essay about english only policy

English Only?

An Opinion on Speaking Only English in Class?

Caiaimage / Chris Ryan / Getty Images

• Resources for Teachers
• Pronunciation & Conversation
• Writing Skills
• Reading Comprehension
• Business English
• TESOL Diploma, Trinity College London
• M.A., Music Performance, Cologne University of Music
• B.A., Vocal Performance, Eastman School of Music

Here is a seemingly easy question: Should a policy of English only be put into place in the English learning classroom? Your gut answer may be yes , English only is the only way students will learn English! However, there may be some exceptions to this rule.

To begin with, let's look at some of the arguments made for an English only policy in the classroom:

• Students will learn to speak English by speaking English.
• Allowing students to speak other languages distract them from the task of learning English.
• Students who don't speak only English are also not thinking in English. Speaking only in English helps students begin speaking English internally. 
• The only way to become fluent in a language is by being immersed in the language.
• An English only  policy in class requires them to negotiate the learning process in English.
• Students speaking another language distract other English learners.
• English only is part of effective classroom management  that fosters learning and respect.

These are all valid arguments for an English only policy in the ESL / EFL classroom. However, there are certainly arguments to be made for allowing students to communicate in other languages, especially if they are beginners. Here are some of the better points made in support of allowing other languages to constructively be used in the classroom:

• Providing or allowing for explanations of grammar concepts in learners' L1 (first language) speeds up the learning process.
• Communicating in another language during class allows students to fill in the gaps, especially if the class is large.
• Allowing some communication in learners' L1 establishes a more relaxed atmosphere that is conducive to learning.
• Translating difficult vocabulary items is much easier and less time consuming when other languages are allowed.
• Committing to an English only policy in class might seem as if the English teacher has, at times, been turned into a traffic cop.
• Students are limited in learning complex concepts through a lack of English vocabulary related to the grammar of English.

These points are also equally valid reasons to perhaps allow some communication in learners' L1. The truth is, it's a thorny issue! Even those that subscribe to an English only policy accept some exceptions. Pragmatically, there are some instances in which a few words of explanation in another language can do a world of good.

Exception 1: If, After Numerous Attempts...

If, after numerous attempts to explain a concept in English, students still do not understand a given concept, it helps to give a short explanation in students' L1. Here are some suggestions on these short interruptions to explain.

• If you can speak students' L1, explain the concept. Mistakes made in students' L1 can actually help build rapport. 
• If you can't speak students' L1, ask a student who clearly understands the concept. Make sure to vary students who explain so as to not create a teacher's pet. 
• If you can understand students' L1, ask students to explain the concept to you in their own language. This helps to check their understanding and show students that you are also a language learner. 

Exception 2: Test Directions

If you teach in a situation that requires students to take comprehensive tests in English, make sure students understand the directions exactly. Unfortunately, students often do poorly on a test due to their lack of understanding about the assessment's directions rather than linguistic abilities. In this case, it's a good idea to go over the directions in students' L1. Here are some suggestions on activities you can use to make sure students understand.

• Have students translate the directions into their L1. Group students together and have them discuss differences in translation and understanding.
• Copy directions onto separate strips of paper and distribute to the class. Each student is responsible for translating one strip. Ask students to read the English passage first and then the translation. Discuss as a class or in groups whether the translation is correct or incorrect.
• Provide example questions for directions. First, read the directions in English, then read them in students L1. Have students complete practice questions to check their understanding.

Clear Explanations in Learners' L1 Helps

Allowing more advanced learners to help other learners in their own language really moves the class along. It's purely a pragmatic question in this case. Sometimes it is more valuable for the class to take a five-minute break from English only rather than spend fifteen minutes repeating concepts that students can't  understand. Some students' English language skills may not allow them to understand complicated structural, grammar or vocabulary issues. In a perfect world, the teacher could explain any grammar concept clearly enough that each student can understand. However, especially in the case of beginners, students really need help from their own language.

Playing Cop

It is unlikely any teacher really enjoys disciplining the class. When a teacher pays attention to another student, it is almost impossible to make sure that others are not speaking in a language other than English. Admittedly, students speaking in other languages can disturb others. It is important for a teacher to step in and discourage conversations in other languages. However, disrupting a good conversation in English in order to tell others to speak  English only  can disrupt a good flow during the lesson.

Perhaps the best policy is English only— but with a few caveats. Strictly insisting that no student speak a word of another language is a daunting task. Creating an  English only  atmosphere in class should be an important goal, but not the end of a friendly English learning environment.

• How to Use Google Translate to Teach English
• Teaching English to Absolute and False Beginners
• Classroom Management
• Methods for Teaching Grammar in an ESL/EFL Setting
• Multiple Intelligence Activities
• Speaking Strategies for English Learners
• Knowing How and When to Correct Students in Class
• Grammar Chants to Learn English
• English Learner Types Quiz
• How to Speak English
• Standard Lesson Plan Format for ESL Teachers
• Top Essential Advanced Level English Learner Resources
• Learn English With These Basic Conversation Exercises
• Non-Native English Teachers
• English Learning Tips
• Ten Reasons to Learn English

Effects of English-Only Policy to Students’ Class Participation in Bestlink College of the Philippines, S.Y. 2019–2020

• Babylyn Villanueva
• Anjanette Pagdato
• Catherine Advincula
• Nicole Tiballa
• Crystel-Joy Tamon

