On Bilingual Education

Review: On Bilingual Education BRUCE BAIN Merrill Swain, ed., Bilingualism in Canadian Education: Issues and Research, Yearbook of the Canadian Society for the Study of Education, 1976, Vol. 3, 135 pp. A quick perusal of this thin, innocuous looking volume is likely to result in the prospective reader rapidly returning it to the library shelf. And, in the main, his spontaneous decision would be justified. The first three articles of the volume are lengthy, mainly uncritical, surveytype papers of the variety found in the work-a-dayworld of the university professor. The last two articles however are of a different order. Were those two also to receive that ignominious thrust, the prospective reader would be the poorer; for he would be throwing out two stimulating gems along with the proverbial bathwater. Moreover they shine for two different yet complimentary reasons. One is a committed insider's chronicle of the passions and trials of a determined ethnic group seeking its just place in the Canadian bilingual landscape. The other is perhaps the missing chapter of the Symons Report, namely, a scholarly analysis of the interrelationships between language learning in the schools and imported language-teaching techniques, between political realities and the transcendent crises of purpose in the quest for a Canadian identity. But more on those two in a moment. First, the three lengthy articles, all of which can be dealt with quickly. Stan Shapson and David Kaufman (Simon Fraser), French Immersion: A Western Perspective , pp 19. The title of this article is, at least to this reviewer, somewhat misleading in that it promises to treat French immersion either in "the West" or from "a Western vantage point." What one reads instead is a description of statistically limited, conceptually bereft research on kindergarten and early elementary immersion programmes in certain schools in Coquitlam, Victoria and Vancouver. Comparisons are then made with what the authors see as ''the East,'' 108 namely, certain schools in Ottawa, Montreal and Toronto. This is not to suggest that, where feasible, comparisons of results are inappropriate. But, in this case, much of this performance on standardized test data has been previously published in school board reports (noted in the bibliography). To go through the exercise again does not make informative nor inspiring reading. The plight of Shapson and Kaufman, working in what is by any reasonable definition "one of the central fields of social research," with a dearth of general resources at their disposal, and a hoary legacy of educational neglect to deal with, is fully appreciated, and shared by many. Perhaps the real value of their paper is in its implicit plea for that help which is needed A mari usque ad mare: conceptual help, financial help, help in disseminating information, help for the various members of the research community to learn the other official language themselves, help for all in resolving the abysmal ignorance about Canada in general and the process of a bilingual education in particular. If the cry is made often enough perhaps we'll start doing something about it. The second paper, indirectly, raises the same clarion call. The immediate concern in this instance being the Franco-ont(}rien. Stacy Churchill (0.1.S.E.), Recherches recentes sur le bilinguisme et !'education des francophones minoritaires au Canada: l'exemple ontarien, pp 35, writing entirely in French, which is something of a refreshing anomaly for a C.S.S.E. publication, documents an overwhelming case for the necessity of maintaining an official languages bilingual education for Franco-ontarien and other Francophone minorities in other parts of the country. Without this particular form of nutriance, she argues, the essentially bilingual character of the Francophone minorities outside of Quebec would soon wither on the Anglophone vine. Her argument is one few reflective people would disagree with. The problem in this instance is that the argument has been made so often and is generally accepted. Why bother documenting the case again? Moreover , far too much space is taken to say it. Churchill 's reference list includes 139 titles (and is part of a still longer list), covers 11 pages, with entries ranging in scope from newspaper articles, to Revue d'etudes canadiennes occasional talks, to dissertations...