Kearney

What are you saying here?  Is this a threat? A promise?  A foreboding?

We'll see what?

Janet


From: Kearney Lykins <kearney_lykins at yahoo.com>
Reply-To: The Adult English Language Learners Discussion List
<englishlanguage at nifl.gov>
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 06:31:03 -0700 (PDT)
To: The Adult English Language Learners Discussion List
<englishlanguage at nifl.gov>
Subject: [EnglishLanguage 2850] Re: citizenship

Eduaro,

 

Stick around.  You'll see.

 

Cheers,

 

Kearney

----- Original Message ----
From: Eduardo Honold <ehonol at sisd.net>
To: The Adult English Language Learners Discussion List
<englishlanguage at nifl.gov>
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 4:20:15 PM
Subject: [EnglishLanguage 2843] Re: citizenship

Kearney:
 
I promise this will be my last post on this issue.  I couldn¹t agree more
with you that freedom is a fundamental value in the U.S. Constitution, and
that valuing diversity is derivative of that principle.  And I don¹t believe
there is anybody on this list who would dispute this.  Diversity is an
empirical religious, ethnic, linguistic and cultural reality in the United
States that, thankfully, is protected by our laws and our Constitution (and
not without a struggle, I might add).   Diversity is an expression of our
freedom to choose who we are.  I have no idea who you are referring to when
you say that ³diversity² has come to supplant ³freedom.²  I follow this list
pretty regularly and I have never seen any posts in which diversity is, as
you say,  the ³be-all and end-all that many on this list make it out to be.²
 
Regards,
 
 

Eduardo Honold

Far West Project GREAT Coordinator

(915) 937-1703  

fax: (915) 937-1795

SISD Community Services

313 S. Rio Vista Rd.

El Paso, TX 79927

www.farwestgreat.org <http://www.farwestgreat.org/>


From: englishlanguage-bounces at nifl.gov
[mailto:englishlanguage-bounces at nifl.gov] On Behalf Of Kearney Lykins
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 12:23 PM
To: The Adult English Language Learners Discussion Li
Subject: [EnglishLanguage 2837] Re: citizenship
 

Eduardo, et al, 
 
I am only trying to make the point that diversity is not the be-all and
end-all that many on this list make it out to be.
 
Diversity is a derivative of freedom; you have to have the freedom before
you can begin to entertain any notion of diversity. And thus it is freedom
that I would think we would be the most dedicated to promoting, protecting,
and celebrating, not diversity.  Especially in a civics class.
 
The first clause of the First Amendment provides a clear example of the
subordination of diversity to freedom.
 
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
 
This clause does not speak to what people are allowed to do, but only to
what the government is not allowed to do; the people are free from
government control. Hence, the First Amendment could care less if its
language produces a nation that is 100% Methodist, or if it spawns the
creation of 5,000 sects of everything under the sun. You might say that the
First Amendment is utterly agnostic regarding diversity.
 
Because diverse individual choices are the by-product of limits on
government power, I don't understand how the term "diversity" has come to
supplant "freedom" as that which is worth attending to. Diversity never made
anyone free.
 
 
Regards,
 
Kearney

 

 

 

----- Original Message ----
From: Eduardo Honold <ehonol at sisd.net>
To: The Adult English Language Learners Discussion List
<englishlanguage at nifl.gov>
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2008 3:52:27 PM
Subject: [EnglishLanguage 2816] Re: citizenship

Dear Kearney ,
 
I¹m not sure it always productive to participate in a polemic about the
meaning of the Constitution or the original intent of its writers, but,
alas, I can¹t  resist.   I am no scholar of the US Constitution, but it
seems to me that while the value of diversity may not have been explicitly
addressed by the Constitution, it is clearly present in the Bill of Rights,
particularly in the First Amendment protection of our right as individuals
from undue interference by government in the establishment of religion and
the preservation of free speech.  I take these to mean that the government
has no business telling me (a relatively recent citizen) what language I
choose to speak at home, what movies I choose to watch, or how I should
conduct my spiritual business, if at all.  These are the values, I would
argue, that make the U.S. Constitution a particularly powerful document, and
certainly make me proud of being an American citizen.  It is particularly
interesting that you bring up the  Soviet Union --the old Yugoslavia and
Iraq under Sadam also come to mind‹which, like Yugoslavia and Iraq, used
state power to suppress  cultural and political identity only to have it
blow up on their faces.
 
