Gist Education and LEarninG rEsEarch JournaL. issn 1692-5777, pp. 62-77 shoukri What Form of Language Education Do Immigrant Parents Want? An Investigation into the Educational Desires of Members of Ontario’s Arab Community1 Bobbie Lynn R. Shoukri2* The University of Western Ontario Abstract The purpose of this study is to investigate the language education desires [whether they be English as a second language (ESL), French as a second language (FSL), and/or heritage language classes] and needs of one segment of Ontario’s ESL population, Arabic speakers, and to determine if those desires vary from the current language education offerings in Ontario’s elementary schools. The findings in this study, provided by data collected from document analysis and an online questionnaire, suggest that members of Ontario’s Arab community strongly value the learning of multiple languages. Also, although all participants agree that learning French is important; most agree that learning English is more important. Furthermore, in addition to supporting Ontario’s bilingual language education program, members of Ontario’s Arab community also desire heritage language classes. The majority of participants in this study would like their children to have access to Arabic at school to maintain their L1 and this desire is further supported by the almost 87% who agree that their children’s use of Arabic is decreasing. Keywords: Arabic language, language education, Ontario language policies, language education desires of immigrant parents, Ontario language programs, English as a second language (ESL), French as a second language (FSL), language maintenance, heritage languages 2 1 Received: January 22nd, 2010 / Accepted: July 17th, 2010 2 Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to B. Lynn Shoukri, The University of Western Ontario, Faculty of Education, London, ON, N6G 1G7, Canada. E-mail: [email protected] VVooll.. IIVV,, NNoo.. 11 ((NNoovv.. 22001100)) VVooll.. IIVV,, NNoo.. 11 ((NNoovv.. 22001100)) shoukri Resumen El propósito de este estudio es investigar los deseos lingüísticos [sean ellos de inglés como segundo idioma (ESL), francés como segundo idioma (FSL), y/o clases del idioma ancestral] y necesidades de un segmento de la población ESL de Ontario, los hablantes de la lengua árabe, y a determinar si aquellos deseos varíen de las ofertas actuales en idiomas en los colegios primarios de Ontario. Los hallazgos del estudio, provistos por información colectada de análisis de documentos y una encuesta en-línea, sugieren que los miembros de la comunidad árabe de Ontario valoran fuertemente el aprendizaje de múltiples idiomas. También, aunque todos los participantes están de acuerdo que es importante aprender el francés; la mayoría está de acuerdo que aprender el inglés es más importante. Además que apoyar el programa lingüístico de educación bilingüe, los miembros de la comunidad árabe de Ontario también desean las clases del idioma ancestral. La mayoría de los participantes de este estudio quisieran que sus hijos tengan acceso a la lengua árabe en el colegio para mantener su lengua materna y este deseo se apoya aún más por los casi 87% que reportaron que el uso de la lengua árabe de sus hijos se va menguando. Palabras claves: idioma árabe, educación de lenguas, políticas educativas lingüísticas en Ontario, deseos de padres inmigrantes en el aprendizaje de lenguas, programas de idiomas de Ontario, inglés como segundo idioma, francés como segundo idioma, mantenimiento de lenguas, lenguas ancestrales Language policy remains a continuously debated concern internationally (Skutnabb-Kangas, 2008). Since the 1960s, Canada’s language policy has focused on the development and support of an officially English/French bilingual country (Yalden, 2007), yet the 2002 census figures indicate that the goal of Canadians becoming bilingual in the country’s two official languages has not yet been met (Zakaluzny, 2003). Current Ontario language education policies support the ideological goal of official bilingualism in Canada through mandatory FSL education (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2001b). Accordingly, as a minimum, every child in the Ontario elementary school system receives FSL education for 40 minutes a day beginning in grade 4. No other international language classes are required to be offered. Mohan (2007) states that with classrooms becoming more diverse, there is a need to develop new approaches to curriculum to improve the educational experiences of the minority students in our schools, yet  Ontario’s language education policies fail to include heritage language3 classes as an option within the elementary school system. 3 Heritage language refers to one’s home or ancestral language (Encarta World English Dictionary, 2009). In Canada, where both English and French are recognized as official languages, heritage language would refer to a home language other than English or French. VVooll.. IIVV,, NNoo.. 11 ((NNoovv.. 22001100)) VVooll.. IIVV,, NNoo.. 11 ((NNoovv.. 