McKay Chapter 2

Chapter 2 focused on the reasons people learn English and the programs that nations from each circle use in order to teach the language.  The chapter starts with an intriguing quote on page 31 that states "There is tremendous pressure for immigrants to learn English since most social and employment situations require the use of English." I thought that this was a little ironic because they feel pressured to learn English, many English-speakers are feeling pressure to learn other languages for the same reason.  Is their pressure similar to the pressure that Americans feel to learn languages such as Spanish or Mandarin-Chinese?
The author next looked at different models that inner circles used, such as Britain, the US, and Australia.  In Britain, the Swann Report endorsed mainstreaming so the students could interact with native speakers.  However, critics say that the report fails to recognize "the important role that first language maintenance can have on both cognitive development and the acquisition of a second language" (p. 33).   The author acknowledges that a decision Inner Circle countries has to deal with is whether to give emphasis to social integration and risk losing language support, or emphasize language support and risk losing social interaction.  It's a give or take situation.  This decision then questions "to what extent development in a learner's first language can have beneficial effects on second language acquisition?" (p. 35).  Unlike Britain;s train of thought, Australian programs were designed to promote bilingualism.  Their 4 guiding principles were:
1. competence in English
2. maintenance and development of languages other than English
3. provision of services in languages other than English
4. opportunities for learning second languages
In my opinion, I think that the Australians were dead on as far as intentions go.  They wanted their citizens to be bilingual because they understood that knowing more than one language is a resource and not a deficit.  Unfortunately, some "teachers cast these students' ability to communicate in two languages not as a special talent or strngth but rather as a disability" (p. 37).  We clearly know from various studies and research that the old saying "two is better than one" is certainly true when it comes to languages.
An interesting point was make on page 49.  According to the text, "there is tremendous pressure for teachers to conduct English-only classroom."  I found this ironic because all the evidence proves that "the use of L1 in language classrooms have documented the ways in which the first language can be used very effectively in language classrooms" (p. 49).  My question, not only for just the Expanding Circle but for everyone, is that if the L1 can help in language classrooms, then why have English-only classrooms?  I firmly believe that all teachers should either have certification in bilingualism or ESL and it would not only be beneficial for teacher but for the students as well.  I think that bilingual teachers would be able to help the students realize that their language skills are a gift that is meant to be cherished, not a problem that needs to be erased.