Gov. William Weld is to be commended for a renewed attempt to overhaul bilingual education. We do hope the Legislature will take a serious look at what’s wrong and what needs to be done, and not be intimidated into inaction again by empire-building advocacy groups.

State law mandates that students whose native language is not English be taught the regular subjects – history, math, and so forth – in the native language while they learn English. This “transitional” method is supposed to keep them from losing ground academically while they make the transition to the new language.

But it often acts as an unneeded crutch. There is a three-year time limit on this “transitional” instruction, but it hasn’t been enforced. One pupil in five stays in the program longer than three years.

There is no excuse for perpetuating separatism like this. Children are natural pickers-up of languages. No European country understakes bilingual education for more than one year. There’s no need to.

Professor Christine Rossell of Boston University has shown that this “transitional” method yields no better results than the “English immersion” method, where instruction is in English. The great majority of immigrant parents want their children to learn English and taught in regular classes as soon as possible.

The governor’s proposal last week provides for a state takeover of schools that don’t move children out of bilingual instruction in three years. Such a drastic penalty may not be the best initial incentive. Loss of a healthy chunk of state financial aid ought to be tried first, with takeovers held in reserve.

The problem is bigger than uncertainty over the appropriate deadline. The Legislature ought to start over from square one in light of Professor Rossell’s findings two years ago, and put an end to the current scandal of bilingual education.



Comments are closed.