22001100)) ontario’s araB coMMunity shoukri In recognizing the growing number of English language learners (ELLs) in its schools, the Ontario government has increased funds and curriculum documents to support its ESL programs (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2003). Are these language programs (both FSL and ESL), however, satisfying the interests of Ontario’s ESL communities? Are the first (or heritage) languages of minority children being sufficiently supported as these children learn a second language (English) or a third language (French)? Finally, how do the members of one specific minority language group in Ontario, Ontario’s Arab4 community, feel about the language program offerings? The Canadian Arab Federation (1999) documents that Arab countries represent “six of the top twenty source countries for business class immigrants” in Canada (p. 4). This statement supports the research findings which declare that “the Arab population in Canada are [sic] highly educated with only 13% having less than a grade nine education” (CAF, 1999, p. 5). It therefore may be concluded that education is valued by the Arab community; but specifics pertaining to their language education desires have not yet been identified. The purpose of this study was to investigate the language education desires (whether they be in favor of ESL, FSL, and/or heritage language classes) and needs of a particular segment of Ontario’s ESL population, Arabic speakers, and to determine if those desires vary from the current language education offerings in Ontario’s elementary schools. This subject was worth investigating because the Canadian federal expectations for official bilingualism are accepted (Government of Canada, 2003; Vandergrift, 2006), Ontario’s language education programs and policies are clear (Ontario Ministry of Education, 1998, 2001a, & 2001b), and research statements regarding second language acquisition (SLA) are known (Cummins, 1979; Lambert, 1975; Wong Fillmore, 1991), but what is unknown is whether the wants and necessities of our ELLs and their families are being recognized. Furthermore, the Ontario government continues to provide new curriculum and educational support documents and funding for ESL programs (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2003) and FSL programs are firmly in place, but it is unclear whether these programs are in accordance with what research has stated to be most effective for SLA  and with what the parents of the Arab community support. 4 According to the Columbia Encyclopedia (2008), the term Arab refers to people “whose primary language is Arabic” (p. 1). The term no longer refers to country of origin. VVooll.. IIVV,, NNoo.. 11 ((NNoovv.. 22001100)) VVooll.. IIVV,, NNoo.. 11 ((NNoovv.. 22001100)) ontario’s araB coMMunity shoukri Guiding Frameworks Cummins (1981) explains that there are two levels of language proficiency: basic interpersonal communicative skills (BICS) and cognitive/academic language proficiency (CALP). The term BICS refers to one’s ability to participate in communication where there are supports in place to aid in understanding (i.e., facial cues, feedback, and non-verbal support). Baker (2006) adds that BICS is apparent in student- to-student conversations during play or interactive communication between a student and a teacher. On the other hand, CALP requires a far greater understanding of the second language (L2), occurring in academic situations that require higher-order thinking skills to complete tasks such as problem solving in context-reduced situations. The purpose of the distinction in levels of proficiency is to emphasize the different time periods needed for immigrant children to obtain conversational fluency in their L2 versus grade-level academic proficiency in that language (Cummins, 1981). Cummins’ (1981) research concludes that BICS can be achieved within 2 years of initial exposure to the L2, however, CALP requires at least 5 years for development. This distinction is imperative for understanding the language-education needs of Ontario’s ELLs. The majority of ELLs who enter Ontario schools at an early age appear to learn English fairly quickly. Many of these young ELLs begin to comprehend and use English shortly after entering the school system. Researchers attribute this quick language acquisition to the fact that these students are surrounded by English at school, through the media, in their communities, and are ultimately forced to learn the English language as a means of survival (Cummins, 1981; Wong Filmore, 1991). As Cummins’ (1981) work outlines, however, this demonstrated language proficiency cannot be the sole evidence used to deem these students fluent in English. Baker (2006) cautions that ELLs’ basic communication skills can potentially mask their actual inadequacies in L2 proficiency. These shortcomings, therefore, directly affect their successes in the classroom both cognitively and academically. An understanding of these two levels of language comprehension and fluency must be taken into consideration to provide appropriate supports and equitable programming for ELLs. This understanding, however, comes into question particularly when curriculum and  standardized test expectations are considered—do these expectations take into consideration the academic-language comprehension level of ELLs? In addition to language proficiency, this study considered Lambert’s (1975) work on additive bilingualism. Additive bilingualism, as stated by Lambert (1975) is when one maintains fluency in one’s first (or heritage) language while adding an L2. Subtractive bilingualism, on the other hand, is when one loses VVooll.. IIVV,, NNoo.. 11 ((NNoovv.. 22001100)) VVooll.. IIVV,, NNoo.. 11 ((NNoovv.. 