3. Suppose a child enters a school speaking very limited English. Explain the connection between thought and language to justify whether that child should be taught in his/her first language (can include Ebonics) or in English only.
It seems like such an obviously good idea for a progressive American school system: Teach a youngster whose first language is not English in his or her first language. The benefit of this seems obvious inasmuch as a non-English speaker who enters a classroom full of English speakers is at an obvious disadvantage. As a principle of social justice, it is the obligation of the dominant-culture-controlled educational system to smooth the linguistic path for the non-English speaker. Once such a child becomes proficient in learning in the first language, the teacher can begin helping the child transition to using standard English. This is proved by the fact that students whose first language is not English are at a learning disadvantage vis-a-vis their English-speaking counterparts.
Though the logic of justice is compelling, the weight of theoretical evidence about the connection between thought and language seems to support the view that bilingual education provides few benefits and can possibly creates more problems than it solves. As Tuman says: "Perhaps only in educational circle is it still possible to believe that social justice, like water seeking lower ground, rushes in to fill the vacuum left by the collapse of traditional authority" (Tuman, 1996, p. 285). To put it in current context, the "cure" of bilingual education may not resolve the problems associated with the disease of the cultural authority exercised by a system that disadvantages students whose first language is not English.
According to Nunes, "Symbolic systems do not merely express the reasoning we carry out in some other fashion; they are an essential part of the reasoning process" (1995, p. 95). Symbolic systems, including languag...