Subtractive Bilingualism: This approach is when the target language is taught to the detriment of the first language development or maintenance. Some of those programs are Mother (Tongue) Language Teaching in Singapore (Singapore Education, 2003), Bilingual Education in Cambodia (Chap and Thomas, 2003), and Bilingual Education, or minority language education for some ethnic groups in Vietnam (Donald, 1998-2003), foreign language immersion program (or heritage language immersion program) offering for minority and indigenous students in the US (Lenker & Rhodes, 2007).
The trick is getting multilingual parents to understand that bilingual education is an asset, not a limitation. Students should not, they admit, remain in special bilingual programs longer than really necessary. What is instead now desperately needed is linguistically informed education policy that supports the acquisition and maintenance of both languages for all students who want to develop bilingual fluency.
These levels are used by the Ministry of Education for allocating funding to immersion programmes – the higher the level of immersion, the higher the funding. What I like most about these videos, though, is that they don’t just illustrate how bilingual education is beneficial for non-native English speakers in our country.
This would hopefully serve as a snapshot of what the bilingual brain undergoes in their everyday lives. Singapore’s current national bilingual education policy is an excellent example of how successful these programs can be. Thus, when people argue over bilingual education’s effectiveness or ineffectiveness, they could be discussing different forms of bilingual education.
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) —The 1965 federal law that is reauthorized and amended every five years. In 2002 Massachusetts approved a similar initiative against bilingual education. HAVING begun quietly in the 1980s and gained momentum in the 1990s, Latino opposition to native-language teaching programs is now publicly apparent.