22001100)) ontario’s araB coMMunity shoukri one’s L1 while learning an L2. Lambert and Taylor (1988) believe that “integration into a new society need not entail the loss of heritage languages and cultures. Instead, the new language and culture can be added, without necessarily replacing the old” (p. 84). Lambert and Taylor (1988), along with the majority of applied linguists, feel that additive bilingualism is more beneficial to language learning than subtractive bilingualism. Cummins (1979) states that additive bilingualism aids in language learning as “access to two languages in early childhood can accelerate aspects of cognitive growth” (p. 229). He continues by saying that additive bilingualism leads to high levels of proficiency in both languages whereas subtractive bilingualism can lead to less than native-like proficiency in both languages. Cummins (1979) believes that “the major educational implication . . . is that if optimal development of a minority language child’s cognitive and academic potential is a goal, then the school program must aim to promote an additive form of bilingualism involving literacy in both L1 and L2” (p. 247). The advantages of additive bilingualism, however, are not limited to academic achievement. Cummins (2005) and Wong Fillmore (1991) express the importance of L1 maintenance for social reasons. Cummins (2005) states that a student’s L1 is crucial in many walks of life—school, home, and family. Wong Fillmore (1991) believes that the consequences of subtractive bilingualism affect “the social, emotional, cognitive, and educational development” (p. 342) of minority students in addition to the “integrity of their families and the society they live in” (p. 342). She explains that when minority children begin to lose their L1, communication with parents becomes a challenge. Passing on traditions, beliefs, and values is then difficult and can lead to families losing the intimacy of their relationships. King and Mackey (2007) also support the social benefits of additive bilingualism as they state that L1 maintenance is “an important source of pride and self-esteem for [the] child” (p. 12). In sum, if additive bilingualism is the ideal, do Ontario’s ESL and FSL programs support and meet this model? Are the L1s of minority children being amply supported as they learn an L2 (English) or a third language (French)? Where Lambert, Cummins, and Wong Fillmore focus on the academic and social implications of additive bilingualism,  Skutnabb-Kangas shares convictions on the importance of additive bilingualism, but from a language rights perspective. Skutnabb-Kangas (1994) believes “there should be no need to debate the right to maintain and develop the mother tongue” (p. 625), therefore supporting additive bilingualism. She states that it is a basic linguistic human right (LHR) for all people to be able to identify with their mother tongue and to have that L1 respected by others, saying, “. . . VVooll.. IIVV,, NNoo.. 11 ((NNoovv.. 22001100)) VVooll.. IIVV,, NNoo.. 11 ((NNoovv.. 22001100)) ontario’s araB coMMunity shoukri necessary individual rights have to do, firstly, with the right to a language- related identity and secondly, with access to the mother tongue(s)” (Skutnabb-Kangas, 2000, p. 498). What is meant by LHRs is that each person has the right to learn his mother tongue “orally and in writing . . . and to use it in many official contexts [in addition to learning] at least one of the official languages in the country of residence.” Skutnabb- Kangas concludes that effective language-education programs should result in a multilingual model, yet many “educational policies often limit . . . access to high levels of multilingualism” (2000, pp. 625-626) as evidenced by Ontario’s Ministry of Education curriculum documents (1998, 2001b). Delpit (2006) and Skutnabb-Kangas (1994) suggest that even the nicest teachers with the best intentions can have a negative effect on minority-student learning if the program is insufficiently meeting the needs of those students. It is imperative, therefore, to determine whether current educational-language policies and programs respect one’s basic LHRs to learn and maintain his mother tongue (Skutnabb- Kangas, 2000). Additionally, do Ontario’s language programs support additive bilingualism and the LHRs of the members of Ontario’s Arab community? Finally, what are the thoughts and opinions of Ontario’s Arab community regarding LHRs and how Ontario’s current programming is being delivered? Methodology The research for this study was qualitative in nature and data was collected through document analysis5 and an online questionnaire that I developed. To gain pertinent background information and to build a foundation for my research, I examined various government documents and SLA research (Government of Canada, 1982 & 2003; Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages, 2004; Ontario Ministry of Education 1998, 2001a, 2001b, 2003, 2005, 2007a, 2007b, & 2008; Rehorick, 2004; Vandergrift, 2006; Yalden, 2007; Cummins, 1979; Lambert, 1975, Wong-Fillmore, 1991; Skutnabb-Kangas, 2002). The online questionnaire was conducted through a link provided by the Canadian Arab Federation (CAF) in their October 26, 2009 issue of the CAF Weekly Bulletin. The participants self-selected to participate in the online questionnaire. The participants were Canadian immigrants  of Arab descent who had at least one child in an Ontario elementary school. 