This study was conducted because the researchers saw that most of the students are struggling to participate in their English class, especially when the class requires speaking, presenting, or exposing themselves during classes. The English-Only Policy is strictly imposed on students as a support to the learners of the language and train them to naturally use English in their everyday activities. The researchers made an action plan for improving the students’ class participation through the English-Only Policy in Bestlink College of the Philippines. The researchers used a descriptive research design because based on the observation, some students are afraid to participate during their English class. The researchers also used a survey questionnaire. The respondents were 50 selected Grade 12 Accountancy, Business, and Management (ABM)students from ABM sections 10–15 with a class schedule of T-TH-S. The researchers used a nonprobability technique because any of the populations being selected is unknown. The researchers also used convenience sampling because this involves collecting a sample that is near, convenient, and based on the availability of the respondents. The results of the study negatively affect students’ class participation because the policy cannot make the students participate in every class discussion because they do not know what exact words and expressions to use. Based on the results of the study, the following are the positive effects of the “English-Only Policy:” (1) Recitation –There are positive effects to the class participation of students regarding recitations, especially because they get more information on the topic. Thus, they actively participate in it. (2) Reporting –It innovates their strategies in presenting their work at the same time improving themselves in terms of reporting their topic using English. (3) Group presentation –Implementing this will improve their skills in different areas of presenting. The researchers recommended that students should not treat “English-Only Policy” as merely a policy but also a part of their learning. Students should know that learning English is a must, and you cannot make the same excuses over the same thing because learning is a process and there is always room for improvement. Thus, the researchers recommend that students should always learn and practice. Practice makes better, and better makes the best.

How to Cite

• Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)

Most read articles by the same author(s)

• Rhoi Vince Condino, April Del Monte, Juliane Rodriguez, Crystel-Joy Tamon, Enhancing Financial Literacy of Grade 12 ABM Students by Using Business Finance Lesson , Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research: Vol. 2 No. 1 (2020): Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Abstracts, Vol.2, No1, March 2020
• Angel Lyn Magpusao, Nicole Barrientos, Haifah Ali, Regine Delos Santos, Crystel-Joy Tamon, Providing Cleaning Materials in Comfort Room to Maintain Good Hygiene and Sanitation of Grade 12 ABM Students , Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research: Vol. 2 No. 1 (2020): Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Abstracts, Vol.2, No1, March 2020
• Joan Salonga, Angelyn Cahilig, John Clark Endrina, Jericho Bayno, Lloyd John Ojales, Crystel-Joy Tamon, Effectiveness of Using Budget Planner in Improving Allowance Management of Grade 12 ABM Students in Bestlink College of the Philippines, S.Y. 2019–2020: An Assessment , Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research: Vol. 2 No. 1 (2020): Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Abstracts, Vol.2, No1, March 2020
• Bianca Angela Rosales, Mikhail Louis Cea, Lusziel Castaritas, Bryan Larisma, Eaiver Concepcion, Crystel-Joy Tamon, Assessment on Effectiveness of Using 50-30-20 Rule in Improving Budgeting Skills ofGrade 12 ABM Students , Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research: Vol. 2 No. 1 (2020): Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Abstracts, Vol.2, No1, March 2020
• Mary Rose Anoos, Cris Manlapaz, Dhane Vic Devebar, Catherine Casipong, Xavier Idpalina, Crystel-Joy Tamon, Assessment on Problems Affects Analytical Skills of Grade 12 ABM Students in Accounting Subject in Bestlink College of the Philippines , Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research: Vol. 2 No. 1 (2020): Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Abstracts, Vol.2, No1, March 2020
• Darwin Racines, Patricia Hortelano, Pamela Nicole Bisda, Marjorie Rios, Hunnylee Dadiro, Crystel-Joy Tamon, Boosting Self-Esteem of Grade 12 Students through Enhanced Public Speaking , Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research: Vol. 2 No. 1 (2020): Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Abstracts, Vol.2, No1, March 2020
• Diana Teresa Noces, Katrina Paula Delovino, Jessa Mae Baluyot, Sheilamaeh Barrete, Felix Roland Laforteza, Crystel-Joy Tamon, Assessment on Implementing 3R (Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle) in Improving Waste Management of Selected Senior High School Students at Bestlink College of the Philippines , Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research: Vol. 2 No. 1 (2020): Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Abstracts, Vol.2, No1, March 2020
• John Symhon Racasa, Mon Carlo Castro, Jasmine Erbon, Jean Cabugnason, Mphsylac Shane Danaytan, Crystel-Joy Tamon, Assessment on Factors Affecting Public Speaking Activities in Improving Self-Confidence of Selected Grade 12 ABM Students in Bestlink College of the Philippines , Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research: Vol. 2 No. 1 (2020): Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Abstracts, Vol.2, No1, March 2020
• Abel Mark Popanes, Monaliza Larios, Roger Gervacio Jr., Angelica Robenta, Danica Trinidad, Crystel-Joy Tamon, Assessment on Implementation of “No Plastic Policy” in Canteen and its Effectiveness in Reducing Plastic Use , Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research: Vol. 2 No. 1 (2020): Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Abstracts, Vol.2, No1, March 2020
• Jomar Penilla, Ailyn Grace Aragon, Chinnie Joy Francisco, Mariel Gallego, Jannel Andrea Saura, Crystel-Joy Tamon, Improving Academic Performance of Selected Grade 11 ABM Student in General Mathematics using Handouts and Reviewer , Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research: Vol. 2 No. 1 (2020): Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Abstracts, Vol.2, No1, March 2020

