,

it seems. Surprisingly, history has advanced beyond 'dead white guys'. It has even advanced beyond 'only teaching the history of the ignored'. Responsible, educated historians don't swing to either extreme of the pendulum these days. Neither do responsible, educated citizens.

[mzteris]

48. actually - my son

receives instruction in both Spanish and English (on an alternating basis) in Math, Science, History, and Language Arts (reading, writing, spelling, grammar)

[LibertyLover]

68. About 16 years ago

My best friend's kids were in high school and I went up to give a presentation on ancient Greece with slides I had taken from a trip to Greece a few years previously. Afterwards, their teacher asked me if I really liked history. When I said that I did, he said that he couldn't stand it and preferred to coach football.

[anonymous171]

39. Yeah, who needs to learn social studies anyways. nt

[mzteris]

47. doing both at the same time -

what a novel idea. Too bad "little johnny" is too dumbed down to do it, eh?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

2. Something tells me...

that this dipshit's kid wouldn't understand social studies if it were taught in English.

[Veritas_et_Aequitas]

3. We have a couple of possibilities here.

Maybe the teacher is misgauging her class' abilities.

Or maybe this gentleman's daughter just isn't that intelligent. Sorry, but not everyone gets to be a supergenius.

[surrealAmerican]

62. While, as you say, ...

... "not everyone gets to be a supergenius", anyone of normal or close to normal intelligence CAN become bilingual. It sounds like they didn't spend enough time in the earlier grades "immersing" the kids in Spanish for them to be ready for the additional vocabulary they needed for forth grade.

[Captain Hilts]

4. I agree. nt

[Blue_In_AK]

6. "Force-fed"? Good grief.

They should be grateful. Anchorage has language immersion programs in (I think) three elementary schools, one for Russian, one for Japanese, and one for Spanish, and each has a very long waiting list to get in. My grandsons have been in Russian immersion since kindergarten - half the day is taught only in Russian - and they're doing wonderfully. I'm thrilled that they will be bilingual.

[treestar]

44. I have a friend from Argentina who said that there you could choose

high schools that spent half a day teaching in English or in French.

"Force fed" just shows these idiots are xenophobes. The program would obviously combine the two subjects so as to make sure they understood the social studies and that it was presented in the Spanish they know. They are also being "force fed" the social studies and math and history and everything else.

[no_hypocrisy]

7. Without immersion in a language, it is difficult to achieve fluency.

And being able to THINK in that language. Otherwise, it's only being able to translate. What the parents fear is enculturalization of their children which is not a goal of the program.

[Captain Hilts]

10. And being next to Canada, they might prefer their kids learn French. nt

[KamaAina]

17. Wisconsin isn't really next to Canada

it's across Lake Superior from it.

On the other hand, Wisconsin teams do tend to dominate U.S. curling...

[Captain Hilts]

19. I'll bet they hear an awful lot of Canadian radio and TV. nt

[dustbunnie]

23. I doubt they get much, if any, French tv or radio.

They're smack under Ontario. Contrary to the popular misconception, not all Canadians speak French outside of Quebec.

[Captain Hilts]

25. Lived in Canada for four years and CBC broadcasts in both languages. nt

[dustbunnie]

26. I'm a transplant myself.

Of course CBC broadcasts in both languages since it services Quebec as well. Not sure why that would impel people to want to learn French though. Wisconsin travelers probably visit Ontario a lot more frequently than Quebec, so excluding those who might have a particular interest in the French language, there is certainly no need to learn it. If anything, it's the New Englanders who often have French ancestry, who can and do business in French, go to Montreal for hockey games and to visit the boobie bars, etc.

[Captain Hilts]

31. Then why should kids learn history in Spanish? nt

[dustbunnie]

32. Not sure I follow?

As I posted downthread, I don't think much of the idea. It's a little 'o this, little 'o that, not much of either.

