Microsoft Word - AMAE Journal Cover Template (General).docx Volume 16 Issue 1 2022 AMAE Open Issue Editors Patricia Sánchez The University of Texas at San Antonio Antonio J. Camacho AMAE, Inc. Associate Editors Julie L. Figueroa Sacramento State Lucila D. Ek The University of Texas at San Antonio http://amaejournal.utsa.edu ISSN: 2377-9187 Association of Mexican American Educators Journal A peer-reviewed, open access journal Cuéllar Association of Mexican American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2022, Volume 16, Issue I 81 “There will only be English in Kindergarten”: The Language Ideologies of the Lead Teacher and of Mexican Mothers in an Arizona Head Start Program serving Spanish-Speaking Latino Children Delis Cuéllar University of Wisconsin, Madison Author Note I thank Alyssa Hanson-Eggebrecht for her insightful comments throughout the publication pro- cess. Abstract This article examines the language ideologies of the lead teacher and of five Mexican mothers of Spanish-speaking, emergent bilingual children in a Head Start program in Arizona. Data from semi-structured interviews, informal conversations, and participant-observation field notes were analyzed using the interrelated concepts of language ideologies and family language policy. The teacher and mothers adhered to ideologies that benefit children’s emergent bilingualism such as expressing pride for the children’s bilingual skills and the view that parents should use Spanish with their children to maintain the children’s bilingualism. However, some of their no- tions were more in line with ideologies of language separation where linguistic labor and in- struction was divided in such a manner that children developed their English skills at school and Spanish abilities at home. The findings highlight the important role of the mothers’ and teacher’s positive and negative lived experiences with language and bilingualism. Keywords: Spanish-speaking, Head Start, language ideologies, mothers, teachers DOI: https://doi.org/10.24974/amae.16.1.462 “There will only be English in Kindergarten” Association of Mexican American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2022, Volume 16, Issue I 82 Spanish-speaking children make up a rapidly growing segment of the American popula- tion (Park, et al., 2018). Nationally more than 20% of preschoolers are exposed to more than one language, and the majority speak Spanish at home (Child Trends, 2018). In Head Start, 28% of children speak a language other than English at home (Barrow & Markman-Pithers, 2016). Of this number, 86% of them live in homes where Spanish is the primary language (Office of Head Start, 2017). These calculations indicate ample growth in the enrollment in early care and edu- cation programs of children who are exposed to multiple languages—mainly Spanish and Eng- lish—throughout the country (Barnett et al., 2016). Supporting children’s multilingualism in the public school system is difficult, even when educators are bilingual, because states such as Arizona (where this study was conducted) have enacted policies that disallow the use of languages other than English for instruction (Butvilofsky & Gumina, 2020). English-only educational policies bolster “hegemonic discourses that the United States is an English-speaking country therefore, English should be the language of instruction” (Garrity & Guerra, 2015, p. 241). Difficulties with supporting multilingualism exist even in states without overt English-only policies. For example, Oregon allows bilingual instruction in its preschools and offers the Oregon Seal of Biliteracy to its students, but in the 2019-2020 schoolyear it served less than 20% of its population of English learners in bilingual or dual language programs (Oregon Department of Education, 2021). Moreover, 22.7% of the state’s English learners are considered long-term English learners and receive English language instruction, supports, and services for more than seven years (Oregon Department of Education, 2021). This is of concern because, “inequities in educational opportunities and outcomes are especially pronounced among students who remain classified as English learners for an extended period” (Sahakyan & Ryan, 2018, p. 1). Across the nation, most emergent bilinguals receive English-only instruction. Perhaps because of the general lack of bilingual educational services and the propensity of serving emergent bilingual students within English- only programs, some language minority parents accept English-only discourses. For instance, Spanish-speaking parents who otherwise actively support their young children’s emergent bilingual development have shared their belief that “children who struggle academically should be placed in English-only classes” (Lee et al., 2015, p. 512). However, research shows teachers and school leaders can play a pivotal role in mediating the effect of English-only ideologies in their schools and support students’ Spanish-English bilingualism (Kilinc & Alvarado, 2021). Cuéllar Association of Mexican American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2022, Volume 16, Issue I 83 In short, Spanish-speaking children are exposed to language ideologies and language practices at home, school, and in society that might be contradictory to each other. It is therefore important to understand the language ideologies of those closely connected to Spanish-speaking children. The research question for the study is: What are the language ideologies that Latino Spanish-speaking, emergent bilingual1 children encounter in their home and preschool environments? Literature Review Research on the language practices of families and teachers of emergent bilingual chil- dren suggests both home and school contexts contribute to children’s overall language devel- opment (Song et al., 2022). Families that value their children’s emergent bilingualism tend to use their home language with their children, read bilingual books with them, and at times even re- quire their children to only speak the home language with family members (Lee, et al., 2015; Song, et al., 2022). Families of emergent bilingual preschoolers report they would like their chil- dren to learn their home language to ensure their children can have promising employment op- portunities and to reinforce familial bonding and cultural attachment to remain close and con- nected (Showstack & Colcher, 2019). Even so, research indicates that at home, preschool chil- dren’s English experiences with bilingual interlocutors tend to be richer and increase in com- plexity when compared to their home language experiences (Song, et al., 2022). Furthermore, parents have noted that children as young as preschool age can begin to perceive English as the more valued language in society and therefore believe children can lack motivation to speak their home language (Sawyer, Manz, & Martin, 2017a). Educators’ language beliefs and teaching practices around the languages of young emer- gent bilinguals vary considerably. Teacher perspectives regarding student language acquisition are complex and correlate to educators’ demographic, geographic, and experiential variables (Bernstein, et al., 2021; Garrity, et al., 2018). For example, preschool