Similar Articles

• Jessamine T. Celzo, Marinella M. Dumagat, Samuel V. Patotoy, Lea P. Portugues, Judy Mae A. Suguitan, Angelica L. Dela Fuente, Factors Affecting the Level of English Proficiency of Grade 12 General Academic Strand Students of Bestlink College Of The Philippines , Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research: Vol. 1 No. 1 (2019): Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Abstracts, Vol.1, No.1, March 2019
• Jhon Carlo Septimo, Jhonalyn Dulpina , Drix Raagas, Shairalyn Resare, Analyn Magalso, Teaching Styles: Factors Affecting English Proficiency to Academic Performance of selected ABM Grade 12 students of Bestlink College of the Philippines. SY: 2018 –2019 , Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research: Vol. 1 No. 1 (2019): Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Abstracts, Vol.1, No.1, March 2019
• D.R. Antonio, A. Dahan, E.G. Facurib, R. M. Lamo, C.M. Torres, Z. Zhilmar, Dr. Amelia S. Ablen, Factors Affecting the Speaking Fluency in English of Graduating Students at Bestlink College of the Philippines , Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research: Vol. 1 No. 1 (2019): Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Abstracts, Vol.1, No.1, March 2019
• Daniel Salera, Hannijane Baleyos, Jasmin Hasel Dela Cruz, Rhea Navarro, Mhikaela Benice Vargas, Dr. Amelia Ablen, Factors Affecting English Communication Skills of Grade 11 Students at Bestlink College of the Philippines , Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research: Vol. 2 No. 1 (2020): Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Abstracts, Vol.2, No1, March 2020
• Jasmin Hasel Dela Cruz, Hanni Jane Baleyos, Rhea Navarro, Daniel Salera, Mhikaela Benice Vargas, Factors Affecting English Communication Skills of Grade 11 Students in Bestlink College of the Philippines , Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research: Vol. 2 No. 1 (2020): Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Abstracts, Vol.2, No1, March 2020
• Rheazole Crizaldo, Beanelle De Mateo, Joyce Jaime, Patricia Nichole Naig, Jocelyn Osio, Alyssa Salimbad, Rocelyn P. Catibag, Factors Causing Difficulties in English language and its Effect on Academic Performance of Grade 12 ABM Students in BCP SY 2018-2019 , Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research: Vol. 1 No. 1 (2019): Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Abstracts, Vol.1, No.1, March 2019
• Mary Joy Calamba, Angelien Buensalida, Marcos Isaac, Christine Joy Lumbre, Angela Rose Ursales, Rinna Bayaborda, Conducting Basic Accounting among Grade 11 ABM Students in Bestlink College of the Philippines , Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research: Vol. 2 No. 1 (2020): Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Abstracts, Vol.2, No1, March 2020
• Sandra Villanueva, Janella Joaquin Bawing, Ariella Garcia, Roberto Paez, Abegail Meyor, Mirasol Midel, Effects of Using Filipino Language during English Classes on Performance of Grade 11 HUMSS Strand Students in Bestlink College of the Philippines , Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research: Vol. 2 No. 1 (2020): Ascendens Asia Singapore – Bestlink College of the Philippines Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Abstracts, Vol.2, No1, March 2020

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.

• (866) 575-0560

The Advantages of Speaking Only English in ESL Classes

by Mark Ollerton | Language Training

English is one of the most important languages to learn when communicating with people internationally . It’s a globally used language where it’s estimated at least 1.35 billion people speak native and non-native English. Being able to communicate effectively in a country where English is the primary language is essential to communication. English as a Second Language classes – or ESL classes – are taught to non-native speakers in the English language environment. They are offered for all ages at all levels of learning, where people can learn to speak, read, listen, and write in English.

The goal of ESL classes is for people is to learn English as efficiently as possible in a way that helps them understand and retain the knowledge that can help them communicate better with others who speak English. Many ESL teachers are leaning into only speaking English in ESL classes to help accelerate their students’ learning in an immersive English language environment.

There is a lot of debate about whether implementing an English-only policy is effective or efficient in helping students learn English. Some teachers may look at it as a negative environment where students are left unable to communicate. In reality, there are clear advantages that benefit the teacher and the students.

What is an English-Only Policy?

An English-only policy is when a teacher decides that only English is to be spoken in an ESL class environment. The teacher requires that students will exclude any other language from communication. With an English-only policy, the intent is to help provide students with more opportunities to work through learning the English language and have an increased chance of practice when they are forced only to speak English.

Advantages of an English-Only Policy

Learning a language is never an easy task, no matter which language you want to learn. The best way to learn is to immerse the student in the environment in a way that helps them begin to think in the language. These are some of the benefits of learning in an English-only environment:

#1 Students Can Learn to Express Themselves in English

By only allowing English in ESL classes, students begin to think their thoughts in English and get more familiar with the language in a way that helps them become more confident and encourages them to experiment more.

#2 ESL Classes Are Easier to Manage

Teachers can manage the student’s communication much better in a way that teachers can help facilitate conversations and keep unnecessary conversations in check.

#3 Students Develop Better Problem Solving

English-only classes force students to find solutions and think outside of the box to find new and better ways to communicate and help deliver their questions and responses to their teacher. These skills can help them through the class with implementing solutions they can use again in future classroom discussions.

