Everyday use of Spanish among bilingual teachers in New York City and their attitudes toward the language

Marco Aponte & Natalia Herrera
The Graduate Center, CUNY

The Spanish language has had a long history in the territory that became the U.S. Its presence dates from the beginning of the sixteenth century, when the conquistadores inhabited the Spanish Borderlands. For approximately three hundred years Spanish was the prestige language in places such as Florida, Texas and the Southwest (Silva-Corvalán 77).Today Spanish is the second-most spoken language in the U.S. Since the mid-twentieth century, immigration from Latin America has become the key factor assuring the presence of the language. Several studies reveal that the increase in the number of Spanish speakers is due to the massive and continuous influx of immigrants from Spanish-speaking countries in recent years, and not as much to the intergenerational transmission of Spanish among Hispanics born in the U.S. This fact highlights the lack of linguistic loyalty to Spanish that characterizes the Hispanic population in the U.S. (Silva-Corvalán 83).

In terms of number of speakers, the most prominent group of Spanish speakers in the U.S. consists, by far, of speakers of Mexican origin. In New York, the Spanish-speaking community mainly consists of speakers from Puerto Rico, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Mexico and Colombia. The fastest growing groups in New York are Dominicans, Ecuadorians and Mexicans (Kates 7).

New York City began providing special programs for children from language minorities in the 1960s. This took place approximately two decades after the massive immigration of Puerto Ricans, who between 1945 and 1955 immigrated to the city at a rate of 50,000 per year (Zentella 168-169).

Since its creation, bilingual education has gone through several changes in New York City’s public schools. One of the most drastic reforms occurred on February 28, 2001, when the New York City Board of Education (today the New York City Department of Education) voted unanimously to overhaul the system’s 26-year-old bilingual education program. Under the new system, students who fail English competency tests are classified as English Language Learners (ELL). Their parents are given the choice to enroll them in one of three different programs: Transitional Bilingual, Dual Language, and English as a Second Language (ESL).

These reforms, instead of increasing the choices for bilingual students, seem to promote the learning of English without focusing on the maintenance of the student’s native tongue. For instance, on the website of the New York City Department of Education, the term “bilingual education”, which suggests an equal footing for both languages, has almost disappeared. The more common term seen in the website is “English Language Learners” (ELL), which only emphasizes the importance of learning English. Given this apparent change in language policy, attitudes within the educational system toward minority languages become an issue of critical importance.

A key question is how students, parents, teachers and administrators feel about maintaining minority languages. In this respect, several studies show that teachers’ negative attitudes toward bilingualism affect the development of students’ bilingualism (Romaine 213). For bilingual programs to succeed, favorable attitudes toward bilingualism on the teacher’s part seem essential. This becomes all the more important given the apparent lack of interest in maintaining bilingual education observed in the language policies of the New York City Department of Education.

In her book on bilingualism, Suzanne Romaine looks at attitudes toward bilingualism from two different perspectives: attitudes of bilinguals toward aspects of bilingual behavior, and attitudes of monolinguals to bilinguals and to various aspects of bilingualism (Romaine 256). Although in our study we will focus on attitudes of bilingual individuals toward bilingualism, it is interesting to note that many studies have shown that monolingual individuals in the U.S. seem to have negative attitudes toward bilingualism. In this respect, Einar Haugan and François Grosjean carried out some of the most compelling research studies. In his book The Norwegian Language in America, Einar Haugen wrote:

Bilingualism has been treated as a necessary evil, a rash on the body politic, which might be expected to cure without the need of calling in the doctors…Very little prestige has been attached to the having of bilingual capacities. (2)

Similarly, in his book Life with Two Languages, Grosjean wrote:

Although the official policy toward linguistic minorities has been neither one of encouragement nor one of repression, but more a policy of toleration, the general attitude of the nation (as compared to its laws) and of the Anglo-American majority, has been that members of linguistic minorities should integrate themselves into the English-speaking society as quickly as possible. This attitude has not changed much since the beginning of the century. (62)

If we judge by the anti-bilingual education reforms adopted by referendum in recent years in states with large Spanish-speaking populations, including California (Proposition 227) and Arizona (Proposition 203), and if we look closely into the reforms voted unanimously by the New York City Department of Education in 2001, it seems that popular attitudes toward bilingualism in the U.S., as Grosjean stated, have not changed much since the beginning of the twentieth century.