teachers’ education level and having studied a language other than English are positive correlates of pro-multilingual be- liefs. However, neither general teaching experience nor experience having a home language other than English has been found to be a significant predictor of pro-multilingual beliefs (Bern- 1 In this paper the term emergent bilingual is used to highlight children’s growing abilities in Spanish and English. “There will only be English in Kindergarten” Association of Mexican American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2022, Volume 16, Issue I 84 stein, et al., 2021). Kilinc & Alvarado (2021) report that the social justice orientation of pre- school teachers in Arizona permitted them to actively attempt to dismantle larger, societal op- pressive beliefs related to language and provide a more equitable bilingual education. Further- more, in a sample of preservice teachers who attended school in California’s English-only con- text—during the enactment of Proposition 227— Latino preservice teachers were found to have more positive attitudes toward multilingual children than their non-Latino peers. Also, multilingual participants were more likely to consider it necessary to maintain a child’s primary language. The authors noted student beliefs about multilingualism tended to align with the fol- lowing finding: students’ perspectives specific to the inclusion of the home langue in the school- ing context, “continues to reflect the hegemony and deficit-thinking” (Garrity, et al., 2018, p. 179) of English-only policies. The literature suggests that teacher beliefs regarding multilingual learners can be in sup- port of children’s bilingual development or serve to undermine it. Results from a study of 425 educators show that although teachers report supporting students’ home language develop- ment, most of them (73%) believe that students should learn English as soon as possible, “even if they lose their ability to speak their native language” (Vázquez-Montilla, et al., 2014, p. 583). Other studies show educators seeking out opportunities to learn their students’ home language and learn information from parents to provide a more optimal education (Sawyer, et al., 2017b). Still, other research has found educators who have discouraged emergent bilingual chil- dren from using their home language (Song, 2016). The literature clearly demonstrates that Spanish-speaking parents value and support their preschool-aged children’s emergent biliteracy. Parents in Spanish-dominant homes believe that children “can learn two languages simultaneously and naturally (Hwang, et al., 2022, p. 1186.) However, even with this belief, which attests to strong affective alignment to the value of multilingualism, Spanish-speaking and other minority families face obstacles when pursuing to raise multilingual children. The obstacles identified by these families are impediments to developing multilingualism, such as the lack of dual language bilingual programs, misinformation about bilingualism, apprehension on the part of mainstream families, and the English monolingual principles that have guided and continue to substantiate practices in early care settings (Jang, 2020; Oliveira, et al., 2020; Showstack & Colcher, 2019). Even in two-way dual language bilingual programs, the lived experiences of Spanish-speaking families are greatly Cuéllar Association of Mexican American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2022, Volume 16, Issue I 85 unknown or misunderstood, and language needs often go unmet (Chaparro, 2020). This study helps to bring what is currently unknown and misunderstood about parent and educator language ideologies into greater understanding and clarity. The beliefs of teachers and parents around how young children use language and emerge and develop into bilingual and multilingual speakers vary considerably, but both parents’ and teachers’ perspectives play a role in children’s trajectory toward multilingualism or monolin- gualism. This study adds specific understanding and clarity to the differences mothers and edu- cators of Spanish-speaking preschoolers have regarding children’s opportunities to acquire one or more languages in school and out of school. Specifically, the study sheds light on the experi- ences of the adults in the lives of emergent bilingual children that help explain ideological com- plexities, tensions, and intentions associated with the language development of young emergent bilingual children. The consequences of not knowing historical language-related events in the lives of teachers and parents can lead to misunderstandings, misinformation, and missed oppor- tunities for teacher-parent collaboration to support children’s multilingualism. Theoretical Framework The theories informing this study are interrelated and include language ideologies (Silverstein, 1979) and family language policy (Fogle & King, 2017). Language ideologies are a set of self-reinforcing beliefs and attitudes about language that justify one’s perspective on language acquisition, language socialization, and language use (Silverstein, 1979). Language ideologies are “constructed from the socio-cultural experience of the speakers” (Kroskrity, 2004, p. 496) and can change with an individual’s lived experience. Language ideologies, however, go beyond the individual and include larger discourses shaping values at a much larger scale such as national levels (Blackledge & Pavlenko, 2002). Throughout the globe, language ideologies are intertwined with issues of power between majority language users and minority language populations (Darder, 2016). Language ideologies “arbitrarily privilege particular linguistic practices while stigmatizing others” (Flores & Rosa, 2015, p. 150), and can negatively affect users of minority languages by breeding discrimination (Andrews, 2013). Language ideologies impact the way people make sense of their language practices and language-based decisions, and in this study, the concept was used to understand the language beliefs and language practices of the teacher in the preschool and of the mothers in the home environment. To further explore the mothers’ language ideologies in the home, this study uses the “There will only be English in Kindergarten” Association of Mexican American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2022, Volume 16, Issue I 86 complimentary notion of family language policy. Family language policy “offers researchers [a framework] to understand and explore the crux of the problem of language practices and ideologies in the family.” (Haque, 2019, p. 226). It is utilized to understand the multilingual development of children by focusing on the family’s language ideologies, language socialization, and language management practices and how these practices are firmly situated in larger ideological and sociocultural realities (Fogle & King, 2017; Purkarthofer, 2017; Smith-Christmas, 2016). Spolsky (2004) suggests three fundamental considerations per family language policy: (a) What are families’ beliefs about language? (b) What are the language practices in the family context? (c) What are some families’ efforts to modify or influence language practices? In order to