I would think there's more benefit to learning Spanish though, even in this hodge podge manner, since a Wisconsin child might eventually end up somewhere where the language could come in handy from both a business and social perspective. French, not so much.

(All languages are useful to have of course, don't mean to imply that French isn't worthwhile learning.)

[Captain Hilts]

55. If you want to work in Europe, French or German is better. In Latin Am. Portuguese ...

rivals Spanish.

[dustbunnie]

64. Oh for sure. But the average American will probably stay put.

We're not exactly big world travelers. Many have never even seen a passport with their name on it. Maybe that'll change with new generations but for now there's more of a likelihood some Wisconsin kid'll move to the southwest than to Berlin.

[WI_DEM]

46. Not this part of Wisconsin, this is down in the southern part of the state

[ogneopasno]

8. Quite right, quite right! God forbid the children should be challenged at all! It's too much!

Just give them their "thanks for participating" medals and go on your way.

[Warpy]

9. Can these conservatives get any stupider and still live?

These fucking morons need to know that the earlier a second language is added, the easier it is down the road to add a third or fourth.

This is a great idea. I'd love to see bilingual education all the way through the schools.

Kids aren't confused when education is bilingual even if their nitwit parents are.

(for the record, English was #2 for me)

[JoDog]

11. Don't know much about immersion learning

but shouldn't it be done so that the kids won't daily be encountering words there's no way they would have been exposed to already? That seems to be a part of the problem here.

[old mark]

16. I took Spanish in a community college, in an immersion class -

It was the best way to learn. I have had problems in the pawst with the old style rote memorization teaching, and immersion was a revelation to me. I was actually dreaming in Spanish after the 2nd week, and I actually can construct and read simple sentences after 20 years since the class.

mark

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

12. Awww. Just give the tykes graham crackers and milk. God forbid they be "challenged".

[Deja Q]

14. I see both sides of the issue and, quite frankly, I don't care.

Knowing other languages is a sign of intelligence. Or at least Bill Cosby thinks so.

And given how corporations want to unify and simplify everything, why not force-feed English to everyone? They speak English, the world is going their way, so why not.

Sorry for the apathy.

[ColbertWatcher]

18. This program sounds fascinating!

Learning two subjects at once!

Imaging spending time in school learning a whole bunch of things!

Wow!

What will they think of next!?

[PVnRT]

20. Ahhh, the Milwaukee 'burbs

Five counties in the state went for McCain in November. The five counties surrounding Milwaukee. This should not be a surprise that they are bitching about multiculturalism.

[dustbunnie]

22. Sounds like a useless program to me.

Immersion works because of the concept, which as its label implies, requires "immersing" the child in the language. That means at least half a day every day, or going for the whole shabang an entire year. Piddling around with one class three times a week seems to me a cheap way of providing language instruction at the expense of learning the subject.

I went through an immersion program and it was great. It meant being thrown into the deep end and learning to swim, fast. This program doesn't resemble that concept at all. Those who don't have a facility for languages could likely fail at both subjects.

[seabeyond]

27. it depends if it interfers or enhances their studies. i am saddened that they dont have a

foriegn language, (spanish my preference) for kids at a younger age, a class of its own. i think it is that important. but with the damn tak tests they have already eliminated art, reduced music and during tak learning time eliminate science and history and pe sometimes for concentrated study.

[NeedleCast]

34. Someone should let them know that being bi-lingual

is one of the biggest benefits they can have in terms of future jobs.

Buddy of mine is a independent contractor for installing home theater systems and stuff like that but he's just an exceptional guy when it comes to building things. Decks, above ground pools...if it's about building things, he's good at it.

He's a native spanish speaker and while a lot of independents in the area are hurting, his business is doing fine.

[4_TN_TITANS]

36. These knuckle draggers need to be dropped down in Europe.

I went through 7 countries 20 years ago and got by just fine because so many Europeans speak English - eventhough the don't have to. People all over the world make efforts to learn English, but Americans are too proud to learn other languages. Consequently, one's ability to speak other languages is indicative of intellegence.