Attitudes of bilinguals may differ from those of monolinguals. Elite bilinguals who chose to learn a second language for pleasure or utility, or because they have had the opportunity to live abroad for a period of time, are likely to show more favorable attitudes toward bilingualism than bilinguals who had to learn a second language as a result of immigration, or who were born into a community of a linguistic minority. In this respect, Romaine mentions that immigrants or children from linguistic minorities often perceive bilingualism in a negative manner and with suspicion, to the extent that they might discourage their children from using their mother tongue (256).

In a study on linguistic attitudes of bilingual teachers in the southern New Mexico and western Texas, Patricia MacGregor-Mendoza conducted structured interviews with bilingual educators at various educational levels to determine their attitudes toward Spanish and English, as well as their public and private uses of both languages (MacGregor-Mendoza 83-84). Among other findings, her results indicate that the educators hold Spanish in high regard, and that their use of Spanish in both public and private settings lags considerably behind their use of English. In terms of attitudes toward the use of Spanish, our study’s findings are consistent with those reported by MacGregor-Mendoza.

A study of the attitudes of bilingual teachers in California found that preserving the Spanish language and Mexican culture was a key motivation for Mexican-American teachers in contrast to non-Mexican-American teachers (Bustamante Jones et al. 441). At first glance, this seems to contradict our findings given that our study suggests that the non-Hispanic bilingual teachers have a more favorable attitude toward the use of Spanish than Hispanic teachers. However, it is important to note that the California study examined motivations in terms of ethnic identity rather than attitudes towards Spanish. Also, issues of language and cultural identity of Mexican-Americans in California are likely to be different from those of Hispanics in New York City, where the Hispanic population is much more diverse in terms of national origin.

Another significant difference among various types of bilinguals relates to their attitudes toward code-switching. Charlotte Hoffmann argues that some bilinguals have favorable attitudes while others consider it “a linguistic impurity or a sign of laziness” (113). The studies of Jacqueline Toribio and Tyler Anderson are noteworthy in terms of negative attitudes toward bilingual speech. In their article entitled Attitudes towards Lexical Borrowings and Intra-sentential Code-switching , they state that monolingual Spanish speech generally elicits the most positive attitudes, and bilingual speech the least positive (Toribio & Anderson). These findings are consistent with our findings.

Our study aims at determining how often bilingual teachers use Spanish in their everyday lives and what their attitudes toward the use of Spanish in the U.S. are. Conclusions are based on an empirical analysis of data gathered in the spring of 2006 through a sociolinguistics questionnaire.

Method

Corpus and design

The corpus consisted of data drawn from a sociolinguistic questionnaire that included 13 items on frequency of use of Spanish, eight on attitudes toward Spanish (one of which relates to lexical borrowings, and one to code-switching), and 13 items on socio-demographic characteristics (see Appendix 1). All items related to frequency of use and attitudes were answered by means of a five-point scale. The questionnaire was written in Spanish and was administered during the spring semester of 2006.

Two sets of research questions guided our analysis. The first set consisted of three research questions dealing with the use of Spanish of bilingual teachers in New York City. The second set consisted of four research questions dealing with bilingual teachers’ attitudes toward the use of Spanish in the U.S. Our research questions were as follows:

1. How often do bilingual teachers (English-Spanish) use Spanish in their everyday lives? Are there significant differences between teachers of Hispanic origin and teachers of non-Hispanic origin? How do U.S.-born Hispanic teachers and those born abroad differ in terms of frequency of use of Spanish in the U.S.?

2. What are the attitudes of bilingual teachers toward the use of Spanish in the U.S.? What are the attitudes of bilingual teachers toward lexical borrowings and code-switching? Are there significant differences between teachers of Hispanic origin and teachers of non-Hispanic origin? How do U.S.-born Hispanic teachers and those born abroad differ in terms of attitudes toward the use of Spanish in the U.S.?