#4 Students Have Improved Listening Skills

Students will learn to build stronger listening skills essential in learning a new language.

#5 Socializing Becomes Much Easier

When students are learning a new language together, they are learning how to socialize in their new language, and as they grow in their communication, they can encourage and help each other in learning new skills.

Although insisting students only speak one language can be daunting, and there will be slip-ups, creating an environment where only speaking English should be a fundamental goal. There are clear advantages to an English-only policy that can help students thrive and learn English in a way that can help them become better listeners, communicators, and speakers.

ESL Classes from Workplace Languages

At Workplace Languages we are not limited to just translation services, we also offer our clients a wide range of business language solutions so they can thrive in the international business environment .

If you would like to learn more about Workplace Languages, and how we can help you with your language and translation needs, please contact us here .

Request a FREE Quote

Workplace Languages has the answer for all of your corporate language needs! Online & onsite / in-person language training is available 24 / 7 / 365. And we offer over 200 languages for your written translation, voiceover and over-the-phone interpretation needs.

Call us at (866) 575-0560 or tell us more about your needs clicking “GET STARTED” below.

Get started

Sign Up for Email Updates

Related posts.

OPI Services: Driving Growth for US Businesses

OPI Services - Your Competitive Advantage Effective communication is paramount for businesses to thrive in today's interconnected global economy. Over-the-phone interpretation (OPI) has emerged as an indispensable tool for US companies navigating linguistic diversity....

Bridging Cultural Gaps in the Workplace Through Language Learning

In our contemporary, globalized world, the workplace has become a melting pot of cultures and languages. This diversity, while enriching, often brings with it unique challenges, particularly in communication. Our natural inclination is to connect with those who share...

A Guide to Incorporating Language Learning Programs for Shift Workers

In today's globalized world, communication across borders is crucial, making language skills an invaluable asset. For shift workers who often navigate unconventional work hours, finding time for personal development, such as language learning programs, can be...

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Effects of “English-Only Policy” on Students’ Fluency and Motivation Level in Speaking English

2021, THE ENGLISH TEACHER

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Discriminatory and Unconstitutional: English Only in U.S.

Judith Tsoi, a rising junior at the University of Maryland, is currently pursuing a double degree in violin performance and psychology, as well as a minor in French. During her time on campus, she has been an active member of the Honors Humanities program and the University of Maryland Symphony Orchestra. She enjoys working at the Clarice Smith Performing Arts Center and looks forward to working as a research assistant in the Language Music and Cognition Lab. In her free time, she loves watching movies, laughing, and making music with friends. 

Discriminatory and Unconstitutional: Why English Only Is Wrong For America

It was a simple question, "How are you?"  Nei ho ma ?

I knew what he had said, and I knew how to respond in Chinese, "I'm good, how are you?" I formed these words at the tip of my tongue, said them in my mind, yet my throat constricted and I made no sound.

This language, once second nature, had gone unused so long that it was now foreign to me. I could not make a sound, knowing that my horrible American accent would give me away, and then they would laugh. Rather than face imminent shame and embarrassment, I stayed quiet and did not reply in Chinese when my uncle, whom I had not seen in six years, asked me how I was doing. Instead, I nodded, sheepishly and shamefully, as I quietly replied in English only, "Good."

When I traveled to Hong Kong and Macau two winters ago, I was overjoyed to visit the place where my parents had grown up. However, it was simultaneously a bittersweet experience, as I began to realize the extent to which I was a complete foreigner. Though I looked Chinese, I could not speak the language; years of assimilation had washed it out of me.

It was this frustrating memory and similar experiences that provoked my desire to examine the American immigrant's conflict of linguistic identity. Recent concerns about immigrants flooding our nation have caused many to panic about the linguistic stability of our nation. Out of this irrational fear, some turn to legislation, hoping that establishing English language laws might reinforce the unity of our nation and give us security. However, what they don't realize is that most immigrants try to learn English as quickly as possible, to assimilate and adjust to a demanding new lifestyle in which linguistic competency is a large factor of success. Thus, they do not pose a threat to the English language's prominence in America, as demonstrated by an estimate that in 2011, 93% of our population spoke English (Ryan). However, while there are undeniable reasons for why immigrants should definitely learn English, any proposed official language legislation would only discourage non-English speakers from retaining and taking pride in their linguistic heritage, a significant aspect of their cultural identity. Thus, any legislature officiating English as the national language would be not only counteractive to national unity, but also inherently exclusive and discriminatory. This nation champions diversity and cultural acceptance; the mere existence of official language legislation would run contrary to our nation's ideals, values, and Constitution.

This essay will explore the numerous reasons why official English language laws would be inappropriate for our democratic nation. To provide clarification for my argument, I will first define the terminology, specifically those key phrases related to language law policies. I will then examine arguments that look into the unconstitutionality of English only laws, paying particular attention to recently proposed amendments and state language laws. I have chosen not to examine court cases, because an investigation of situations involving English only-mandating policies would be too specific for my purposes. Instead, I will examine the ideological aspect of language laws and demonstrate that the foundations of the arguments behind official English are fraught with qualities that run contrary to traditional American ideals. I will conclude by providing an alternative solution to assist the facilitation of immigrant integration into American society, namely the system of bilingual education. I will explore various policies of bilingual education and evaluate how they reflect the pluralistic society of America today. Throughout my argument, I will demonstrate that national language legislation would be detrimental to our nation's ideology and that the government should focus its resources on implementing education policies instead of bolstering law enforcement to ease the transition of immigrants into America.

