English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

In most cases, parents whose native language is not predominant in the area they live in have no opportunity to choose the language for their children’s instruction in schools. However, in some areas language minority families have options regarding the language of instruction (e.g., Finns in Sweden and Russians in Estonia). This article focuses on language choice from the viewpoint of these families. Typically, discussions of language of instruction have focused on integrative issues, such as creating loyal citizens, or instrumental or practical issues, such as education or labor market opportunities (Mets 2004). Choice, however, may have deeper cultural and emotional meanings for families, and such meanings may need to be considered by policy makers. In the United States, for example, policy debates on language of instruction have largely focused on whether or not to employ bilingual education strategies. In fact, states such as California, Arizona, and Massachusetts have forbidden (via referenda) the use of bilingual education, mandating English immersion, with approximately a year of transition in limited instances. Consequently, research in this area has become so politicized that, when a panel of scholars from the National Research Council studied the issue and found a positive effect from bilingual education, an opponent of bilingual education wrote that the report of the panel was intended to convey that “there is no evidence that there will be long-term advantages or disadvantages to teaching limited-English students in the native language” (Glenn 1997, 66). The study directors themselves had stated to the contrary: “Empirical results . . . support the theory underlying native language instruction” (August and Hakuta 1997, 147). Similarly, a recent meta-analytical study regarding the effectiveness of bilingual versus monolingual educational methods conducted by a panel of researchers appointed by the Bush administration found small to modest gains from bilingual programs. However, the Bush administration, after seeing the findings, declined to release the report (Krashen and McField 2005). In such a highly charged policy climate in the United States, most parents do not have a choice in the language of instruction for their children’s schooling. The U.S. language policy clearly is limiting families’ language

Sociocultural Aspects of Russian‐Speaking Parents’ Choice of Language of Instruction for Their Children in Estonia