Participants

The sample consisted of 35 public school bilingual teachers belonging to one of two programs: the New York City Teaching Fellows Program (NYCTFP) and the Teaching Opportunity Programs (TOP). Both programs are designed to bring new teachers into the New York City public school system. All respondents teach full-time while taking courses at the City University of New York in order to get their Master’s degrees in Education.

The sample consisted of 22 females and 13 males. Out of the total, 23 were of Hispanic origin and 12 were of other origins. Out of the 23 respondents of Hispanic origin, 16 were females and 7 males. There were 6 non-Hispanic females and 6 non-Hispanic males.

Out of the total teachers of Hispanic origin, 8 were born in the U.S. and 15 were born abroad. A total of 7 females and 1 male were born in the U.S. compared to 9 females and 6 males born abroad.

Ages of respondents ranged from 21 to over 50. More than half were in their twenties, and approximately 80% of respondents were younger than 40.

In terms of the respondents’ place of residence, 39% of all Hispanic bilingual teachers lived in neighborhoods where the primary language spoken was Spanish, compared to 31% of all non-Hispanic bilingual teachers.

Procedure

Two items were used in the questionnaire to gauge the proficiency of respondents in each language. Responses ranged from Muy mal to Muy bien. A number from one to five was assigned to each possible response. One item was related to the level of proficiency in Spanish, and the other to the level of proficiency in English. Numbers were assigned as follows: number one was assigned to Muy mal, two to Mal, three to Regular, four to Bien, and five to Muy bien.

In order to be considered as a bilingual, respondents had to have a combined score of eight or more in the two items. Three respondents were eliminated, bringing the original sample from 38 informants to 35.

Thirteen items were used to quantify how frequently informants use Spanish in everyday life. Responses ranged from Nunca to Siempre. A number from one to five was assigned to each possible response. Numbers were assigned as follows: number one was assigned to Nunca, two to Raramente, three to Regularmente, four to Frecuentemente, and five to Siempre.

The thirteen items related to use of Spanish are as follows:

1. En mi casa hablo español

2. Con mis amigos cercanos hablo español

3. Veo televisión en español

4. Voy a restaurantes de comida hispana en los Estados Unidos

5. Voy a tiendas y bodegas hispanas en los Estados Unidos

6. Voy a ver espectáculos o películas en español

7. Oigo radio en español

8. Leo publicaciones en español (Internet, libros, periódicos, o revistas)

9. Escribo en español (cartas, correos electrónicos, notas)

10. Hablo español en mi trabajo

11. Voy a la iglesia en español

12. Voy a vecindarios donde se habla mayormente español

13. Viajo a un país (o a países) donde se habla español

Six items were used to determine general attitudes toward Spanish in the U.S. Respondents were given a scale ranging from one to five, and were told that number one represented No me gusta nada, and number five represented Me gusta mucho. The six items related to attitudes toward Spanish in the United States are as follows:

1. Me gusta hablar español en los Estados Unidos

2. Me gusta que los hispanos en los Estados Unidos sepan español

3. Me gusta que los norteamericanos que no son de origen hispano sepan español en los Estados Unidos

4. Me gusta que los empleados públicos en los Estados Unidos sepan español

5. Me gusta que los empleados en las tiendas en los Estados Unidos sepan español

6. Me gusta que en las escuelas y en las universidades de los Estados Unidos se den clases en español

One item was used to determine attitudes toward lexical borrowings and one to determine attitudes toward code-switching. The scale used for these two items was the same one used to determine general attitudes. The items were as follows:

7. Me gusta cuando la gente usa algunas palabras en inglés al hablar español

8. Me gusta cuando la gente cambia del español al inglés varias veces en una conversación

Analysis and Results

Our analysis was based on correlations between variables (such as Origin and Frequency of Use, or Origin and Attitudes), and comparisons between means. Two-tailed T-tests were used and the significant value was set below 0.10.

Use of Spanish

Overall, results indicate only moderate frequencies of use of Spanish in everyday life among the three groups (Hispanic bilingual teachers born in the U.S., Hispanic bilingual teachers born abroad, and non-Hispanic bilingual teachers). As mentioned before, these results are consistent with MacGregor-Mendoza’s results. However, Hispanic teachers born in the U.S. seem to have the highest frequency of Spanish use, while non-Hispanic teachers seem to have the lowest. Our findings are illustrated in Table 1.

