Learn a lesson from California
Priscilla Gutierrez
Recently, Colorado's Rep. Tom Tancredo and Linda Chavez announced that they would attempt to place an initiative on the November ballot which would dismantle bilingual education in Colorado, citing the dramatic gains made by students placed in English immersion within the Oceanside City School District. Following the lead of Ron Unz, co-author of California's Prop 227, both insist that a student need only one year of 'English immersion' to be mainstreamed into a regular English classroom. Sounds pretty promising, doesn't it? Except when you dig a bit deeper than Tancredo and Chavez would like, things don't quite add up to what they claim. Having been an educator in California for 15 years at both the elementary level as well as at the university level, and then having moved here from California for a job as a literacy specialist, I have a good perspective of what the educational scene is in both states. I can tell you that Colorado leaves California behind in the proverbial dust on the education front. Colorado's state standards are a vast improvement over California's; our school libraries put California's to shame; and even the CSAP is a better assessment tool than the SAT-9 test that California adopted. If all that weren't enough, our students score at a higher level in reading, math, and writing statewide (California doesn't even test writing). English immersion in California requires no specialized training in dealing with diverse populations - the sole requirement listed on Prop 227 is a 'good working knowledge of English.' Hmmm, that's like saying my profoundly deaf son's teacher need only have a good working knowledge of English without any additional training in sign language. Proponents of English immersion insist that 6- and 7-year olds need only a year to master English. When I recall my experiences in high school learning a second language, even after three years of intensive study I still had not mastered Spanish. How can we expect a 6- or 7-year old to accomplish what we ourselves as young adults could not? The test scores that have become the 'poster child' for the English immersion movement in California were taken from one city, Oceanside. While Oceanside's scores for second-language learners may be up, it hardly qualifies as a representative district for English language learners. Oceanside is an affluent suburb of San Diego - hardly your typical inner-city district serving large numbers of second-language learners. Neighboring Vista School District, which maintains a bilingual program at parents' requests, outscored Oceanside on the SAT-9 at every grade level. Rep. Tancredo and Linda Chavez would like us to ignore the fact that the purpose of bilingual education is to give students better access to English. Still another factor regarding Oceanside's success is the amount of time teachers in California are expected to devote to SAT-9 preparation. This is in spite of the fact that the California Education Code specifically prohibits any such preparation. In the school district I worked in, test practice booklets were purchased for every grade level and we were expected to spend several hours a week getting students ready to take the SAT-9 so our test scores would improve. The irony here is that the SAT-9 does not align with California's state standards, nor with framework of the state curriculum. I have heard from colleagues in California how the high-stakes testing atmosphere there has intruded on teaching kids how to become proficient readers and writers because so much time is being devoted to test-taking skills. When Unz was attempting to get Prop 227 passed in California, he cited the low statewide redesignation rate as an indicator of bilingual education's failure. The redesignation rate indicates how many students have been changed from a limited-English status to a fluent-English status. Since the statewide rate was 6.7 percent, Unz reasoned that bilingual education had a 93 percent failure rate. An examination of redesignation rates since the implementation of Prop 227 shows that the rate has gone up marginally, to only 7.6 percent. Given Unz's example, it would seem then that English immersion is suffering from a 95 percent failure rate. Finally, there is the issue of local control. Even prior to the passage of Prop 227, local control was non-existent in California. The state government is running the show for the thousands of school districts there, regardless of what individual communities need or want. Legislative mandates have become more and more restrictive - even with regard to which reading books kids are allowed to be taught from.If Tancredo and Chavez have their way, their English-only initiative will amend the Colorado Constitution to virtually eliminate local control and parental choice in education programs. Is that what Coloradans want? I suggest Colorado learn a lesson from California's mistakes and show both Tancredo and Chavez that you are considerably smarter than they take you for and not allow the initiative on the ballot. Priscilla Shannon Gutierrez is a literacy coach for the Boulder Valley School District. |