Unbeknownst to many, for a little more than two hundred years, the United States of America has gotten by without an official language (Baron 36). But what effect would a national language have on the development of our nation? What purpose could it have? Though there are many differing interpretations of common terms used in language law discourse, writers and speakers frequently use "national language" and "official language" interchangeably and without differentiation (Ruiz 20). For the sake of clarity and consistency, I will do the same. Likewise, I will also use the policy names "official English" and "English only" interchangeably, for the sake of variety and to reflect the national discourse about these policies which employs the use of both terms, though "official English" is admittedly more euphemistic.

It is important to note that although the United States does not have an official language, approximately twenty-five states have declared an official language (Schildkraut 445). Individual states possess a constitutional jurisdiction to declare state languages; thus, the official language currently in question is that of the entire nation. Another important aspect of the debate to clarify is the purpose or end goal of English language policies. Many proponents of official English disagree with the current system of "multilingual government" and advocate for policies which would "[require] that routine government operations be in English" instead of "increasingly [seeking] to cater to immigrants in as many languages as possible" ( English as the Official Language  7). Such policy shifts would be directed towards government-related distribution of information and would specifically target material including federal publications such as tax laws and medical precautions, bilingual ballots, translations of lawsuits and hearings, and other information provided for limited-English speakers in federally funded programs, such as public school notices for limited-English parents ( English as the Official Language  63-64).

One issue that obstructs some officials from determining the constitutionality of English language laws is the question of language as right. According to a study of court cases conducted by Guadalupe Valdés of Stanford University, language discrimination against bilinguals has largely violated civil rights, those guaranteed to citizens through a constitution, as opposed to human rights, which are natural and inherent (Valdés 159). Whereas this rather esoteric question of whether retaining a native language is a natural human right or granted civil right may still be up in the air, linguistic ability indubitably correlates directly to an individual's understanding of societal affairs. Therefore, regardless of native language's standing as a natural or civil right, construction of any barrier preventing access to vital governmental information would directly interfere with the ability of non-English speaking Americans to receive information and ideas, an interest protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution (Chen 44).

In addition, attorneys who defend language rights and bilingual individuals have long portrayed language-restricting policies as discriminatory (Valdés 159). Sure enough, some opponents of English only legislation vehemently argue that "language discrimination is functionally equivalent to national origin discrimination" (Chen 39). This reasoning uses the logic that linguistic heritage is an integral part of an immigrant's identity; negative prejudice based on the linguistic element of an immigrant's identity is just another way of actively discriminating against someone solely because the individual is a foreigner. The discriminatory nature of these language policies is seen in their tendency to alienate or offend, which in turn leads to a greater risk of community conflict. As evidenced by the 2007 report of a U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law, this conflict between natural-born citizens and immigrants is detrimental to Official English supporters' purported goals of "assimilation and integration" ( Comprehensive Immigration Reform ).

As Betty Lou Dubois, Professor of Speech at New Mexico State University, points out, one of the fundamental purposes of law is to "forestall conflict by providing a standard of conduct" (233). She goes on to state that, ironically enough, in this situation, the implementation of language regulations would not lead us away from conflict, but towards it (233). Though supporters of official English claim the implementation of such a policy would unite the nation through a common language, the English language law campaign has historically always led to division of communities. This trend is documented in a 2006 report of a United States House of Representatives Committee on Education and the Workforce, undertaken by a Subcommittee on Education Reform ( English as the Official Language ). Since the campaign began in the early 1980's, there have been flares of language vigilantism that include ignorant and exclusionary slogans such as "This is America—speak English!" ( English as the Official Language  64). This way of thinking, prompted by the fervor in the English language debate, has often led to an offensive ideology that includes the bipartisan dichotomy of us versus them. Here, the immigrant is seen as the "other"—a foreigner, alienated and wrong. James Crawford, advocate for English language learners and president of the Institute for Language and Education Policy, asserts that "language-restrictionist laws are never just about language" ( English as the Official Language 61); rather, they inherently reflect attitudes and discrimination against speakers of certain languages and "racist attitudes—toward Latinos in particular—have closely been associated with this movement" ( 61). Crawford later quotes Arizona Senator John McCain's opposition to a language law proposal: "Why [would we] want to pass some kind of initiative that a significant portion of our population considers an assault on their heritage?" ( English as the Official Language  64). Evidently, language and identity cannot be separated, as language is an intrinsic and ubiquitous component of culture. Linguistic heritage is undoubtedly a crucial part of an individual's identity and it is clearly evident that a restrictive regulation would make a bilingual person feel threatened and/or alienated.

I would like to clarify that these feelings of being discriminated against are not restricted to non-English speaking immigrants. The effects are felt by second and third generation Americans, whose parents and grandparents were immigrants, as seen in the multiple court cases examined in Valdés' study. This cyclic pattern of discrimination reveals that the conflicts and challenges associated with English Only attitudes and policies "continue—especially in an anti-immigrant age—even after individuals acquire English" (Valdés 164). The official English campaign has antagonized American immigrants for years and the creation of a national official language would only embody that similar exclusivity and discrimination. Since the language regulations target specific groups of immigrants, the racial undercurrents make the proposed laws dangerous and divisive, and instead of leading to the happy unification of America, this legislation would only "exacerbate social discord and ethnic tension" (Chen 49).