move the field forward, Hua & Wei (2016) recommend that family language policy studies conducted with transnational families should emphasize individual strategies for dealing with the challenges of multilingualism. Per their observations, challenges faced by multilingual families include how to maintain the home language, how to communicate with family members when some family members don’t share a common language, how to develop a new identity in a new host country, and how to fight against prejudices and stereotypes. Furthermore, they note that when working with trans-national families regarding their use of language(s), “it is important to understand their experiences, histories, imaginations, why they feel the way they feel and why they do things the way they do.” (Hua & Wei, 2016; p. 665). Language ideologies and family language policy are conceptually interconnected. These concepts were used to shed light on the ideological complexities and tensions associated with language development of emergent bilingual children at home and in an English-only preschool program located in a low-income, Latino, immigrant community in Arizona. Methods This article uses data collected from a larger qualitative study focusing on the perceptions of teachers and mothers regarding emergent literacy in Kidtown (pseudonym) a single Head Start preschool center located in Arizona. Kidtown was the ideal location for the study because it has served a primarily Spanish-speaking, immigrant population for more than ten years and because the first 20 minutes of each day are dedicated to “Family Literacy”. What is also relevant about Head Start is that the program is a federally funded initiative envisioned as part of the effort on the “War on Poverty”. Head Start was not only to attend to inequities stemming from socio-economic differences but also to be culturally responsive to the Cuéllar Association of Mexican American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2022, Volume 16, Issue I 87 communities that the program served (Office of Head Start, 2022). Therefore, the federal regulations governing Head Start programs can be said to conflict with the State of Arizona’s English-only educational law. This conflict is a notable power differential between federalism and states’ rights that adds another layer of understanding concerning language ideologies and equity. The data in this paper relate to one research question, namely, what are the language ideologies that Latino Spanish-speaking, emergent bilingual children encounter in their home and preschool? Methods of Data Collection This paper uses data from audio-recorded, semi-structured interviews, informal conver- sations, and field notes from classroom observations that took place twice per week at Kidtown during one school year. The information for this paper comes from the lead teacher and five Mexican-descended, Spanish-speaking mothers of children enrolled in Kidtown. The semi-structured interviews were composed of descriptive questions from the eth- nographic (Spradley, 1979) tradition. Descriptive questions are designed so that participants can do most of the talking while describing their experiences in everyday language. Given Spradley’s typology of descriptive questions, I employed typical grand tour, mini tour, and experience questions. In typical grand tour questions, the participants are asked to describe how events, processes, or interactions usually proceed. Mini-tour questions ask about a specific aspect of an experience that was brought up while answering a grand tour question. Example questions are more specific than mini-tour questions in that they ask the participant to describe specific in- stances of the aspects probed by the mini-tour questions. During the first semi-structured interview, all participants were asked questions about their life histories, upbringing, daily activities, parenting, and their beliefs on emergent literacy during the preschool year. The second interview focused on obtaining more details and specific instances about their beliefs about emergent literacy and their children’s development of English and Spanish. The interviews with the teacher were in English in a conversational tone and took place in the early afternoon at Kidtown after the children were let out. The interviews with the mothers were in Spanish and had a conversational tone. The interviews took place at the chil- dren’s homes in the evening hours and lasted between 45 minutes and 90 minutes. One of the mothers shared that she was at first nervous about the audio recorder, but she eventually for- “There will only be English in Kindergarten” Association of Mexican American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2022, Volume 16, Issue I 88 got it was there. The interviews generated a lot of information, perhaps because this mode of data collection requires one-to-one focused attention. The classroom observations were conducted via participant-observer (Gold, 1958) point-of-view. Participant observers take an active role in the setting they are studying and im- merse themselves in the everyday occurrences of the people they study. I was able to take an active role because when I first introduced the project to the lead teacher, she suggested that I volunteer in her program so that I could witness it all for myself. A few weeks before the start of the year, I officially became a classroom volunteer. I volunteered two days each week. I was present at the start of the day, 8:00 AM, and until the end of the day —12:00 PM. Some parents would drop off their kids and leave quickly but several stayed behind for much of the 20 minutes dedicated to family literacy. It was during Family Literacy Time that I had many informal conversations with the participating mothers. My role in the classroom could be described as a “teacher’s aide”. I was “on the floor” with the children and staff at all times. I was there when the children were dropped-off and picked-up. I played with the children indoors and outdoors. I helped with breakfast and lunch routines. I was present at teacher-parent conferences and at- tended the end-of-year graduation ceremony. Following the recommendation of Emerson, et al., (2001), I wrote the fieldnotes more- or-less contemporaneously with the events they described. A few times, I wrote some field notes in a back room where the lead teacher had a desk and kept her personal items. I did this so that participants did not feel discomfort with my notetaking. I usually wrote handwritten field notes in a small notebook on the same day the events occurred. Stylistically, the field notes were written as realistic tales, (Van Maanen, 2011) mainly describing the concrete details of dai- ly life and routines as well as capturing exact quotes when possible. Participants The participants in the study are five Mexican mothers of the children enrolled in Kidtown and the program’s lead teacher. Of the participating mothers, Carla, Priscilla, Esther and Antonietta (pseudonyms) all speak Spanish as their first language and can read and write in Spanish. Marcela (pseudonym) learned Nahuatl (an indigenous language in Mexico) at home and learned Spanish at school in Mexico, but now she mainly