Is It Time to End Bilingual Education?
GUESTS: Ron Unz, Delia Pompa, Dan Stein, Christy Haubegger BYLINE: Bobbie Battista HIGHLIGHT: Ron Unz, chairman of English for the Children, and Delia Pompa, executive director of the National Association for Bilingual Education, debate the relative merits of bilingual education and English immersion programs. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, BUCHANAN CAMPAIGN AD) UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you for calling 911. Please listen for your language. For Spanish, press 1. For Korean, press 2... NARRATOR: Do you ever miss English? (END VIDEO CLIP) BOBBIE BATTISTA, HOST: English and immigration: two political issues touching on everything from urban sprawl to education. Do immigrant children need bilingual education or are they better off immersed in the English language? (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They learn Spanish from us at home. (END VIDEO CLIP) BATTISTA: Next month, Arizona voters decide whether to do away with bilingual education. Two years ago, California ended its program, and related or not, there was a rapid improvement in standardized test scores. But do test scores tell the whole story? (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) FRANCISO VERDIN JR., PARENT: I feel it's wrong because my son is, you know, missing the benefit of learning both languages. (END VIDEO CLIP) (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) MAVRA URBINA, SECOND GRADE TEACHER: They can read phonetically, but they still don't have the language development that they need. (END VIDEO CLIP) BATTISTA: Also... (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, NATIONAL POPULATION GROWTH AD) NARRATOR: How do you feel about paving over the amber waves of grain? (END VIDEO CLIP) BATTISTA: Are immigrants to blame for urban sprawl? (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DAN STEIN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, FAIR: What causes population growth? Immigration. (END VIDEO CLIP) BATTISTA: Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. Is bilingual education a necessity or a nicety? We're going to talk about a couple of immigration issues today. First, meet Ron Unz, chairman of English for the Children, an organization that says children should be taught only in English in school. He's the author of Proposition 227, which dismantled bilingual education in California. Also with us is Delia Pompa, executive director of the National Association for Bilingual Education. Welcome to both of you. RON UNZ, CHAIRMAN, ENGLISH FOR THE CHILDREN: Great to be here. BATTISTA: Ron, recent testing results in California would seem to back up your assertion, and one that you made on our show a couple years ago, that immersing kids in English as soon as you possibly can is working in California. How so? UNZ: I certainly agree with that. What the results have shown is that in less than two years after the dismantling of bilingual education, the test scores of over a million immigrant children have risen by an average of 40 percent, and that includes those districts that dragged their heels on implementing the initiative. Those districts that most fully and completely followed English immersion have doubled their immigrant test scores. And I think parents are happy when their children's test scores double in less than two years. BATTISTA: On the other hand, though, other reforms were enacted at the same time. And some critics will say that because you also cut the size of the average classroom in California and the fact that some teachers are teaching basically the answers that are to appear on these tests, that those factors are part of the test scores going up. So how do you know that it's just the immersion program? UNZ: Well, I'm not saying that it's just Proposition 227, but it is interesting that those school districts that didn't follow 227 -- for example, the San Jose Unified School District, which was exempt from 227 because of a court order -- their reading test scores went up two points, while the Oceanside Unified School District, which more strictly followed the initiative, raised their reading test scores by 20 points. Now I think 20 is a lot bigger than two. BATTISTA: Delia, what do you... UNZ: And that's the pattern statewide. BATTISTA: Delia, what do you think of what's happened in California? DELIA POMPA, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR BILINGUAL EDUCATION: Well, I think the opponents of bilingual education have a strong opinion. But we have the facts on our side. For all of the schools in California that are implementing bilingual education, we can find many, many examples of schools that had higher growth rates on their test scores than Oceanside or any of the other schools that Mr. Unz cites. UNZ: That's complete nonsense. She's making up the facts. Let me give you an example. POMPA: Let me -- let me point out. I can name dozens of schools. Mr. Unz, the opponents of bilingual education often single out one school and try to make policy by anecdote. The fact is the studies are not complete on the schools in California. Oceanside, which is the district you cite most often, has not been compared to all the districts in California. And for every anecdote that shows that schools teaching in English immersion only have raised their test scores, we have as many examples, if not more, of bilingual programs that have raised their test scores higher than Oceanside has. UNZ: Why don't I quote the bilingual education supporters? Now the Stanford Department of Education is very strongly pro-bilingual. They established a Web site under Kenji Hakuta, one of the professors there, to debunk the information on Prop 227 and say that it didn't work. They themselves selected about a dozen school districts, some of which were pro-English, some of which kept their bilingual programs, and they followed those districts in the last two years in order to prove that 227 was not working. Now the facts are the average increase in test scores of the worst-performing pro-English district was better than the best- performing pro-bilingual district, and those were districts selected by the supporters of bilingual education. POMPA: They were selected... UNZ: If their own