Explore the vast range of titles available.

Each new demographic shift and economic or social change bring seemingly new issues into popular and political focus--questions, debates, and policies about the role of language in education and society and the recent claims that transnational migrations and globalization are resulting in unprecedented forms of ethnolinguisic \"super-diversity.\" This chapter addresses issues related to language diversity, policy, and politics within the U.S. context and notes recent trends and future projections. The first section takes as a point of departure a seemingly simple question from a popular television game show to illustrate some of the complexity in posing seemingly simple historical questions. The second major section considers how ethno-racial labeling and linguistic diversity have been constructed through time in U.S. Census data and considers their implications for claims regarding the allegedly unprecedented superdiversity of the present. The third part addresses how English became dominant during the colonial period, thereby establishing its position as the common language prior to the American Revolutions. The fourth section revisits issues and themes addressed in some of my work on the history of language policy, politics, rights, and ideologies (Ovando & Wiley, 2007; Wiley, 1998, 1999a, 1999b, 2005, 2007, 2010, 2013a, 2013b; Wiley & Lukes, 1996). In particular, it focuses on the evolution of English-only ideology and how it became hegemonic during the World War I era. This final section is largely based on Wiley (2000) as it looks in relation to language policies in the United States at the differential impact of language policies on various ethnolinguistic groups in the United States.

This article considers the relevance of language policy and planning (LPP) for language education in the United States in relation to the country's longstanding and continuing multilingualism. In reflecting on the U.S. context, one striking feature is the absence of a guiding overarching explicit national educational language policy. Language policies and practices may either promote or restrict the teaching of languages. Thus, whether having such a policy would be desirable for promoting the learning of languages depends on a number of factors such as the features of the policy and the extent to which it was adequately resourced, understood, valued, and implemented effectively, just to mention a few. Explicit language planning and policy making in the United States—when it does occur—tends to be done at the state, local, or institutional levels, or within rather limited domains of federal priorities, such as those related to defense or national security. Beyond formal policies, implicit language practices sometimes have more influence on language behavior. Even when policies are intended to promote languages, they may not always be well conceived, received, resourced, or implemented. Given some of these issues, it is useful to consider the role of agency in language planning and policy (LPP). Even when guided by national or state top-down policy agendas, policies can be interpreted and reinterpreted, by policy intermediaries, agents, administrators, or arbiters (Johnson, 2013). Moreover, within the context of school language policies, at the level of implementation, teachers, parents, and the students themselves help to determine the effectiveness of policies in practice (Menken & Garcia, 2010). Beyond the schools, parents and stakeholders in the community can play significant roles in creating practices that have the force of policy from the bottom up. Given these considerations, this article weighs the role of policy and the legacy of past policies and their consequences; assesses some of the strengths and weaknesses of current policies and practices, both in schools and families and communities; and considers prospects for a more promising future that involves embracing the fundamental multilingualism of U.S. society, communities, and families. In so doing, the article reflects on alternatives to U.S. language education policy that would transcend national conceptions of languages so as to leverage speakers' actual linguistic competence.

This volume brings together many insightful perspectives regarding Castañeda v. Pickard 648 F2 989 (5th Cir., 1981), which was originally tried in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas in 1978. The contributors generally agree that Castañeda is a significant case but differ when considering its continuing relevance or the soundness of its ideological underpinnings

The Education of Language Minority Immigrants in the United States draws from quantitative and qualitative research methodologies to inform educational policy and practice. It is based on cutting-edge research and policy analyses from a number of well-known experts on immigrant language minority education in the USA. The collection includes contributions on the acquisition of English, language shift, the maintenance of heritage languages, prospects for long-term educational achievement, how family background, economic status, and gender and identity influence academic adjustment and achievement, challenges for appropriate language testing and placement, and examples of advocacy action research. It concludes with a thoughtful commentary aimed at broadening our understanding of the need to provide quality immigrant language minority education within the context of globalization. This collection will be of value to students and researchers interested in promoting educational equity and achievement for immigrant language minority students.