5 The details of the document analysis are not included in this article; however, they are available upon request to the author. VVooll.. IIVV,, NNoo.. 11 ((NNoovv.. 22001100)) VVooll.. IIVV,, NNoo.. 11 ((NNoovv.. 22001100)) ontario’s araB coMMunity shoukri The online questionnaire created for this study included both open-response questions and Likert scale closed-response questions. Part 1 of the online questionnaire was designed to collect pertinent background information from the participants. The questions were all open-response and included items such as country of birth and language(s) spoken in the home. Part 2 of the online questionnaire employed a closed-response Likert scale format with an option to explain responses or expand answers in an open-response box. These questions were designed to quickly determine the thoughts and opinions of the participants as they pertain to the current language education that their children receive while providing additional space for participants to further express themselves or to provide clarification. Questionnaire responses were collected over a 1-month period beginning on October 26th and ending on November 26th, 2009. Findings Part 1 of the questionnaire revealed that all 30 participants were indeed immigrants to Canada. The responses showed that 4 participants were from Egypt, 4 were born in Syria, 8 participants were from Jordan, and the highest number of participants, 14, were born in Lebanon. This section of the questionnaire revealed that no participants had lived in Canada for less than 7 years and no participants had yet lived in Canada for more than 32 years. More specifically, it can be noted that 13% had been in Canada for less than 10 years, more than half of the participants, 53%, had lived in Canada between 10 and 20 years, and approximately 33% had immigrated to Canada more than 20 years ago. Additionally, we learned that all participants (with the exception of one) were speaking Arabic and English in the home. This participant, from Syria, shared that Arabic and French are spoken in her home. Furthermore, the 14 participants from Lebanon spoke French in addition to Arabic and English. Finally, the majority of participants, 15, currently have 2 children in Ontario’s public elementary schools. Seven participants have 1 child in Ontario’s public elementary schools, and 8 participants have 3 there. It is important to note here that 3 participants from Lebanon disclosed that their children are in Ontario public French Immersion schools  and are therefore learning English as a subject and French through the teaching of all other subject content. As there was no specific question pertaining to the school program of the participants’ children, there is no way of knowing whether other participants’ children were also in French Immersion schools. The following is a summary of the responses collected from Part 2 of the online questionnaire: VVooll.. IIVV,, NNoo.. 11 ((NNoovv.. 22001100)) VVooll.. IIVV,, NNoo.. 11 ((NNoovv.. 22001100)) ontario’s araB coMMunity shoukri 1. I am satisfied with the ESL support that my child(ren) receive(s). Responses to question 1 of the online questionnaire revealed that the majority of participants are not satisfied with the English language support that their children are currently receiving as 43% somewhat disagreed to being satisfied with the current ESL support and almost 7% strongly disagreed. 2. I would like my child(ren) to have opportunities to speak his/ their first language at school through Arabic language classes. Twenty-six of the 30 participants believe that their children should have opportunities to speak Arabic at school. However, a total of 4 participants disagreed. Two of the participants who somewhat disagreed explained that their children currently receive Arabic language education at an Arabic school outside regular school hours. Participant #6 (who shall hereon be referred to as Yasmine, and who strongly disagreed) stated, we live in canada which is an english speaking launage [sic] and french as a second laungae [sic] therefore school should be english. how are our children to learn to speak proper english if they are to continue speaking arabic. this why they have heritage school on the weekend for their children to advance in their mother speaking tongue. 3. I believe that my child(ren) should learn Arabic during the school day. Question 3 revealed that 90% of the participants believe that their children should learn Arabic at school: 14 participants somewhat agreed and 13 participants strongly agreed. Three participants explained that Arabic should be offered as an option, 2 participants believe that their children should learn Arabic at school as learning multiple languages is important, and 1 participant, who somewhat agreed, explained that his/ her children are also learning Arabic in the home. A final open-response was provided by Yasmine who somewhat disagreed to her children learning Arabic in school. Yasmine reiterated her beliefs (previously stated in question 2) that her children should be learning English and French in school, as those are the official languages of Canada.  4. My child(ren)’s use of Arabic is decreasing. Responses to question 4 show that the majority of participants believe that their children’s use of Arabic is decreasing. One participant who somewhat agreed that his/her children’s Arabic is decreasing explained that his/her children are using English and Arabic together. VVooll.. IIVV,, NNoo.. 11 ((NNoovv.. 