When I talk to teachers about Civics instruction, I emphasize the importance
of understanding and celebrating the rich cultural background and traditions
of our immigrant as they seek to find their place in a new society. I
believe integration is more likely to take place if immigrants feel that
welcomed, valued and respected by this society, and less likely to happen if
it imposed by legislative fiat and the heavy hand of the government.
Acculturation will take place eventually, especially as children and
grandchildren are born and raised in this country, and there is very little
evidence that respecting diversity has any impact on the extent to which
children of immigrants learn English or become effective members of this
society.  So there is actually very little to fear from the promotion of
diversity as a value, and much to be gained from the idea that we come from
different backgrounds and experiences, but still manage to get along, work
together, pray (or not) without a grave danger to our society.
It is interesting how we can get very defensive about the effect of another
culture on ours, as if there really were a monolithic American experience
that we are all protecting.   What are we protecting?  Is it the notion of
the United States as a Christian nation? (The 1st amendment has a problem
with that).  Is it the notion that English should be the only language
spoken by Americans (This is already the case once you get past the first
generation of immigrants.)  Is it the vast array of cultural products coming
out of Hollywood studios and TV (Am I willing to die for MTV, reality
television, and Donald Duck?  Maybe not, but they are certainly an integral
aspect of our shared experience as Americans.)  The point is that both
immigrants and non-immigrants are constantly processing the incredibly
heterogeneous and contradictory meanings of what it means to live in this
society, and we all do the best we can to find our own understanding of who
we are in relation to the whole.
 
So Martin, keep discussing, celebrating and thinking about the diverse
nature of the American experience.  It will make all of us stronger.
 
 

Eduardo Honold

Far West Project GREAT Coordinator

(915) 937-1703  

fax: (915) 937-1795

SISD Community Services

313 S. Rio Vista Rd.

El Paso, TX 79927

www.farwestgreat.org <http://www.farwestgreat.org/>


From: englishlanguage-bounces at nifl.gov
[mailto:englishlanguage-bounces at nifl.gov] On Behalf Of Kearney Lykins
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2008 9:04 AM
To: The Adult English Language Learners Discussion List
Subject: [EnglishLanguage 2810] Re: citizenship
 

Martin,

 

I second the notion that the best language classroom is not the classroom at
all, but all those other real world places outside it. But I have to take
issue with your civics lesson.

 

In our nation's founding documents (e.g., The Declaration of Independence,
The Consititution), and in the arguments (e.g. The Federalist Papers) that
sought to bind us together in the first place, and in the second place
(Lincoln's First and Second Inaugurals), I find no mention of "diversity" as
the glue that bonds this nation. In fact, diversity (faction, competing
interests, etc.) was named as the force which threatened to tear us apart.

 

Rather, it has always been the common love of  liberty (defined at the
founding as limited, decentralized government) and not diversity, which has
united us to the extent that we are, and which continues to attract people
from places where liberty is but a vapor.

 

Sure we are all different, but so was the Soviet Union with its 200 distinct
ethnic groups. 

 

Diversity is not the main attraction.

 

 

 

Regards,

 

Kearney


 

 

----- Original Message ----
From: Martin Senger <MSenger at GECAC.org>
To: The Adult English Language Learners Discussion List
<englishlanguage at nifl.gov>
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2008 8:17:42 AM
Subject: [EnglishLanguage 2809] Re: citizenship

Pax Stephen!
 
I am a civics teacher for adults here in the US . I always stress that by
learning about their new country, they are more apt to become involved in
that environment, which is the best language classroom ever. Most of my
students have limited access to an English-language environment, since they
speak their L1 at home with family, and their social circles are often
restricted to that L1. I always tell my students that if the only time they
speak English is in my classroom, I will require them to buy me a nice
retirement gift, because they will be in my class for the next 40 years!
 
I also teach that diversity has been, is, and (hopefully) always will be the
bond that unites us as a nation. So it is perfectly acceptable to be
completely different than everyone around you, just like everyone else! Viva
le difference! (I hope my English is better than my French!)
 
Ciao!
 

Martin E. Senger

Adult ESL Teacher

GECAC / The R. Benjamin Wiley Learning Center

Erie, Pa

814-490-8510

 
-----Original Message-----
From: englishlanguage-bounces at nifl.gov
[mailto:englishlanguage-bounces at nifl.gov] On Behalf Of Stephen Woulds
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2008 12:50 AM
To: englishlanguage at nifl.gov
Subject: [EnglishLanguage 2808] citizenship
 

Hi

This website was created to help those teaching/learning English develop an
understanding of citizenship as it relates to the United Kingdom .
http://www.esoluk.co.uk <http://www.esoluk.co.uk/>  There are however many
people in the UK who are opposed to the teaching of 'citizenship'. It is
becoming a hot political issue, particularly as language ability and
cultural knowledge are being used as gate-keeping processes for entry into
the UK . I'm wondering what other people's thoughts are on the teaching of
citizenship to migrants, asylum seekers, etc, particularly within their own
national contexts.

 
 

 

----------------------------------------------------
National Institute for Literacy
Adult English Language Learners mailing list
EnglishLanguage at nifl.gov
To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to
http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/englishlanguage
Email delivered to janet_isserlis at brown.edu

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/englishlanguage/attachments/20080923/e6ffada4/attachment.html