Wiley comments on Jim Cummins's A Proposal for Action: Strategies for Recognizing Heritage Language Competence as a Learning Resource within the Mainstream Classroom (2005). He believes that Cummins is quite correct in noting that the lack of a coherent \"macro\" educational language policy for heritage or community language speakers relates to the fact that \"the issue has been submerged within the volatile debates about bilingual education and the frequently xenophobic discourse about immigration.\"

Wiley writes that despite increases in speakers of languages such as Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, Korean, Russian and Arabic in the US, most languages other than Spanish have scant representation as subjects for instruction. Based on current national sentiment, the presence of languages other than English speakers in the US population, instead of constituting a demographic imperative for instruction, represents a threat for some; whereas for others, their presence provides only a resource for pragmatic or expedient policies.

\"Review of Research in Education: Vol. 38, Language Policy, Politics, and Diversity in Education\" explores the role of educational language policies in promoting education as a human right. There are an estimated nearly 7,000 living languages in the world. Yet, despite the extent of language diversity, only a small number of the world's languages are used as mediums of instruction. Even in English-dominant countries, such as the United States, it is important to understand the role of educational language policies (ELPs) in promoting educational access through the dominant language, and its impact on educational equity, achievement, and students' sense of identity. A central question of importance taken up by the authors in this volume is whether language minorities should have a right not only to linguistic accommodation but also to the promotion of their languages as a means for developing a positive identification with their languages and cultures. Other questions about the impact of educational policies relate to the differential statuses of language minorities and the failure to recognize speakers of minority languages. Many countries attempt to neutralize linguistic diversity by promoting a \"common\" or \"national\" language. This strategy can have negative consequences for both minorities and speakers of the dominant language if the majority population disassociates itself from language minorities or uses minority languages to stigmatize minority populations. The role of English as the world's dominant language or lingua franca also poses challenges (see Shohamy, Chapter 11). In many countries around the world, English is a required subject in school and increasingly for university admission (Jenkins, 2013). It is also increasing as a medium of instruction, especially in mathematics and science instruction. Thus, the impact of English language educational policies as well as that of other dominant languages in a global context are subjects worthy of consideration (see Tollefson, 2013; Tollefson & Tsui, Chapter 8). Another focus of this volume addresses the importance of other major languages within the context of global economic, political, and cultural contexts. Given the large number of speakers of Spanish in both global and U.S. contexts, it is also important to consider the implications for ELPs (see the chapters by García, Chapter 3, and Macías, Chapter 2). Despite the presence of over 35 million Spanish speakers in the United States, Spanish continues to be taught primarily as a \"foreign\" language. As Macías (Chapter 2) notes in his chapter, the historical role of Spanish in the United States is complex but the case may be made for its status as a conational language of the United States. Finally, within most countries and increasingly within the United States, there are many languages that play an important role as heritage and thriving languages of immigrant and indigenous communities. Thus, this volume also addresses the importance of considering policies related to these languages and their speakers. Similar to the changes we are experiencing in the natural world, language diversity is in flux due to large-scale trends with widespread implications that affect every nation. This timely volume arrives at a crossroads in the course of these global shifts. The authors' perspectives provide a solid intellectual grounding from which to inform the consequential policies and programs that will shape the educational and social environments for millions of students worldwide.

This article probes assumptions underlying dominant U.S. ideologies regarding language diversity (both between English and other languages and among varieties of English) and their impact on language planning and policy from a historical-structural perspective by analyzing and synthesizing a broad base of literature. It compares and contrasts two popularly accepted ideologies. The first is the ideology of English monolingualism, which frames policy issues in an immigrant paradigm in order to portray language diversity as an alien and divisive force; the second involves a standard language ideology that is used to position speakers of different varieties of the same language within a social hierarchy. The article discusses the connection between assumptions underlying linguistic ideologies and other social ideologies related to individualism and social mobility through education. It discusses limitations in the immigrant paradigm and considers the instrumental role that schools play in positioning students by using language assessment and classification schemes. Dilemmas and opportunities for contesting these ideologies are addressed.