speaks Spanish. Marcela reads and writes in Spanish. Carla finished 12 years of education in Mexico. Esther completed high school in the U.S. Table 1, shows other demographic information. Cuéllar Association of Mexican American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2022, Volume 16, Issue I 89 Table 1. Demographic Information for Participating Mothers Pseudonym Age Language(s) Marital Status Education Attained Marcela 25 Nahuatl, Spanish Married 6th grade Carla 28 Spanish Married 12th grade Priscilla 33 Spanish Married 9th grade Esther 25 Spanish Eng- lish Single High school Antonietta 34 Spanish Married 9th grade Diana (pseudonym) is the lead teacher. She is a 43-year-old, Native American woman with 16 years of teaching experience in the early care and education system. Diana is married to a bilingual, Latino man and they have three children. Though Diana has fond childhood mem- ories of singing songs in Comanche with her grandfather, Diana’s children are English monolin- gual. Diana is partially bilingual in English and Spanish and notes that she has lost all ability to speak Comanche. Her bilingual skills are of note because she possesses the capacity to interact with children in both English and Spanish. She, however, does not feel her Spanish-speaking skills are adequate to have conversations with adults. Researcher Positioning I grew up in California in a predominately Mexican immigrant community during the en- actment of Propositions 187 and 227 and this has influenced the conceptualization of this study. California’s anti-immigrant climate of the 1990s promoted the linguistic and cultural assimilation of minority students like me. Re-experiencing the English-only political climate in Arizona—but this time as a scholar of language and culture—provided me with the impetus to examine the language-based perspectives, ideologies, plans, and practices that can impact the lives of young, Spanish-speaking, emergent bilinguals. Research Setting Kidtown was chosen as the host research site because of its affiliation with Head Start. Head Start underscores the engagement of families in their children’s development. As noted previously, Kidtown was also chosen because it has served almost exclusively Spanish-speaking, “There will only be English in Kindergarten” Association of Mexican American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2022, Volume 16, Issue I 90 emergent bilingual children in immigrant families for more than a decade. Kidtown is an English- only, part-day program that serves17 children, of whom 16 were locally born in nearby towns in Arizona and one child born in Mexico. Fourteen of the children speak Spanish at home, two speak both English and Spanish, and one child is English monolingual. Data Analysis I transcribed the audio files within 3 weeks of the actual interviews. I digitized the hand- written field notes and saved them as dated word files the same week they were created. Based on the study’s theoretical framework, and the research question, I implemented Huber- man & Miles’s (1994) form of data analysis. The data were first analyzed through multiple readings of the digitized files and by apply- ing a set of initial codes. The initial codes were a priori categories based on the academic litera- ture and theoretical framework. As I re-read the electronic files, I became more familiar with the data set and began to add inductive categories that came about from the data itself. Both types of codes were applied to the data repeatedly so patterns amongst the codes became more evident. Lastly, I used triangulation to verify that the codes did indeed present across the entire body of data by cross-referencing themes that emerged from the field notes and the in- terviews. Findings This study examines the language ideologies of one educator and five mothers of Latino, Spanish-speaking, emergent bilinguals in an English-only preschool in Arizona. The findings bring forth new understanding that clarifies and specifies how internal conflict in attitudes, feelings, and behaviors presents among the mothers and teacher regarding children’s bilingualism. What follows are data showing that the participants hold simultaneously, ideologies that sustain the preschooler’s bilingualism, but also share beliefs and practices that promote the separation of the young children’s languages. The findings feature participants’ language-based experiences that contribute to the understanding of complex language ideologies. Ideologies Promoting Bilingualism The mothers in the study and Diana valued the children’s emergent bilingualism. Moth- ers in the study demonstrated pride in their children’s abilities to acquire both languages, main- tained practices for developing their children’s knowledge and use of their home languages, and considered their children’s development of English as important. Diana contributed to the chil- Cuéllar Association of Mexican American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2022, Volume 16, Issue I 91 dren’s emergent bilingualism as well. In the following field note, it is evident that Esther is pleased about her children’s bilin- gualism: When a mom not participating in the study comments to Esther, “Su hija bien que habla inglés, ¿verdad?” [Your daughter speaks English well, doesn’t she?] Esther replied with a smile, “Sí, ella habla los dos idiomas. Mis dos hijos hablan los dos idiomas.” [Yes, she speaks both lan- guages. Both of my children speak both languages.”] During the second interview, I asked Esther about the comment she received regarding her child’s English development, and she explained, Yo valoro que ella y su hermano sean bilingües, pero eso no quiere decir que no me importe el español. Para mí es importante que ella hable español. Pues, nosotros somos de México, y pues no se nos puede olvidar. [I value for her and her brother to be bilingual, but that does not mean that I do not care about Spanish. For me, it is important that she speaks Spanish. Well, we are from Mexico, and, well, we cannot forget that.] From Esther’s explanation, one can surmise she finds her children’s bilingualism com- mendable. However, Esther appears to be conflicted by the compliment that her child speaks English well and consequently highlights her fear her children could forget their Mexican identi- ty if they forget to speak Spanish. Marcela also indicated her support for her children’s bilingualism by talking about her own childhood speaking Nahuatl at home, learning Spanish at school, and by describing her at- tempts to teach her children Nahuatl vocabulary words: Yo aprendí español en la primaria en México. Lo aprendí rápido. En mi casa mis hermanas y yo crecimos con Nahuatl… Cuando yo les hablo a las niñas en Nahuatl, les enseño a decir "perro," "casa" o "tortilla," cositas así para que aprendan quienes son. Cuando hablo con mis hermanas [por teléfono a México] hablo en español. Cuando hablo con mi mamá [por teléfono a México] le hablo en Nahuatl, y ellas (refiriéndose a sus hijas) me escuchan y dicen 'mi mama está hablando a México.' [I learned Spanish in elementary school in Mexico. I learned it quick. In my house my sisters and I grew up speaking Nahuatl… When I talk to the