Negative sentiment towards diverse and foreign languages would discourage immigrants from retaining their unique language heritage in an attempt to actively conform and assimilate into American society. In my own experience, I have heard the regrets of many who regret the loss of their native language. Despite attending heritage centers or extra-curricular language schools at a young age, later-generation immigrants struggle with a seemingly "hegemonic" environment that "refuses to recognize the complexity of contaminated diasporic identifications," thus making it difficult to hold onto multiple strains of cultural identity (Branach-Kallas 356). According to a study about the involuntary loss of native language by the "third and later generations, the pressures to speak English exclusively are sufficiently strong" and it is extremely difficult to preserve the other tongue (Alba 480). It is troubling and regretful that these formerly bilingual individuals can no longer use or recall this language that united them with people of similar ethnic background. Though I regret not cherishing the bilingual opportunities I had as a child, I am thankful that I came to realize the significance of my parent's language, and I do not believe it is too late for me to hold on to my linguistic heritage.

However, one policy that would respond to the call for immigration reform and facilitate immigration integration without mandatory assimilation would be the inclusion of a more substantial bilingual education system. If English represents such a crucial aspect to becoming American and being successful in America, the government, instead of imposing exclusionary regulations, should actively help immigrants learn English, while perhaps also promoting the status of bilingual individuals so that no one has to feel shame for having an ethnic or linguistic background.

Recent studies have shown that two-way bilingual education can potentially benefit both English and non-English speaking students. Instead of viewing English learner students as "problems" that require remedial "fixing," administrators of two-way bilingual enrichment programs can use students' linguistic and cultural experiences as a resource (Thomas and Collier 37-38). The two-way bilingual programs proposed involve a near-equal use of instruction time and grading in both English and the non-English language. The program would produce active bilingual students, supported by engaged parents and school administrators. Teachers would combine non-English students with English students to create a heterogeneous class in which a symbiotic relationship exists between both types of student, and they could learn from each other (Thomas and Collier 39). This system is radical and would require special demographics in order to be successful and promote enrichment on behalf of both groups of students. However, this future model could be a possibility, especially since language-minority students are predicted to account for about 40% of the school-age population by the 2030s (Thomas and Collier 40).

Although such revolutionary systems are not necessary everywhere, the aforementioned two-way bilingual education program would encourage the inclusion and grateful acceptance of language-minority students. Conversely, refusal to implement these programs could threaten to incur great losses on both native English and non-English speakers alike. Recent bilingual studies have clearly shown that "in controlled studies of cognitive performance across the life span, bilinguals consistently outperform their monolingual counterparts" (Bialystok 233). Language laws hoping to make English the only language in schools could possibly eradicate any opportunities for language minority students to learn English at the same rate as their peers. In some areas of California, "one out of every three students is a Spanish/English bilingual learner" and any truncation of bilingual programs would inhibit the education and acculturation processes of these students (Mora 45). These official English policies that narrow-mindedly promote the "security" of the English language at the cost of other minorities will include the collateral "loss of other languages and the sacrifice of valuable linguistic skills" (Mora 46). Eradication of bilingualism at best deprives both native English and non-English speakers of an invaluable asset. At worst, a student may suffer a linguistic loss from which there is little or no return.

Assimilation, integration, acculturation—whatever we want to call adjustment into American society—should not require the sacrifice of an equally rich culture integral to the individual's identity. Surely I appreciate the advantages that my English skills have brought me, but I also mourn the loss of my familiarity with the Chinese language. Such a loss has already begun to alienate me from my parents' culture. English language policies in the United States should reflect our nation’s championed values of diversity and acceptance. Language practices should not be forced and enforced through an exclusionary and discriminatory piece of legislation that violates the fundamental ideals on which this nation was founded. Instead, language policies should allow Americans to grow together by facilitating and supporting programs that allow cross-cultural communication and draw from the invaluable experiences of others' unique languages and cultures.

Works Cited

Alba, Richard, et al. “Only English by the Third Generation? Loss and Preservation of the Mother Tongue among the Grandchildren of Contemporary Immigrants.”  Demography  39.3 (2002): 467-484. JSTOR. Web. 8 May 2014.

Baron, Dennis. “Federal English.”  Language Loyalties . Ed. James Crawford. Chicago: The University of Chicago, 1992. 36-40. Print.

Bialstok, Ellen. “Reshaping the Mind: The Benefits of Bilingualism.”  Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology  65.4 (2011): 229-235. American Psychological Association. Web. 8 May 2014.

Branach-Kallas, Anna. “Between the Diaspora and the Nation: Multicultural Identity Negotiations in Selected Asian-Canadian Writings.”  Beyond Imagined Uniqueness: Nationalisms in Contemporary Perspectives . Burbick, Joan, and William Glass, eds. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2010. 347-366. Print.

Chen, Edward. “Statement on the Civil Liberties Implications of Official English Legislation before the United States Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, December 6, 1995.”  Language Ideologies: Critical Perspectives on the Official English Movement . Ed. Roseann González and Ildikó Melis. Urbana, Ill.: National Council of Teachers of English, 2001. 30-62. Print.