Table 1. Mean of means for the 13 items related to frequency of use

Nevertheless, the difference that we observed in term of frequency of use between Hispanic teachers born in the U.S. (3.07) and Non-Hispanic teachers (2.74) does not seem to be statistically significant. This is evidenced by a T-value of 0.233.

Out of the thirteen items related to frequency of use, only the responses to two of those items show significant differences between the two groups (item 1: En mi casa hablo español, and item 2: con mis amigos cercanos hablo español. These findings are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2. Significant differences related to use of Spanish in the U.S. (T < 0.1)

It is not surprising that Hispanic bilingual teachers speak Spanish at home and with their friends. However, it is interesting to note that, for item 1 (en mi casa hablo español), Hispanic bilingual teachers born abroad do not show significant differences when compared to Hispanic bilingual teachers born in the U.S., but they do show significant differences for item 2 ( con mis amigos cercanos hablo español). These findings are illustrated in Table 2a.

Table 2a. Significant differences related to use of Spanish in the U.S. (Hispanics born abroad versus Hispanics born in the U.S) (T < 0.1)

The significant differences in Table 2a related to item 2 may be explained by the fact that Hispanic bilingual teachers born in the U.S. are generally more integrated to the English-speaking majority than those born abroad. In addition, their first language is often English instead of Spanish.

The fact that Hispanic teachers born abroad seem to speak Spanish with their friends more frequently than Hispanic teachers born in the U.S. is supported by responses to items 1 and 2 (level of proficiency in Spanish and Englishh respectively) of the socio-demographic part of the questionnaire. These responses show that Hispanic teachers born abroad have a significantly higher level of proficiency in Spanish than their counterparts born in the U.S. (means of 4.67 versus 3.88 respectively with a T-value of 0.017).

Similarly, Hispanic teachers born in the U.S. show a significantly higher level of proficiency in English than their counterparts born abroad (means of 4.27 versus 4.88 respectively with a T-value of 0.055). These results are shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Proficiency in Spanish and English (Hispanic bilingual teachers born in the U.S. and those born abroad) (T < 0.1)

Attitudes toward the use of SpanishIn general, all groups seem to have favorable attitudes toward the use of Spanish in the U.S. This is illustrated in the following table:

Table 4. Attitudes toward the use of Spanish in the U.S.

The mean for non-Hispanic teachers (4.76) is higher than the one for both groups of Hispanic teachers combined (4.55). However, this difference does not seem to be statistically significant as evidenced by a T-value of 0.254.

In addition, when comparing non-Hispanic bilingual teachers with Hispanic bilingual teachers, there are no significant differences in any of the answers related to attitudes, except for the one related to lexical borrowings. For the most part, Hispanic and non-Hispanic bilingual teachers have very similar attitudes toward the use of Spanish in the U.S.

Nevertheless, when we disaggregate the group of Hispanic bilingual teachers into those born in the U.S. and those born abroad, we observe important differences between the groups. The main difference between Hispanic bilingual teachers born in the U.S. and those born abroad relates to item 1 of the attitudes part of the questionnaire: Me gusta hablar español en los Estados Unidos (mean of 4.0 for those born in the U.S. and 4.73 for those born abroad). The difference between means seems to be significant as evidenced by a T-value of 0.030. Thus, the data indicate that Hispanic bilingual teachers born abroad have a more favorable attitude toward speaking Spanish in the U.S. than Hispanic bilingual teachers born in the U.S. These findings are illustrated in Table 4a, which shows means related to item 1:Me gusta hablar español en los Estados Unidos.

Table 4a. Means related to item 1 (Hispanic teachers born abroad versus those born in the U.S.)

Furthermore, if we compare Hispanic bilingual teachers born in the U.S. with non-Hispanic bilingual teachers, we still find a significant difference for the same item (item 1, means of 4.00 and 4.67 respectively, T-value = 0.05). In fact, these groups show the fewest similarities in their attitudes toward the use of Spanish in the U.S. These findings are summarized in Table 4b, which shows means related to item 1:Me gusta hablar español en los Estados Unidos.

