Historically, Americans have not shown great tolerance of linguistic diversity. The bilingual learners have to knowledge the learning materials, to have literacy skill and to have communication skill in English (Rojas and Reagan, 2003). The authors prove that bilingual education in America has “cut off” the bilingual learners from the “standard curriculum”. The bilingual learners are obstructed in some period before they can understand the learning contents. In addition, bilingual education does not respect the language diversity. They suggest that the first language of bilingual learners should be respected as groundwork for other languages learning. As Brisk (1998) says that inconsistency is happened in bilingual education. The bilingual education is established in private school for the privileged group, but it is not accepted for the language minority education in public school. The bilingual education condition in Indonesia is similar to the Brisk’s opinion. It is accepted in both private and public schools, but it is only available for the smart students. In recent years, Chinese and Japanese are also taught as a second language.Research on bilingual education shows that it has ascertained a failure both on the bilingual education and the research itself. The unsuccessful bilingual education is demonstrated They find that native learners who do not learn second language are better than bilingual learners. Despite of the research imperfection, the authors find some good indicators to improve the bilingual education, such as combination between language development with learning content development and maintenance of content development using student’s native language. Moreover, they explain that the essence of the bilingual education debate is related to the ideological and political matters, but it does not give suggestion to improve the academic side of bilingual education.