Dubois, Betty Lou. “Official English and the Urge to Legislate.”  Perspectives on Official English . Ed. James Crawford. Chicago: The University of Chiago, 1992. 228-236. Print.

Mora, Jill. “English-Only Education Ignores Social and Political Realities.”  Bilingual Education . Ed. Loreta Medina. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2003. 44-51. Print.

Ruiz, Richard. “Official Languages and Language Planning.”  Perspectives on Official English. The Campaign for English as the Official Language of the USA . Ed. Karen Adams and Daniel Brink. New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 1990. 1-24. Print.

Ryan, Camille.  Language Use in the United States: 2011 . Rep. non. 22. N.p.: American Community Survey, 2013.  Language Use in the United States: 2011 . U.S. Census Bureau, Aug. 2013. Web. 17 Apr. 2014.

Schildkraut, Deborah. "Official-English and the States: Influences on Declaring English the Official Language in the United States."  Political Research Quarterly . 54.2 (2001): 445-457. JSTOR. Web. 2 Apr. 2014.

Thomas, Wayne and Virginia Collier. “Two-Way Bilingual Programs Benefit Both English- and Non-English-Speaking Students.”  Bilingual Education . Ed. Loreta Medina. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2003. 36-40. Print.

United States. House of Representatives. Committee on Education and the Workforce. Subcommittee on Education Reform.  English as the Official Language . 109th Cong., 2nd sess. Washington: GPO, 2006. HathiTrust. Web. 2 Apr. 2014.

United States. House of Representatives. Committee on the Judiciary. Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law.  Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Becoming Americans . 110th Cong., 1st sess. Washington: GPO, 2007. HathiTrust. Web. 18 Apr. 2014.

Valdés, Guadalupe. “Bilingual Individuals and Language-Based Discrimination: Advancing the State of the Law on Language Rights.”  Language Ideologies: Critical Perspectives on the Official English Movement . Ed. Roseann González and Ildikó Melis. Urbana, Ill.: National Council of Teachers of English, 2001. 140-170. Print

Articles copyright © 2024 the original authors. No part of the contents of this Web journal may be reproduced or transmitted in any form without permission from the author or the Academic Writing Program of the University of Maryland. The views expressed in these essays do not represent the views of the Academic Writing Program or the University of Maryland.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

What Happens When Abusive Parents Keep Their Children

By Naomi Schaefer Riley

Ms. Riley is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and the author of “No Way to Treat a Child.”

In February 2023, Phoenix Castro was born in San Jose, Calif., suffering from neonatal opioid withdrawal after being exposed to fentanyl and methamphetamine in her mother’s womb.

Her mother was sent to jail and then ended up at a drug treatment facility. But her father, who had multiple drug arrests, was allowed to take the newborn to his San Jose apartment, even though a social worker had warned that the baby would be at “very high” risk if she was sent home. The county’s child protection agency had already removed the couple’s two older children because of neglect.

Three months later, Phoenix was dead from an overdose of fentanyl and methamphetamine.

The ensuing uproar, chronicled in detail by The Mercury News, focused on new efforts by the county to keep at-risk families together. In the past, children often would be removed from unsafe homes and placed in foster care, and newborns like Phoenix in all likelihood would not have been sent home.

Those policy changes led to a “ significant ” drop in removals of children from troubled homes in the San Jose area, according to the state’s social services agency. They reflected a larger shift in child welfare thinking nationwide that has upended the foster care system. Reducing the number of children placed in foster care has been hailed as an achievement. But leaving children in families with histories of abuse and neglect to avoid the trauma of removing them has had tragic results.

We need to ask whether avoiding foster care, seemingly at all costs — especially for children in families mired in violence, addiction or mental illness — is too often compromising their safety and welfare.

The use of foster care has been in decline even as more children are dying from abuse and neglect in their homes. In recent years, the number of children in foster care fell by nearly 16 percent while the fatality rate from abuse and neglect rose by almost 18 percent. Many factors were and are at work, among them caseworker inexperience, a lack of resources and the high bars for removing children from their homes that have been erected by child welfare agencies, policymakers and judges.

What is clear from a sampling of states that release fatality reports in a timely fashion is that we are seeing deaths of children in cases in which they had been allowed to remain in homes with records of violence, drug use and neglect.

In Minnesota, a children’s advocacy group’s study of 88 child fatalities in the state from 2014 to 2022 found that “many of these deaths were preventable” and were the result of a “child welfare philosophy which gave such high priority to the interests of parents and other adults in households, as well as to the goals of family preservation and reunification, that child safety and well-being were regularly compromised.”

The prioritization of family preservation has been advanced by states and the federal government and by the nation’s largest foundation focused on reducing the need for foster care, Casey Family Programs.

Three ideas seem to have guided the effort: the child welfare system is plagued by systemic racial bias, adults should not be punished for drug addiction, and a majority of children in the system are simply in need of financial support and social services.

This effort was bolstered in 2018 with the passage by Congress of the Family First Prevention Services Act , which enables states to use federal funds “to provide enhanced support to children and families and prevent foster care placements through the provision of mental health and substance abuse prevention and treatment services” and other programs.

The push certainly has been well-intentioned. There was a sense that child welfare authorities had overreacted to concerns about a crack baby epidemic in the 1980s. Mothers were arrested and babies and children taken away. The number of children in foster care more than doubled between 1985 and 2000. There was also deep concern — concern that persists — that Black children in particular were bearing the brunt of being removed from their homes and sent to foster care, which can cause its own upheaval for children.

