Education Dept.'s Tightening Of Bilingual Regulations Ignites Firestorm of Protest

WASHINGTON—The Education Department, which is tightening procedures in the awarding of grants and contracts for bilingual education programs across the country, has ignited a firestorm of protest among educators who charge it with a “backdoor” attempt to destroy the programs.

Many state officials are convinced that the department, which has been openly critical of bilingual education, is making an effort to shut off $105 million authorized by Congress for programs in hundreds of school districts, state education departments and university-based centers.

Among its management changes, the department is questioning the use of its funds to pay for travel, fringe benefits and training costs of persons who work in bilingual programs. It is also challenging pay scales for consultants.

‘Management Procedures’

“It is incumbent on us, as federal managers, to ensure that federal dollars are spent appropriately,” said Carol Pendas Whitten, director of the federal bilingual program. “What might look to the field like a mass crackdown is management procedures that are coming together at the same time.”

But many state education officials around the country view the management shifts as one more piece in a mosaic of federal opposition to the concept of bilingual education. They fear that the new rules will have the effect of discouraging applications for funds and squeeze the life out of federally assisted bilingual education programs, which now serve 205,000 students.

Bill Honig, California’s superintendent of public instruction, said “the green-eyeshade mentality” will “wreak havoc” on California bilingual programs, which receive about $20 million from the federal government. Fred Tempes, assistant manager for the California Education Department’s Bilingual Education Office, said: “I don’t want to use the word ‘harassment,’ but it borders on that.”

Feeling ‘Pressure’

In the Massachusetts Education Department, Ernest J. Mazzone, director of the Bureau of Transitional Bilingual Education, said he is feeling “pressure” as he renegotiates his state’s bilingual education grant. He called the tightened procedures “very inhibiting.”

And Keith Crosbie, coordinator of the Washington state Education Department’s Bilingual Education and Foreign Languages Office, labeled the relationship between state bilingual education offices and the federal Education Department “a state of war.”

State and local officials say the Education Department’s management campaign fits a pattern that includes Education Secretary William J. Bennett’s assertion that there is “no evidence” that 17 years of federal bilingual programs have been effective.

More English Encouraged

They link the move to Reagan Administration regulations that encourage school districts to use more English in their bilingual programs, an effort that the Administration has also proposed in legislative form.

“First you go in with the big lie, saying bilingual education doesn’t work,” charged James J. Lyons, legislative counsel for the National Assn. for Bilingual Education. “Then you try legislation and lay back quietly. Meanwhile, you dismantle the programs behind the scenes.”

Many school districts are still negotiating with the Education Department for bilingual education grants for the coming school year, and several officials complained that the Education Department is dragging its feet in the negotiations. Nancy Mendoza, Arizona’s bilingual education director, said many small school systems have no staff members available in the summer to pursue the negotiations.

Cite the ‘Irony’

Officials in several states cited the “irony” of tightened federal control by the Reagan Administration, which has vigorously promoted local autonomy in the operation of federally assisted programs.

Leo R. Lopez, director of bilingual education for California schools, said the Education Department’s new restrictions imply “that there will be more direction from the federal government and less flexibility. That seems to be in conflict with local control.”

But Whitten said: “I don’t view good management as federal interference.”

Among the management shifts that have local officials most upset is the restriction on using federal grants for travel. An internal Education Department memorandum says, “Travel costs are not allowed for state or national association conferences, conference fees or training.”

‘Too Much Politicking’

Critics interpret this as an effort to prevent bilingual education advocates from getting together at conferences to voice their disagreements with Education Department philosophy. “They didn’t say it, but I think the reason they’re doing that is they think we do too much politicking,” said Crosbie of Washington.

A bilingual education official in a southwestern state, who asked not to be named, said: “The Education Department has vowed to get rid of the good-guy network.”

Local officials assert that travel is necessary to keep abreast of developments in their field. “We’re not against accountability,” said Mazzone of Massachusetts, “but this program can’t run in a vacuum.”

‘Tighten Monitoring’

Edward J. Fuentes, director of research and evaluation at the Education Department’s bilingual office, replied that the department only wants to ensure “that you’re not traveling to attend (national conferences) or to lobby.” In the past, he insisted, bilingual program officials had “a kind of carte blanche. We want to tighten up our monitoring.”

As for the new restrictions on the hiring of consultants, Fuentes cited two unspecified cases in the Midwest where consultants billed the government and simultaneously worked elsewhere full time.

The battle over the management of bilingual programs has spread to Congress, where Rep. Augustus F. Hawkins (D-Los Angeles), chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, said he is “deeply concerned with the Education Department’s effort to restrict bilingual education programs through the regulatory process and through the award of grants and contracts.”

‘Raise the Issue’

He said anyone seeking a bilingual contract who feels the procurement process is unfair should “raise the issue with the General Accounting Office.”

Thomas G. Clausen, Louisiana’s superintendent of education, has already done just that. He wrote to the GAO to protest procedures under which Louisiana lost a bid to establish a bilingual education center that would have served five states.

An Education Department letter said Louisiana lost the bid because it was “not within the competitive range, price and other factors considered.” But Clausen charged that he had learned that the “sole remaining competitor” for the contract had submitted a bid $50,000 higher than Louisiana’s.

Clausen asked the GAO to “halt the whole procurement process” immediately and “thoroughly investigate the blatant failure to follow established government procedures” on grants and contracts.



Comments are closed.