evidence -- why did they select those districts if they're supporters of bilingual education, but it proves exactly the opposite of their case? POMPA: They selected those districts because they were trying to be objective and they selected only a handful of districts. Again, you need to look at the entire picture and you need to look at the facts. UNZ: Well, let's look at one fact. During the 227 campaign, the supporters of bilingual education refused to defend bilingual education in most cases because it really was indefensible. What they argued was that Proposition 227 would be even worse. They claimed if the initiative passed, test scores would plummet. Instead, test scores have risen for over a million immigrant children by an average of 40 percent in less than two years. If you claim that that... (CROSSTALK) POMPA: As you pointed out... BATTISTA: You know what, can I jump in for just a second because I think we're kind of getting all lost here among the numbers. Is it -- obviously, the bilingual program that's being used in the state of Texas, Delia, is working. And there are no plans that I know of at this point to change it in the state of Texas. So I guess what I'm wondering is does it have to be all or one? I mean, if we're approaching this from more of an educational standpoint as opposed to maybe political, might some programs work better than others depending on the students and their -- and the knowledge that they have of English coming into the class, which could run the gamut? POMPA: You're absolutely right. It not only depends on the amount of English students have, it depends on the resources of the school district, it depends on the values of the parents and what they want for their children. Bilingual education isn't a mandatory program. It's one of many approaches, and bilingual education actually encompasses a wide variety of approaches. Texas has implemented what's called a transitional bilingual educational program that begins children in their native language while they're learning English and gradually increases the amount of English as children acquire it. And they've had great success. They have great test scores for Hispanic children, 40 percent of whom are in a bilingual program. BATTISTA: Ron, does it have to be only one way? Yes. UNZ: If I could respond to that. Texas' bilingual program is a colossal failure. All the facts show that it doesn't work in Texas either. Let me give you a few statistics, and these are the official government statistics in Texas: 600,000 immigrant children in Texas have not learned English, and over half of the immigrant children in Texas don't learn English by the fourth grade. They don't learn enough English to even be tested in English. What happens is they're passing the Texas task test, but they're passing it because it's given in Spanish. Over half the children taking the Texas tests are not taking it in English because they haven't learned enough English to even be tested. Now I think if after five years a children -- a child has not learned enough English to even be tested in English, it shows he's not learning English. BATTISTA: Delia, that is a long time. Five years is a long time, isn't it? POMPA: May I say something, though? May I say that we're using fuzzy math here? The 600,000 immigrants Mr. Unz describes in Texas, many of them have just arrived in the last year. So you can't just classify immigrants and say... UNZ: Very few. POMPA: ... immigrants haven't learned English. No, sir, I'm sorry. I worked in Texas. BATTISTA: Well, let me ask you this. Let me ask you this to help us understand. What is the average length of time that it takes a child in Texas to learn English? POMPA: The average length of time it takes children in Texas and in the United States and worldwide is about three years. BATTISTA: And in Texas you're saying it's three years, not five? POMPA: I don't believe it's five years for most children. There's research that says it takes children up to five years, but on average children are in bilingual education programs for about three years. BATTISTA: What's the average length of time, Ron, if they're immersed in English? What's the average length? UNZ: Well under one year. Now here's the whole thing. What Delia Pompa just said is nonsense. All of the bilingual researchers, all of them, claim that it takes five to seven years for a child to learn English. The reason she's not quoting that five to seven year figure is it would make her a laughing stock because everybody knows that's nonsense. So the supporters of bilingual education have thrown aside their own research, which says five to seven years, and they say three years because three years sounds more plausible. POMPA: Let me put... UNZ: The truth is in Texas, it just is taking five years for half the children to learn English. POMPA: I'm afraid, again, you have your facts wrong. I'm not quoting the five to seven years because the bilingual researchers say it can take up to five to seven years, and all our studies have shown that on average children in bilingual educational programs about three years. BATTISTA: What is it that you don't like about the immersion program, Delia? POMPA: The immersion program doesn't work. Children cannot learn a second language well enough to perform academically in one year, and that's what the immersion program that proponents of these initiatives are espousing. What we find is that children need the support of their native language. When the native language is not possible, they need some assistance with native language materials or native language instructional aids. But immersion alone doesn't work. It also doesn't have the benefits of preparing children to live in a global economy. We are the only country among the G-7 countries that don't teach a second language beginning early in the second grade. BATTISTA: Point by point there, I was just curious, because you -- don't they get their native language support, for example, at home? (CROSSTALK) BATTISTA: So if they are just learning English for those five or six that they are in class -- and then I wanted to ask also: If they do have a problem, is -- does the teacher not have the option to use the native language to help out a child in a frustrating situation, for example? POMPA: Two very important questions. At home, children get native language development with their parents in a parental role. Native language instruction can only be provided by a teacher who is trained to provide instruction. In terms of teachers using the native language when necessary, the proposition in California and the proposed proposition in Arizona, makes that very difficult. In fact, the Arizona proposition allows school districts to turn down waivers from parents -- or waivers requesting bilingual without any reason at all. BATTISTA: We will talk more about the Arizona proposition in just a minute. I have to take a break. As we do, please take part in our TALKBACK LIVE "Online Viewer Vote" at cnn.com/talkback. Today's question: Should English be the official language of the United States? We'll be right back. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) BATTISTA: Spanish is the second most commonly spoken language on the planet. Mandarin Chinese is first. English is third. E-mail from Elliot in Florida, who says: "All countries must have common elements to effectively administer laws, conduct business, educate children and unite the people. Language is one such common element." Let me take Freda on the phone from Alaska -- Freda. FREDA: Yes, hi. I wanted to say that it took us exactly -- approximately six to eight months to learn a new language when we immigrated -- father and mother and six children -- from the country of Holland in the '50s. So, no, I disagree that it takes three to five years. In six months, we all spoke a functional English. BATTISTA: Let me -- so you were how old when you came to this country? FREDA: I was 15. BATTISTA: Fifteen. And were you just thrown into an American school system or... FREDA: We were thrown into it, but my father and mother already took responsibility in Holland to teach us a functional kind of English, so that we have some sort of a transition there. And I feel that people do need to take a responsibility to learn the language of the country that you are going to relocate to. BATTISTA: All right, Freda, thanks very much. Ronnie, Arizona voters are getting ready to vote on a similar proposition here coming up in November. Native Americans have entered the fray in that state, saying that it is basically a racist assault on their culture, and that is a, you know, really another way of eradicating their language and their culture. Is that fair? UNZ: Well, not really, because it doesn't even apply to Native Americans, in that American Indian tribes are sovereign nations under federal law. So when the initiative passed in California, there apparently was a legal opinion saying that since federal law supersedes state law, it doesn't apply to Indian schools in California. So since federal law is the same in Arizona, it wouldn't apply there as either. What has actually happened is some of the bilingual activists in Arizona, the supporters of bilingual education are trying to frighten some of the Indian tribes by persuading them it applies to them, when it obviously doesn't. POMPA: Well, I wish it didn't apply to all Native Americans. Unfortunately, most Native Americans in Arizona are not in Indian schools, They're in U.S. public schools. So this law will apply to them. UNZ: It didn't seem to in California. POMPA: Well, Arizona is a different state. And as you know very well, Mr. Unz... UNZ: Federal law is the same law. POMPA: Not in U.S. public schools, if this passes. BATTISTA: Well, what -- what do you think, Delia, is the effect on culture? POMPA: Well, culture is one of the issues. It's not the primary issue. Bilingual education is about preparing children academically. It's about teaching them English. It is about making sure they achieve in all subjects. Culture is an important byproduct. Culture is taught in the home, though. And culture should always be reinforced in the school, no matter whose culture we are talking about. But that's not the primary reason we support bilingual education. UNZ: Well, to be honest... BATTISTA: Go ahead, Ron. UNZ: The primary reason people support bilingual education is because of the dollars. Right now under California -- under Arizona law, schools are paid more money so long as children don't learn English, which is a very perverse incentive structure. In other words, when a child learns English, the school districts lose money. That provides school districts with a strong incentive either to not teach children English or to pretend that they haven't learned English even after they have. And there are numerous cases we are aware of where children have been classified as not knowing English while -- by the time they were in high school and were taking A.P. English. Now, if somebody is taking advanced placement English, I do think they know English. But the schools keep them classified as limited English so they can keep the money flowing. POMPA: I'm very saddened that you would imply that educators would keep children in bilingual education programs for $150 a year, which is all they get extra in Arizona. Educators want children to learn English. Parent wants children to learn English. We have a shortage of bilingual teachers. We have a shortage of the resources we need to offer good bilingual education programs. No good educator would keep a child in bilingual education longer than he needed to be in it. BATTISTA: Let me... UNZ: It's a very perverse incentive structure. And we're talking $20 million a year in Arizona, which is not a totally insignificant amount of money. I'm not saying that people necessarily are badly intentioned. Or they certainly were not when they set up these program 30 years ago. But if you set up a program where schools benefit, where they make more money so long as children are classified as not knowing English, you have to be aware of the consequence you'll end up with. BATTISTA: Let me go to the audience here quickly. POMPA: Let's go back -- let's go back before there was bilingual education in Arizona, and multiply that $20 million by about three or four, which is what it would take for children to repeat a grade if they are not doing well in school. Bilingual education helps keep children stay... UNZ: They are doing very well in -- they are doing very well now that we got rid of it