girls in Nahuatl, I “There will only be English in Kindergarten” Association of Mexican American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2022, Volume 16, Issue I 92 teach them how to say "dog," "house" or "tortilla," things of that sort so they can learn who they are. When I talk to my sisters [on the phone in Mexico] I talk in Spanish. When I talk to my mom [on the phone in Mexico] I talk in Nahuatl, and they (referring to her daughters) hear me and they say, 'mom is calling Mexico.'] On a different occasion, Marcela described Spanish as the main language of her home and communicated sadness at the thought that her child might forget how to speak Spanish: Aquí en la casa nosotras hablamos en español, escuchamos la radio en español y vemos la tele en español y todo. Para mí, sería muy triste si a ella (refiriéndose a su hija) se le olvidara su idioma. No me puedo imaginar eso. Sería muy feo. [Here at home, we talk in Spanish, listen to the radio in Spanish, and watch tv in Spanish, and everything. For me, it would be very sad if she (meaning her daugh- ter) forgot her language. I cannot imagine that. It would be awful.] Marcela lives with the internal conflict of wishing that her children will continue to choose to speak Spanish—their first language— as they get older, while at the same time, she herself, mainly speaks her second language (Spanish). The mothers in the study consistently mentioned fear when explaining why they wanted to maintain their home languages. They feared that if their children didn’t speak Spanish, they would miss out on knowing an important part of themselves, such as their heritage or their Mexican identity. The mothers often imagined that if their children lost the ability to communicate in Spanish, it would cause them to feel sad- ness and disappointment. The next excerpt comes from a field note regarding what Priscilla shared with me about the conversation she had with Diana at her 15-minute appointment during her parent-teacher conference. Estoy muy contenta porque dice la maestra que en inglés va muy bien. Yo me siento muy contenta porque pues yo lo que quiero es que hable los dos (refiriéndose a inglés y español).” (I’m very happy because the teacher said that his English is going well. I feel very happy because I want him to speak both (re- ferring to Spanish and English). Although Diana was explicitly only speaking about the English development of Priscilla’s child, it is important to note that Priscilla equated it to feelings of happiness about her desire for her child’s bilingualism. This also happened when Esther responded with pride about her Cuéllar Association of Mexican American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2022, Volume 16, Issue I 93 children’s bilingualism to another mother’s comment that only concerned her child’s English development. This highlights situations where when mothers are given information about only one of their children’s languages, they think about their children’s language development in terms of bilingualism. Esther, Carla, and Marcella shared additional personal, sociocultural experiences related to bilingualism. Esther, the only parent who was English speaking and who graduated high school in the U.S. stated, En el trabajo me toca traducirles a mis compañeros. Yo les digo lo que dice la supervisora. A mi hasta me pagan más porque ayudo a traducir. Yo creo que es muy importante. Así ellos (refiriéndose a sus hijos) también pueden tener un mejor trabajo. [At work I get to translate for my coworkers. I tell them what the supervisor says. I even get paid more because I help to translate. I think it’s very important. That way, they (referring to her children) can also have a better job.] Carla shared, “Yo siempre estoy agradecida cuando voy al doctor y hay quien me ayude con el idioma. Ahorita estoy embarazada y voy mucho al doctor. Me gustaría que mi niño ayude a la comunidad cuando sea grande. [I am always thankful when I’m at the doctor and there is someone to help me with the language. Right now, I’m pregnant and I go to the doctor a lot. I would like for my boy to help the community when he is grown.] Marcella recalled the bilingual support she received when enrolling her child at Kidtown: Yo tuve ayuda cuando inscribí a la niña en la escuela. No sabía cómo llenar la aplicación y toda la información que necesitaba. Ellas me ayudaron a llenar todo en inglés y a recopilar los documentos. Cuando uno no habla el idioma es difícil. Uno no quiere eso para ellos. [I had help when I enrolled her in school. I didn’t know how to fill out the appli- cation, and all the information that I would need. They helped me to fill out the forms in English and to collect the necessary paperwork. When we don’t speak the language [referring to English] it’s difficult. I don’t want that for them] In multiple instances, the mothers mentioned helpful bilingual professionals that guided them and helped them navigate various social systems such as healthcare, education, and immi- gration. The mothers drew on their positive histories with bilingual doctors, nurses, teachers, “There will only be English in Kindergarten” Association of Mexican American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2022, Volume 16, Issue I 94 and lawyers, and those experiences help to explain why they hoped their children become bi- lingual. Diana looked for ways to contribute to the children’s emergent bilingualism. During our first interview, Diana said to me, “I am: a full-blooded Native American, a military baby, a Head Start baby, a preschool teacher, a wife, and a mother of three.” She said it with a tone of voice that conveyed to me this was not the first time she described herself in that way, and with the body posture and a smile that communicated pride. Later in the same conversation, Diana said with a sad look in her eye, “It’s unfortunate that I was not raised to learn either of my parents’ languages.” I believe that Diana searched for ways to contribute to her students’ emergent bi- lingualism in part because she felt conflicted that her students could potentially live through the painful experience—she, herself went through—of not having learned her ancestral languages. One way in which Diana supported the children’s emergent bilingualism was by encour- aging the parents in Kidtown to continue to use Spanish at home with their children. For in- stance, when describing her plans for the next time she would see the parents, Diana said the following: For the next parent meeting, I’m going to bring it up. They (parents) need to count with their children in Spanish at home, otherwise, they (children) are going to lose their language. I could do it here, and I do sometimes, but at school, we teach them all their academics in English, so they are ready for kindergarten… Kindergarten is going to be all in English. On a different occasion, Diana spoke to me about the emotional effects that English- only laws have on parents. She reported that English-only laws frustrate parents and to that she would say, Yes, we know your child should not lose their language As long as you continue it at home, your child is never going to lose it… Give them some more. Here in the school, we can