[MellowDem]

42. It's not that we're too proud...

It's that it is not necessary, at least not nearly as necessary as for Europe, with so many different languages right next to each other. Personally, I think this class is stupid. The kids won't learn social studies, and it's inefficient. Teach kids from a young age or don't waste their time.

And yes, Europeans do, in a sense, HAVE TO understand English. It has become an international language. Now they can talk to people of many multiple languges using English as a medium. And English is the language of business. So yes, to be successful, many Europeans have to learn English. It's not because they're sophisticated. We don't have to learn Spanish, and won't ever really be in that situation. Still, it is much more beneficial to know Spanish nowadays, for your career, than it ever has been. But when immigration slows to a trickle again and Hispanics living here learn English, you will see that need go down, probably replaced by some new immigrant group. It's the way it always has been in America.

[Bluebear]

40. "Force-fed"...yeah, it's called immersion foreign language teaching, you ignorant cheese curd. nt

[dustbunnie]

50. 1 1/2 hours a week isn't exactly "immersion."

It's like trying to sell a Big Mac as Chateaubriand.

Edit: Bwahaha, all those hours of immersion and I can't even spell Chateaubriand. :rofl:

[Bluebear]

54. well u get the idea

[anonymous171]

45. That title is misleading.

They are supposedly concerned that immersion will hamper their childrens' academic development. They aren't whining about Messicans or DEYTOOKRJOBS-ing or anything like that.

[dsc]

51. I can see their problem

First just how proficient are these teachers in both subjects. I am presuming they are likely native spanish speakers who studied history at some level but have they mastered history? I think it would be difficult to find truely bilingual teachers who actually know the subject.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

52. Gotta Be On The Side Of The Parents With This One.

[Bluebear]

58. Naturally

[AlCzervik]

63. Thank God it passed.

[Cleita]

60. Reason?

Is it any language you object to or just that particular one? What if the language offered was Italian or French, or some other European language? How about Latin the basis for most European languages? You see it's about producing bi-lingual children so that they can keep up with children in every other country of the world, most of whom speak another language fluently other than their own and more commonly several languages.

[Bluebear]

69. (crickets)

[AlCzervik]

56. maybe they can flip around, use history in the language classes.

my daughter has been taking Spanish for about 7 years, they have it and hour a day and she's become almost fluent.

kids who learn another language generally do better in school.

[Cleita]

57. Would they be happier if it were German or Swedish?

Somehow I think they probably would be. I'm bilingual myself because I had to learn all my lessons in the language of the country I was presently attending school in at the time. I am a strong believer in Americans learning another language fluently in school. I think it would break down the provincialism we are so guilty of. If parents don't like Spanish how about one of the other languages? Learning a couple of languages fluently in your childhood facilitates learning additional languages later on. So those kids might want to pick up Spanish at a later date without parental interference and it will be easier for them.

[EndersDame]

65. Spanish should take precedence

We share a border with Mexico, a large portion of our country speaks it (yes even legal born ones).Being fluent in Spanish is a big asset when applying for a job. I would also advocate French since alot of Canadians speak it. I myself took Latin in high school because my mom made me. I would like to be able to communicate with more people although learning Latin helps

[Cleita]

67. That's the big picture, but the smaller picture is producing children fluent

in at least two languages. If parents aren't accepting Spanish, maybe they will accept another language instead. In Los Angeles there is a school called the Lycee Francais, which produces bi-lingual American children in both French and English. When the kids reach high school they can opt to take Spanish or other languages on the curriculum. I have known people who took their kids out of public school and put them in the Lysee because they didn't want them learning Spanish ("What kind of job will that get them, picking lettuce?"), but didn't object to them learning French. If there is a big fight about this with the Wisconsin parents, then they won't learn any second language fluently and that's not the point. btw I am fluent in both English and Spanish myself, but although it sometimes helped me get a job, I never was paid additionally for it, so I stopped listing it on my resume.