In some states, the reductions in the number of children in foster care were drastic. But there are limits to how much those numbers can be reduced without putting children in grave danger.

In Santa Clara County, Calif., where Phoenix Castro died, an inquiry the previous year by the California Department of Social Services into the county’s child protection agency found “multiple” instances of “children placed into protective custody by law enforcement,” only to have the county agency “immediately” place “the children back in the care of the unsafe parent.” (In what appears to be an about-face by the county, The Mercury News reported that in the last two months of 2023, the number of children removed from their homes was triple the two-month average for the previous months of that year.)

In an email to Santa Clara County’s Department of Family and Children’s Services staff in 2021, explaining the new emphasis on keeping families together, the director at the time described the move as part of the county’s strong commitment “to racial justice and to healing the historical wounds underlying disproportionate representation of children of color in the child welfare system.”

As much as racial disparities in foster care are deeply troubling — Black children are twice as likely as white children to spend time in foster care — Black children also suffer fatalities from abuse and neglect at three times the rate of white children. Which means that policies intended to reduce disproportionality by reducing foster care may actually be resulting in more deaths of Black children.

Foster care is not a panacea. The trauma children suffer from suddenly being removed from their home and their siblings, to be placed in a strange home with a caregiver they don’t know, is well documented. But the alternative, allowing a child to remain in a dangerous home, should never be an alternative.

Naomi Schaefer Riley is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and the author of “No Way to Treat a Child.”

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here’s our email: [email protected] .

Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Instagram , TikTok , WhatsApp , X and Threads .

You are using an outdated browser. Upgrade your browser today or install Google Chrome Frame to better experience this site.

• IMF at a Glance
• Surveillance
• Capacity Development
• IMF Factsheets List
• IMF Members
• IMF Timeline
• Senior Officials
• Job Opportunities
• Archives of the IMF
• Climate Change
• Fiscal Policies
• Income Inequality

Flagship Publications

Other publications.

• World Economic Outlook
• Global Financial Stability Report
• Fiscal Monitor
• External Sector Report
• Staff Discussion Notes
• Working Papers
• IMF Research Perspectives
• Economic Review
• Global Housing Watch
• Commodity Prices
• Commodities Data Portal
• IMF Researchers
• Annual Research Conference
• Other IMF Events

IMF reports and publications by country

Regional offices.

• IMF Resident Representative Offices
• IMF Regional Reports
• IMF and Europe
• IMF Members' Quotas and Voting Power, and Board of Governors
• IMF Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific
• IMF Capacity Development Office in Thailand (CDOT)
• IMF Regional Office in Central America, Panama, and the Dominican Republic
• Eastern Caribbean Currency Union (ECCU)
• IMF Europe Office in Paris and Brussels
• IMF Office in the Pacific Islands
• How We Work
• IMF Training
• Digital Training Catalog
• Online Learning
• Our Partners
• Country Stories
• Technical Assistance Reports
• High-Level Summary Technical Assistance Reports
• Strategy and Policies

For Journalists

• Country Focus
• Chart of the Week
• Communiqués
• Mission Concluding Statements
• Press Releases
• Statements at Donor Meetings
• Transcripts
• Views & Commentaries
• Article IV Consultations
• Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP)
• Seminars, Conferences, & Other Events
• E-mail Notification

Press Center

The IMF Press Center is a password-protected site for working journalists.

• Login or Register
• Information of interest
• About the IMF
• Conferences
• Press briefings
• Special Features
• Middle East and Central Asia
• Economic Outlook
• Annual and spring meetings
• Most Recent
• Most Popular
• IMF Finances
• Additional Data Sources
• World Economic Outlook Databases
• Climate Change Indicators Dashboard
• IMF eLibrary-Data
• International Financial Statistics
• G20 Data Gaps Initiative
• Public Sector Debt Statistics Online Centralized Database
• Currency Composition of Official Foreign Exchange Reserves
• Financial Access Survey
• Government Finance Statistics
• Publications Advanced Search
• IMF eLibrary
• IMF Bookstore
• Publications Newsletter
• Essential Reading Guides
• Regional Economic Reports
• Country Reports
• Departmental Papers

Policy Papers

• Selected Issues Papers
• All Staff Notes Series
• Analytical Notes
• Fintech Notes
• How-To Notes
• Staff Climate Notes

Review of the Fund’s Income Position for FY 2024 and FY 2025-2026

Publication Date:

May 10, 2024

Electronic Access:

Free Download . Use the free Adobe Acrobat Reader to view this PDF file

This paper updates the projections of the Fund’s income position for FY 2024 and FY 2025-2026 and proposes related decisions for the current and the following financial years. The paper also includes a proposed decision to keep the margin for the rate of charge unchanged until completion of the review of surcharges, but until no later than end FY 2025, at which time the Board would set the margin for the rest of FY 2025 and FY 2026. The Fund’s overall net income for FY 2024 is projected at about SDR 4.4 billion after taking into account pension-related remeasurement gain and estimated retained investment income of the Endowment Account.

Policy Paper No. 2024/025

Budget planning and preparation Credit Discount rates Financial services Income Monetary policy Money National accounts Political economy Public financial management (PFM) SDR interest rate

9798400276484/2663-3493

PPEA2024025

Please address any questions about this title to [email protected]