22001100)) VVooll.. IIVV,, NNoo.. 11 ((NNoovv.. 22001100)) ontario’s araB coMMunity shoukri The other open-response provided was shared by a participant who strongly agreed and stated that his/her children use “more English now.” Yasmine was one of 4 participants who disagreed and explained that, “as long as we keep on speaking arabic [sic] in the house they will always remember. some reponsiblities [sic] have to be on the parents and not on the school if the children forget their Arabic.” 5. I believe that learning French is important. One hundred percent of the participants agreed that learning French is important. Furthermore, one participant stated that “all languages are important,” and Yasmine believes that learning French is important as it is Canada’s second language. 6. It is more important that my child(ren) learn(s) English than French. Although all participants support the learning of French in school, question 6 reveals that the majority of the participants believe that it is more important that their children learn English than French. Of the 13 participants who disagreed with this statement, 6 explain that they disagree with English being more important than French as they believe that one language is not more important than another. Additionally, Yasmine, who selected no response, believes that English is, in fact, more important than French; “english is more important than french becaues [sic] everywhere you go it is english ex. when the child goes to university it is english however french would be an assest [sic].” 7. It is alright that my child(ren) be removed from French class to receive English language support. Sixty percent of the participants did not believe that it is alright that their children be removed from French class to receive English language support. Open-responses revealed a common belief that ESL support should be given at another time. 8. I believe that a child should develop English skills before learning French. Two-thirds of the participants disagreed with this statement and various open-responses support the ability to learn two languages 0 simultaneously versus the need to acquire one language prior to another. 9. I want my child(ren) to be bilingual or multilingual. One hundred percent of the participants indicated that they strongly agree that they want their children to be either bilingual or multilingual. VVooll.. IIVV,, NNoo.. 11 ((NNoovv.. 22001100)) VVooll.. IIVV,, NNoo.. 11 ((NNoovv.. 22001100)) ontario’s araB coMMunity shoukri Macro Findings This data clearly reveals that Ontario’s Arab community values L1 maintenance and the learning of additional languages. As the majority of participants expressed their discontentment with the current ESL support that their children receive, there is valid reason to be concerned: These parents feel their children will encounter difficulties in the classroom due to a lack of acquired academic-level English skills (Cummins, 1979). Though all but one participant document that English is spoken in the home, we do not know the level of proficiency of the English spoken. Applying Cummins’ (1979) research, one may assume that these children have good BICS in English, however, without appropriate ESL support, they may not quickly develop the CALP required to succeed academically. Additionally, 2 participants stated that they questioned the quality and effectiveness of the ESL support being provided. This issue coincides with Mohan’s (2007) concerns that the additional funding provided for ESL programs in 2003 was not designated appropriately. English as a second language programming, however, is not the only area of importance expressed by the members of Ontario’s Arab community. As almost 87% of participants agree that their children’s use of Arabic is decreasing, it is not surprising that the majority of participants would like their children to learn Arabic at school. This strong support for L1 maintenance should be applauded as it is ideal for SLA. Mother tongue maintenance promotes additive bilingualism (Lambert, 1975) and more effective language learning (Cummins, 1979; Wong-Fillmore, 1991). Even Yasmine, who does not believe that Arabic should be learned in Ontario’s public elementary schools, still supports L1 maintenance through weekend heritage language classes. An important point to highlight, though, is Yasmine’s view that L1 maintenance should not figure into the regular school day. This distinction between when and where Arabic learning should occur (i.e., on the student’s own time versus during the regular school day), and the support expressed for L1 maintenance through alternative language education programs, is important to this study as it relates to Delpit’s (2006) work. In this study, a combined 23% of all participants disagreed with the option of having their children learn Arabic during the regular school day. As an L2 teacher, I would have assumed that all 1 participants would have embraced this opportunity for their children to learn Arabic at school. These survey results, however, demonstrate that there are a significant number of parents who feel differently. The difference between what my assumptions (as an educator and L2 researcher) are as they pertain to L2 education and the actual language educational desires expressed by this group of parents directly VVooll.. IIVV,, NNoo.. 11 ((NNoovv.. 22001100)) VVooll.. IIVV,, NNoo.. 11 ((NNoovv.. 22001100))