teach them in English how to read and stuff in English and all these things like pronunciation and spelling. You can do that in Spanish. Teach them how to say things, how to pronounce things bet- ter, and the writing of it. Diana knew that many of the parents in the program were relatively new to the U.S. and she was knowledgeable about the families’ frustration with larger, state-wide, hegemonic Cuéllar Association of Mexican American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2022, Volume 16, Issue I 95 English-only ideologies. Diana demonstrated an orientation toward linguistic justice by support- ing the parents in resisting discriminatory, monolingual perspectives and encouraging the preservation of Spanish use and Spanish literacy in the home. Diana’s use of the word “lose” to refer to the possibility that the children might stop developing their home language is likely in- fluenced by her own sense of loss regarding the discriminatory experiences in her own family history and having not been raised to learn her ancestral languages. Diana considered both English and Spanish when conceptualizing language and literacy development at Kidtown. When discussing that topic with me she stated, “I try to discover how many words they know. I don't care what language (meaning English or Spanish). I want to know how many words they can use in a sentence. Is it a two-, three-word sentence? Or can [they] tell an elaborate story that uses more and more words to describe details?” This quote, and many others, where Diana comments that the actual language the children use at Kidtown did not matter, suggests that like the mothers in the study, Diana also demonstrates an ideology that equates the children’s language development with their emergent bilingualism. Ideologies Promoting Language Separation While the mothers in the study and Diana value the children’s bilingualism, some of their beliefs and practices regarding the children’s emergent bilingualism reflected ideologies of language separation (Martínez, et al., 2015). For example, Carla recalled, “El otro día, él (refiriéndose a su hijo) estaba hablando en inglés enfrente de familiares que llegaron de México. Y que lo regaño… Yo me encargo del español aquí, y él que aprenda inglés en la escuela”. [The other day, he (referring to her son) was speaking in English in front of family members that traveled from Mexico. And I scolded him… I take care of the Spanish here and he will learn English at school.] Similarly, during the first interview with Antonietta, where we conversed about her life in the United States, she explained that together, with her husband, she decided that Spanish would be the only language spoken in their home so that their children “no se les olvidara” [would not forget] their language. Antonietta proudly mentioned that in her house they have been able to maintain their “regla del español” [Spanish rule] for many years, even after the older children have learned English. Antonietta has firm ideas about the mixing of English and Spanish: “A mí no me gusta que los combinen (referente al español y al inglés). Eso no está bien”. [I don’t like it when they combine [referring to Spanish and English]. That’s not right.] “There will only be English in Kindergarten” Association of Mexican American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2022, Volume 16, Issue I 96 Moreover, Antonietta shared an anecdote she experienced with her English-dominant nephew that further suggests she believes Spanish should be developed in the home: Fui a la casa de mi hermana, y mi sobrino estaba en el sillón y me di cuenta de que apenas si habla español. Yo trate de hacerle la plática, pero la verdad no me supo contestar. No pudimos hablar. No quiero que les pase eso a mis hijos. Yo pensé que pena que no hablen español en la casa. [I visited my sister, and my nephew was sitting on the couch, and I realized he barely speaks Spanish. I tried to have a conversation with him, but he didn’t how to respond. We couldn’t talk. I don’t want that to happen to my children. I thought what a shame that they don’t speak Spanish at home.] Priscilla’s family made decisions that would support her children’s Spanish language de- velopment. They decided to send the children to Mexico for a few weeks during the summer break for the children to stay with their cousins and further develop their Spanish-speaking skills. The mothers concentrated their efforts on developing Spanish at home without express- ing that the school also help with that effort. From a family language policy perspective, Antonietta’s, Carla’s and Priscilla’s language practices were deliberate and purposeful. By organizing their language-based routines and activi- ties, including child vacations and at home language rules, these mothers managed the language usage in their homes and positively influenced their children’s ability to maintain their Spanish- speaking abilities. Research shows U.S. based Latino families who want to support their chil- dren’s capacity to speak two languages often have a language separation stance where they take full responsibility for teaching their children the home language (Rodriguez, 2015, p. 177). This division of linguistic labor is related to the mothers’ language resources and priorities. The mothers concentrated on developing their children’s abilities to speak Spanish at home because Spanish is the language that the mothers know best. It was helpful that Diana also encouraged the use of Spanish at home. Furthermore, the mothers had a vested interest in their children’s ability to maintain relationships with family members who only speak Spanish. For Diana, her personal involvement in helping the children develop their English skills was a top priority. For instance, this is what she said about conducting home visits during the summer: First, I want to know how much English they have from home. I want to see how Cuéllar Association of Mexican American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2022, Volume 16, Issue I 97 much they are getting from home. I get a good idea at the home visits that we do in the summer. [That’s] when we meet all the children and whoever lives with them, you know Mom, Dad, Grandma, siblings. Diana focused her attention on getting to know the children’s family members and col- lecting information about the children’s exposure to English. Her focus on the children’s English development appeared to be impacted by the enactment of English-only policies: Here in Arizona, I don’t know the logistics, but the children only get English schooling. You know, we have to prepare them here because there will only be English in Kindergarten… In the past, I used to give them a little more time, but now by the middle of the year, I really have to push them to talk to me in Eng- lish. I want to hear that English. I want them to try to talk to me in English. Diana’s explanation about how she has to “push them to talk in English” indicates that she feels pressed for time, and that somehow, she was hoping to speed up the children’s English devel- opment. Her sense of stress and the more focused attention to the children’s English develop- ment is related to supporting and preparing