Table 4b. Means related to item 1 (Hispanic teachers born in the U.S. versus non-Hispanics)

Another significant difference between these two groups relates to item 3: Me gusta que los norteamericanos que no son de origen hispano sepan español en los Estados Unidos. Here, the average for the non-Hispanic bilingual teachers is 4.83, while the one for the Hispanic bilingual teachers born in the U.S. is 4.25 (T-value = 0.090). This favorable attitude of non-Hispanic bilingual teachers may be due to the fact that they are, for the most part, elite bilinguals. These finding are illustrated in Table 4c, which shows means related to item 3: Me gusta que los norteamericanos que no son de origen hispano sepan español en los Estados Unidos.

Table 4c. Means related to item 3 (Hispanic teachers born in the US versus non-Hispanics)

Attitudes toward lexical borrowings and code-switching

Overall, mean values among the three groups for the two questions related to lexical borrowings and code-switching are relatively low when compared to mean values for all items related to general attitudes toward the use of Spanish.

Table 5. Attitudes toward lexical borrowings and code-switching

This seems to indicate that attitudes toward lexical borrowings and code- switching are rather negative among all three groups. This is illustrated in Table 5, which summarizes the attitudes toward lexical borrowings and code-switching as measured by items 7 and 8 of the attitudes part of the questionnaire. Items 7 and 8 were as follows:

Item 7: Me gusta cuando la gente usa algunas palabras en inglés al hablar español;

Item 8: Me gusta cuando la gente cambia del español al inglés varias veces en una conversación.

When we compare the mean values of the three groups in terms of attitudes toward lexical borrowings, we find that bilingual Hispanic teachers born in the U.S. seem to have a less favorable attitude than bilingual Hispanic teachers born abroad. We also find that bilingual Hispanic teachers born abroad seem to have a less favorable attitude than the non-Hispanic teachers.

Overall, however, only the difference between Hispanic bilingual teachers born in the U.S. and the non-Hispanic bilingual teachers are statistically significant (T-value = 0.029). These means are illustrated in Table 5.

When we compare the mean values of these three groups in terms of attitudes toward code-switching, we find that bilingual Hispanic teachers born in the U.S. seem to have a less favorable attitude than the non-Hispanic teachers. We also find bilingual non-Hispanic teachers seem to have a less favorable attitude than Hispanic teachers born abroad. However, none of these differences are statistically significant. Again, the means are illustrated in Table 5.

Conclusions

The results indicate that the three groups of bilingual English-Spanish teachers had only a moderate frequency of Spanish use in their everyday life. These results are consistent with the findings of MacGregor-Mendoza, who found that bilingual educators’ use of Spanish lags behind that of English. Although we did not measure the informants’ everyday use of English, we can assume that most of the bilingual English-Spanish teachers use English when they don’t use Spanish.

In general, Hispanic bilingual teachers seem to prefer to speak Spanish when they are at home. However, only those born abroad seem to prefer to speak Spanish with their friends. This may be due to the fact that Hispanic bilingual teachers born in the U.S. are often more integrated to the English-speaking majority than those born abroad. In addition, as evidenced in this study, they feel more comfortable speaking English than Spanish.

Overall, bilingual teachers from this sample seem to have favorable attitudes toward the use of Spanish in the U.S. As mentioned in the introduction of the study, this is an essential factor for the survival of bilingual education. It would be interesting to measure the attitudes of bilingual teachers who have been in the New York City educational system longer than the informants of this study.

When we subdivide the group of Hispanic bilingual teachers of the sample, we find that those born abroad seem to have a more favorable attitude toward speaking Spanish in the U.S. than those born in the U.S. This suggests that the maintenance of the language may depend more on immigrants than on Spanish speakers born here. This is consistent with Silva-Corvalán’s findings on the lack of linguistic loyalty of the Hispanic population in the U.S.

In addition, non-Hispanic bilingual teachers seem to have a more favorable attitude to the idea that non-Hispanic Americans sepan hablar español. This may be partly explained by the fact that, for the most part, the non-Hispanic bilinguals in this study are elite bilinguals.

