Prop. 203: Attack on our Apache language
Bilingualism is positive, desirable, and common ability in most of the world but in America the ability to speak more that one language is seen by some as an obstacle if the other language is Spanish or a Native American language. Instead, the opposite is truer-speaking only English is also an obstacle and the ability to speak more than one language is a true asset. There are some of us on this reservation who are from Apache and other backgrounds and are bilingual or trilingual in Apache, Spanish, English, Navajo, Hopi, etc. Therefore, those who oppose bilingual education seem to exhibit discriminatory and even racist behavior because only certain languages are valued over others. The current anti-bilingual education rhetoric in the media and polls taken in Arizona, seems to indicate that Proposition 203 is going to pass as a law in this state. Proposition 203, also known as an "English-Only" initiative or anti-bilingual education referendum, has several requirements to eliminate bilingual education with a one-year English immersion program. A 1997 pilot study on this reservation concluded that there is very little bilingual education going on in our schools. Instead of eliminating any such programming locally, we should be expanding and developing better approaches to bilingual/bicultural education for our Apache students. A dual-language approach would be a great method and goal for our schools. >From an Apache perspective, bilingual education does not mean assimilating as rapidly as possible into the dominant society by learning and speaking English. Nor does it mean eliminating one language (Apache) as a "handicap" to learn another (English)that seems "superior." To some of us, bilingual education means having the availability of Apache language teaching in our local schools so that our schools (which have an approximate average of 99% Apache student enrollment) will be one avenue for them to learn their mother tongue. Some parents might not wish to have their children learn Apache while there are those (majority according to recent surveys) who wish otherwise. This choice would be eliminated with passage of Prop. 203. Waivers are mentioned but if funds are also eliminated, there will actually be no "choice." Funding, staffing, and other resources would also be cut back or eliminated. There are also those who would argue that English is necessary for Apache children to make it in today's society economically, socially, politically, etc. Those of us who are advocates for retaining and maintaining our Apache language are not disputing that or against English, but are pro-bilingualism and pro-Apache language. Our language is our identity. We wish for our children and grandchildren to be fluent in both and we know it is possible for them to survive in this world we live in as an English-and Apache-speaking individual. Many of us have this advantage already but want it for our children. Our children who balk at learning Apache will learn that it is important when they mature. They will then thank you for teaching them. Some educators and researchers have stated that the learning of students' native language belongs in the home (through parents and other relatives) and not school. That is not a very valid argument in today's "rat race" world even on or reservation. Many young couples both work or do not speak Apache, and most children do not live with other relatives (grandparents, aunts, uncles) who are available readily to teach them Apache or one parent might be non-Apache. Families are scattered in various housing areas unlike earlier in the twentieth century when Apache families lived in extended family households ("lik'ii da bigot'ah") within walking distance. Therefore, in contemporary times, school, where the majority of our Apache children spend a lot of their time, should be one of the places where they can learn the local language and cultural knowledge. Some local administrators and educators have been heard to state that school is, and should be, about three "R's. To some of us who suffered through long years of public schooling without seeing anything about our local Apache language and culture in our curriculum, this seems like just "business as usual." In fact, at a recent conference in Tucson by educators, bilingual education and university personnel, one of the conclusions was that if Prop. 203 becomes law, successful bilingual education practices in schools would be eliminated and, instead, education would go backward to times when children of the same grade such as fourth grade would be divided into classrooms labeled: 4A (for "brighter" students), 4B (for average students), and 4C (for below average or "slow" learners). In off-reservation schools, the "C" -levels were where the Spanish-, Navajo-, or Apache-speaking children were placed. In our reservation public schools, as many of us recall, most Apache-language speakers were often placed in the lowest level even though they were often as intelligent as others but spoke English with a accent or used "Apache-ized" English. The truth is that Apaches are not slow learners or unintelligent as students, it is more the negative socio-economic factors that play into their overall lives that also create an inability to acquire a meaningful and successful education. Many of our Apache students, even if they are speaking only English, are not, do well in school because of the bigger picture of historical inequalities of the last hundred years. This cannot readily be "erased." This is the same reason why some of us oppose the new AIMS (Arizona Instrument to Measure Standards) testing required for our public school students because they do not start from a level playing field with dominant societal students and should be judged on the same standards. The solutions for the successful education of our Apache students is a complexity of issues. Actively opposing negatives such as Proposition 203 that seem racist and anti-indigenous language, is one solution. One of the most important issues facing us as Apaches is the loss of our language and cultural knowledge. If we do nothing to reverse trends of shift to English especially among our younger generation, our language, cultural values, knowledge, and identity as White Mountain Apaches will be one in the next fifty years. Are we going to allow further devaluation of our language and culture by outsiders who are monolingual in English and believe their language is superior and more worthy? Resolution No. 08-2000-249, (August 9, 2000) by the White Mountain Apache Tribe strongly oppose Proposition 203. Some of the wording states: "...the ideological attacks on bilingual education, as proposed by Prop. 203, are essentially attacks on the Apache language and the freedom of choice of Apache children and parents...". English-Only laws in our state and at the national level are unacceptable and should be seen as attacks on our indigenous languages, cultures, and societies. Therefore, as stake-holders we will continue to advocate for, and support bilingual/bicultural education programming in our local schools. One of the ways to do this is to register to vote by the deadline of October 9, and then vote in the Arizona General Election on November 7. The Apache Voice needs to be heard. VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 203!! |