the children for the English-only environment they would face in kindergarten during the following year. Discussion The findings in this study support the idea and understanding that sociocultural and ex- periential variables play a key role in the development of complex language ideologies people espouse and promote (Kroskrity, 2004). What this study adds and extends to this understand- ing is how people come to adopt their language ideologies is also of great importance. Specifi- cally, this study provides more clarity on how social conditions (e.g., English-only policies) and personal experiences with language (e.g., being paid a higher hourly wage for being bilingual) can create internal conflicts (which must be resolved) that impact people’s language ideologies and practices, which ultimately affect children’s language learning. The study data show that Diana works in social conditions constrained by ideological conflicts that must somehow be resolved. For instance, Diana works in a Spanish-dominant community, speaks some Spanish, values bilingualism, and looks to support the development of the children’s home language and English. However, Diana teaches under Arizona’s English-only educational policy, though in a program that is federally funded that seeks to serve families in a culturally and linguistically responsive manner. Furthermore, Diana’s personal experiences as a “There will only be English in Kindergarten” Association of Mexican American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2022, Volume 16, Issue I 98 woman of Native American heritage who regrets not knowing her ancestral languages also im- pact her language ideologies. In the end, Diana complies with the English-only requirements by focusing primarily on teaching the children English in the program. However, her lived experi- ences with linguistic discrimination inspire her to recognize and understand the mothers’ indig- nation and mothers’ fear that the children might lose their home language. Diana supports fami- lies in resisting the English-only educational policy in Arizona by encouraging them to speak and write with their children in Spanish. Given their lived experiences and the racially and linguistically discriminatory social mi- lieu of Arizona, the mothers in the study also experienced internal conflict regarding their chil- dren’s bilingualism. For example, the mothers in the study hope their children would develop bilingual skills, emphasized some of the benefits of bilingualism, and highlighted their personally positive experiences with helpful bilingual professionals. However, the xenophobic, anti-Latino climate of the state of Arizona, and the English-only educational policy, along with the rigorous focus on teaching the children English in the program, likely undermined the mothers’ excite- ment about their children’s English development and bilingual development. This can be seen in the hesitation and fear the mothers expressed that their children would not be inclined to con- tinue to learn and use their home language. Given this complicated and contradicting set of cir- cumstances, the mothers in the study mainly focused on developing their children’s Spanish- speaking abilities in their home through a variety of family language policy practices and deci- sions. Future research should include data collection in the home, as this would provide a more comprehensive perspective. An important proposition to put forth from the findings of this study is that educators and parents are highly constrained when implementing their language ideologies and plans. This requires the need for educators and parents to have open conversations about the children’s language and cultural development that explicitly cover topics such as contradictions in language beliefs, language planning, language and identity, and how to deal with language discrimination. Not having these types of conversations could mean that families don’t know that their chil- dren’s teacher is a language ally and looks to support their children’s multilingualism. Conclusion This article contributes to the knowledge base on language ideologies of mothers and educators of Spanish-speaking, emergent bilingual preschoolers. It demonstrates that in order Cuéllar Association of Mexican American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2022, Volume 16, Issue I 99 to support children’s bilingualism in English-only settings, teachers and parents tend to divide the linguistic labor and therefore children learn English at school and Spanish at home. This divi- sion of labor requires the efforts of educators who may have had personal experiences that give rise to a sense of linguistic social justice as well as the commitment of family members to find ways to implement daily language routines and practices to support the likelihood that their children will become bilingual. The article highlights the ideologies and practices of a teacher and mothers who actively, consistently, and courageously confront and navigate English-only, monolingual ideologies in educational settings to sustain children’s home language and their Eng- lish development. “There will only be English in Kindergarten” Association of Mexican American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2022, Volume 16, Issue I 100 References Andrews, M. (2013). Mexican students’ identities in their language use at a U.S. high school. Bi- lingual Research Journal, 36(1),100–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2013.778920 Barnett, S. W., Friedman-Krauss, A. H., Gomez, R., Horowitz, M., Weisenfeld, G. G., Brown, C. K., & Squires, J. H. (2016). The state of preschool 2015: State preschool yearbook. National Institute for Early Education Research. Barrow, L., & Markman-Pithers, L. (2016). Supporting young English learners in the United States. Future of Children, 26(2),159–183. Bernstein, K. A., Kilinc, S., Troxel Deeg, M., Marley, S. C., Ferrand, K. M., Kelley, M. F. (2021). Language ideologies of Arizona preschool teachers implementing dual language teaching for the first time: pro-multilingual beliefs, practical concerns. International Journal of Bilin- gal Education & Bilingualism, 24(4), 457–480. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2018.1476456 Blackledge, A., & Pavlenko, A. (2002). Introduction. Multilingua, 21,121-140. Butvilofsky, S. A., & Gumina, D. (2020). The possibilities of bilingualism: Perceptions of bilingual learners in Arizona. Bilingual Research Journal, 43(2), 196–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2020.1781295 Chaparro, S. (2020). School, parents, and communities: Leading parallel lives in a two-way im- mersion program. International Multilingual Research Journal, 14(1), 41– 57. doi:10.1080/19313152.2019.1634957 Child Trends. (2018). Racial and ethnic composition of the child population. Retrieved from https://www.childtrends.org/indicators/racial-and-ethnic-composition-of-the-child- population. Darder, A. (2016). Language, ideology, and power: Interrogating restrictive language policies. The International Journal of Diversity in Education, 16(3), 35–43. Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (2001). Participant observation and field notes. In P. Atkinson, A. Coffey, S. Delamont, J. Lofland, & L. Lofland (Eds.), Handbook of Ethnogra- phy. (pp. 352–368). SAGE. Flores, N., & Rosa, J. (2015). Undoing appropriateness: Raciolinguistic ideologies and language diversity in education. Harvard Education Review, 85(2), 149–171. https://doi.org/10.17763/0017-8055.85.2.149 Fogle, L. W., & King, K. A. (2017). Bi-and multilingual family language socialization. In Patricia A. Duff & Stephen May (Eds.), Language socialization, 61–77. Springer. Garrity, S., Aquino-Sterling, C., Van Liew, C., & Day, A. (2018). Beliefs about bilingualism, bilin- gual education, and dual language development of early childhood preservice teachers raised in a Prop 227 environment. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingual- ism, 21(2), 179–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2016.1148113 Garrity, S., & Guerra, A. (2015). A cultural communities approach to understanding Head Start teachers’ beliefs about language use with dual language learners: Implications for prac- tice. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 16(3), 241–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/1463949115600027 Gold, R. (1958). Roles in sociological field observations. Social Forces, 36, 117–223. Haque, S. (2019). Why family language policy is crucial? Case of France with some new perspec- tives. Family Language Policy, 215–231. LINCOM. Cuéllar Association of Mexican American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2022, Volume 16, Issue I 101 Hua, Z., & Wei, L. (2016). Transnational experience, aspiration and family language policy. Jour- nal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development,37(7), 655-666. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2015.1127928 Huberman, M. A., & Miles, M. B. (1994). Data management and analysis methods. In N. K. Den- zin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds., Handbook of qualitative research. (pp. 428–445). SAGE. Hwang, J. K., Mancilla-Martinez, J., Flores, I., & McClain, J. B. (2022). The relationship among home language use, parental beliefs, and Spanish-speaking children’s vocabulary. Interna- tional Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,25(4), 1175–1193. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1747389 Jang, S. (2020). The pluralist language ideology of Korean immigrant mothers and the English- only principle in early childhood education programs. Language and Education, 34(1), 66- 80. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2019.1682598 Kilinc, S., & Alvarado, S. (2021). Two dual language preschool teachers’ critical consciousness of their roles as language policy makers. Bilingual Research Journal, 44(4), 485–503. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2022.2043487 Kroskrity, P. V. (2004). Language ideologies. In A. Duranti (Ed.), A companion to linguistic anthro- pology (pp. 496–517). Blackwell. Lee, M., Shetgiri, R., Barina, A., Tillitski, J., & Flores, G. (2015). Raising bilingual children: A quali- tative study of parental attitudes, beliefs, and intended behaviors. Hispanic Journal of Be- havioral Sciences, 37, 503-521. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739986315602669 Martínez, R. A., Hikida, M., & Durán, L. (2015). Unpacking ideologies of linguistic purism: How dual language teachers make sense of everyday translanguaging. International Multilingual Research Journal, 9, 26–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/19313152.2014.977712 Office of Head Start. (2017). Head Start program facts: Fiscal year 2015. Washington, DC: Ad- ministration for Children and Families. Office of Head Start. (2022). Head Start History. Washington, DC: Administration for Children and Families. https://www.acf.hhs.gov/ohs/about/history-head-start Oliveira, G., Chang-Bacon, C. K., Cho, E., & Baez-Cruz, M. (2020). Parent and teacher percep- tions of a Brazilian Portuguese two-way immersion program. Bilingual Research Jour- nal,43(2), 212-231. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2020.1773961 Oregon Department of Education. (2021). English Learners in Oregon: Annual Report 2019-2020. https://www.oregon.gov/ode/students-and fami- ly/equity/EngLearners/Documents/Oregon%20English%20Learners%20Report%202019- 20%20Final.pdf Park, M., Zong, J., & Batalova, J. (2018). Growing superdiversity among young U.S. dual language learners and its implications. Migration Policy Institute. Purkarthofer, J. (2017). Building expectations: Imagining family language policy and heteroglossic social spaces. International Journal of Bilingualism, 9, 695-712. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006916684921 Rodriguez, V. (2015). Families and educators supporting bilingualism in early childhood. School Community Journal, 25(2), 177–194. Sahakyan, N., & Ryan, S. (2018). Long-term English learners across 15 WIDA states: A research brief (WIDA Research Brief No. RB-2018-1). Madison, WI: WIDA at the Wisconsin Center for Education Research. “There will only be English in Kindergarten” Association of Mexican American Educators (AMAE) Journal © 2022, Volume 16, Issue I 102 Sawyer, B. E., Manz, P. H., & Martin, K. A. (2017a). Supporting preschool dual language learners: Parents’ and teachers’ beliefs about language development and collaboration. Early Child Development and Care, 187, 707-726. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2016.1163548 Sawyer, B. E., Manz, P. H., Martin, K. A., Hammond, T. C., and Garrigan, S. (2017b). Teachers and parents as partners: Developing a community of practice to support Latino pre- school dual language learners. Advances in Early Education and Day Care, 20, 159-186. Showstack, R., & Colcher, D. (2019). Language ideologies, family language policy, and a changing societal context in Kansas. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics,12(2), 455-483. https://doi.org/10.1515/shll-2019-2020 Silverstein, M. (1979). Language structure and linguistic ideology. In R. Clyne (Ed.), Language structure and linguistic ideology (pp. 193–247). Chicago Linguistic Society. Smith-Christmas, C. (2016). Family language policy. Maintaining an endangered language in the home. Palgrave Macmillan. Song, K. (2016). “No one speaks Korean at school!”: Ideological discourses on language in a Korean family. Bilingual Research Journal, 39(1), 4–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2016.1138903 Song, L., Luo, R., & Liang, E. (2022). Dual language development of Chinese 3-and 4-year-olds: Associations with the family context and teachers’ language use. Early Education and De- velopment, 33(2), 219-242. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2020.1865746 Spolsky, B. (2004). Language policy. Cambridge University Press. Spradley, J. (1979). The ethnographic interview. Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Vázquez-Montilla, E., Just, M., & Triscari, R. (2014). Teachers’ dispositions and beliefs about cul- tural and linguistic diversity. Universal Journal of Educational Research,2(8), 577-587. Van Maanen, J. (2011). Tales of the field: On writing ethnography. University of Chicago Press. AMAE Journal Cover Template (General).pdf Cuellar Final Page Proof 111.pdf