Bilingual Hispanic teachers born in the U.S. seem to have a less favorable attitude toward the use of lexical borrowings than Hispanic teachers born abroad, who seem to have a less favorable attitude than non-Hispanic teachers. On the other hand, bilingual Hispanic teachers born in the U.S. seem to have a less favorable attitude toward code-switching than non-Hispanic teachers, who seem to have a less favorable attitude than Hispanic teachers born abroad.

Results indicate that, in general, attitudes toward lexical borrowings and code-switching are rather negative among bilingual teachers. These findings are consistent with Toribio’s study mentioned in the introduction of this paper. It seems that although attitudes toward the use of Spanish in the U.S. are rather favorable, attitudes toward lexical borrowings and code-switching have a negative perception among bilingual teachers in New York City.

Many people in the United States have negative attitudes toward languages other than English. However, these attitudes are particularly damaging when they are held by teachers (García-Nevarez 311). One of the most important factors in teaching bilingual students is respect for and understanding of the students’ language and culture (García 164). As García notes, bilingual students in the U.S. do not speak a single variety of a foreign language. Instead, they speak multiple varieties of varying prestige. Since lexical borrowings and code-switching are prominent aspects of Spanish spoken in the U.S., it is essential that bilingual teachers understand that lexical borrowings and code-switching are natural elements of any bilingual community. This may improve their attitudes toward Spanish and contact phenomena such as lexical borrowings and code-switching.

We recommend that programs such as the New York City Teaching Fellows Program (NYCTFP) and the Teaching Opportunity Programs (TOP) include sociolinguistics courses on bilingualism in general, and on lexical borrowings and code-switching in particular. As shown in this study, being fluent in Spanish does not seem to be enough to understand the linguistic traits that characterize bilingual communities. A study published by Byrnes, Kiger and Manning in 1997 on teachers’ attitudes about language diversity shows that teachers’ formal training is positively correlated to favorable language attitudes. It seems essential that this training address the linguistic complexities of bilingual communities in order to improve the education of students in Transitional Bilingual, Dual Language, and English as a Second Language (ESL) programs.

References

Bustamante Jones et al. (1999) “Identity and Career-Choice among Mexican-American and Euro-American Preservice Bilingual Teachers,” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Science, 21:44, 431-446.

Byrnes, D. A. et al. (1996) “Teachers’ attitudes about language diversity,” Teaching and Teacher Education, 13(6), 637-644.

Haugen, Einar. (1969). The Norwegian language in America: a study in bilingual behavior. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Hoffmann, Charlotte. (1992). An Introduction to Bilingualism. Longman: London & New York.

García, Eugene E. (2005). Teaching and Learning in Two Languages: Bilingualism and Schooling in the United States. New York and London: Columbia University, Teachers College Press.

García-Nevarez A.G. et al. (2005). “Arizona Elementary Teachers’ Attitudes Toward English Language Learners and the Use of Spanish in Classroom Instruction,” Bilingual Research Journal, 29: 2.

Grosjean, François. (1987). Life with Two Languages. Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London, England: Harvard University Press.

Kates, Brian. (2006, November 14). “Latinos on the Rise in the City,” New York Daily News, 7.

MacGregor-Mendoza, Patricia. (1998). “Language and the Bilingual Teacher: Use, Attitudes, Roles,” Southwest Journal of Linguistics, 17:2, 83-99. New York City Department of Education. , 6 April 2008.

Romaine, Suzanne. (1987). Bilingualism. Oxford & New York: Basil Blackwell.

Silva-Corvalán. (2000). “La Situación del Español en los Estados Unidos,” Anuario Instituto Cervantes.

Toribio, Almeida Jacqueline & Anderson, Tyler. (2005). “Attitudes towards lexical borrowings and intra-sentential code-switching,” XX Conference of Spanish in the U.S. / 5th Conference of Spanish in Contact with Other Languages. University of Illinois: Chicago.

U.S. Census 2000. Summary File 3, Table DP-2.

Zentella, Ana Celia. (1997b). “Spanish in New York City,” The Multilingual Apple, ed. by Ofelia García and Joshua Fishman. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Appendix 1

Cuestionario

I. Uso del español

Por favor marque la respuesta que describa mejor su situación:

1. En mi casa hablo español