there. POMPA: They are doing very well in California statewide. All children are doing better in California. And we are very pleased with that. And it has nothing to do with not offering bilingual education. BATTISTA: Let me go to Elaine in the audience. ELAINE: I just want to make a comment that I do think that perhaps we are dealing with some fuzzy math again. I'm aware of folks who have moved to other countries with their children, their entire families, and they do very well -- the grade school children, the high school children being immersed immediately into other languages. So I do not believe it takes three to five years. The other thing I would like to say is I wonder if sometimes we get carried away and we think perhaps we are going to lose our culture, our ethnicity if we send our children to this type of a program, and that's not what it's about at all. As Delia has said earlier, that the culture and the ethnicity are taught at home and it's very important that that be continued, and I think sometimes we fear that we are going to lose our ethnicity if we are put in this program. I think most immigrant parents very much want their children taught English in school, and almost all the people involved in our Arizona campaign are either Mexican born or first generation immigrants, because they are the ones who see firsthand how much young immigrant children are suffering by not being taught English in Arizona public schools right now. BATTISTA: I got to... POMPA: All children in Arizona are being taught English in public schools, including those in bilingual education programs, and those children are being taught English from day one. As for parents supporting bilingual education, we have figures that 99 percent of children -- parents whose children were in bilingual education chose to keep those students in bilingual education. BATTISTA: I got to take another quick break here. We'll continue in a moment. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) BATTISTA: Let me take a phone call from Marie in Arizona -- Marie. MARIE: Yes. BATTISTA: You are planning on voting on the proposition coming up next month? MARIE: Yes. BATTISTA: And what do you think about it? MARIE: I am a retired 4th grade teacher who had bilingual children in her classroom, and I feel that we need a combination of both. I feel that children do initially learn the English language when they are immersed in the English classroom. However, it's very superficial, and when they develop or get up into the higher 3rd, 4th, 5th grade social studies and science areas, if they don't have the comprehensive depth that our English language requires -- I mean, there is double and triple meanings for many words in the English language. And I find that children do well in spelling and in math, and in handwriting, and all of those functions, but they need that comprehension, the depth of it. BATTISTA: Why are they not getting that in, say, standard English classes that they are required to take during their academic... MARIE: Because of the meanings of the words. Many times an English word -- they are not aware that an English word has many meanings, and when I taught it in a classroom I would have the mentor or the bilingual teacher that I could send these children to with their social studies and science assignments and then they would help them, and they could speak in Spanish and say to them, well, now, this means this, or do you understand this, and they could help them through this, and so I really feel we need a combination of the two. And I don't think it's one language over another. I mean, I also had a child who spoke only Arabic, and I had children who came from Asia and spoke their native languages, and that was very tough for me because I didn't have a help system. BATTISTA: Marie, thanks very much. Let me get Ron to react to your comments. UNZ: The bilingual education teacher on the phone really provided a lot of good points that I would like to respond to. First of all, the point about children from other countries is a very important one. In California, and to some extent in Arizona, children enter the public schools speaking over 100 different languages, children from all over the world. The only group of immigrant children that receive significant quantities of bilingual education, which allegedly is beneficial, are Spanish-language immigrant children. I don't think it's entirely coincidental that the one group of immigrant children that do the worst in school, with the highest dropout rates and the lowest test scores, and the lowest rate of college admissions, are Spanish-language immigrant children. I think bilingual education hurts rather than helps. And if it's so necessary, why are all the other immigrant children from all over the world doing better than the Hispanic children, even though none of them get bilingual education? BATTISTA: Delia. POMPA: First of all, we don't have evidence that all of the other immigrant children are doing better than Hispanic children. There are a number of factors that are at play when you talk about Hispanic children, beginning with the high poverty rate. There are bilingual programs offered in California for Arabic-speaking children, for Russian-speaking children and the list goes on. In terms of significance, you are absolutely right. There aren't as many bilingual programs for other languages, because 75 percent of the immigrant children in California are Spanish speaking. BATTISTA: I got to let that be a last word here. Let me go to the audience quickly and then we'll take another break --Jane. JANE: But my point was that I think that what we are talking here is about averages -- none of us are average. All of us are individual. And that, yes, there are more Spaniards dropping out because there are more Spanish-speaking people, but we need to take the individual into consideration and with perhaps these mentor programs, or something, some kind of support so that they understand what they are being taught, not just cause to drown. BATTISTA: Ron Unz and Delia Pompa, thank you both very much for joining us today, appreciate your time and your insight. Coming up in just a moment: Are immigrants responsible for overbuilding, traffic jams, and other urban woes? We'll be right back. |