Bennett Wants More ‘Flexible’ Bilingual Aid

Education Secretary William J. Bennett, saying there is “no evidence” that children have benefited from federal bilingual education programs, will urge today that states be allowed to teach more bilingual classes in English, instead of in students’ native languages.

In a speech scheduled for delivery in New York, Bennett--in his most comprehensive statement to date on the issue--will announce his intention to seek regulatory and administrative changes that would allow states more “flexibility” in the use of the $139 million in U.S. bilingual aid.

Current regulations, worked out last year in Congress, allow only 4% of such aid to be used in programs not taught in students’ native languages, but Bennett wants all of the budget to be available for “alternatives” to the native-language programs, such as “submersion” in English.

Programs ‘Confused’

Over the years, the text of Bennett’s speech says, government programs “gradually became confused as to purpose and overbearing as to means.” As a result, “too many children have failed to become fluent in English.”

In his speech, to be delivered to the Assn. for a Better New York, the secretary details the 17-year history of the federal role in bilingual education, citing the “intrusiveness” and “heavy-handedness” of federal regulations. He also declares his belief that local authorities are best able to determine how to serve their non-English-speaking students.

A copy of the secretary’s speech was obtained from sources outside the Education Department.

Bennett, like other Education Department officials, has repeatedly said he wants to give local districts more “flexibility” in the way they use their shares of the federal bilingual education budget.

The latest proposal drew immediate fire from major Latino and bilingual education groups. John D. Trasvina, legislative attorney for the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, said: “Flexibility is just another code word for abandoning the federal responsibility for teaching children.”

Similarly, Lori Orum, senior education policy analyst for La Raza, a Washington-based Latino advocacy group, said: “Jell-O is flexible. You need enough structure so that a program meets its goals.”

And California Rep. Augustus F. Hawkins (D-Los Angeles), chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, said: “I certainly hope that the education secretary will not attempt to gut the bilingual education laws through (changes in) regulations. I would expect the secretary to respect the law, or the Congress will be forced to pursue every legal avenue available to us.”

‘Alternative Programs’

A congressional aide knowledgeable about education issues called the secretary’s proposal for regulatory and administrative changes “their way of getting what they couldn’t achieve in Congress.”

Last year the Administration had sought to permit states to allow all of the bilingual budget to be used for “alternative programs” but, in the face of strong opposition, a compromise calling for the 4% figure was worked out in Congress.

Officials at the Education Department said they will try to “clarify” to local districts that “even under current law,” they have more discretion than some have used to determine the extent to which they use native languages.

In Orange County, bilingual education has been a subject of dispute for years, especially in the Santa Ana school system, where 69% of the students are Latino. In 1982, for example, the state withheld $2.3 million from the Santa Ana Unified School District for three months because state officials contended the district had not fully complied with the state’s bilingual-education law.

Santa Ana school officials have frequently criticized the law for its rigidity, and on Wednesday night that criticism was renewed by Joan Wilkinson, president of the school board.

“We will always have a crisis with the program,” she said, “because the state law that implements bilingual education is inflexible.” She said that getting qualified teachers for the program in Santa Ana has been a continuing problem.

Carolina Tercero, president of the Orange County chapter of the Assn. of Mexican-American Educators, agreed that finding qualified teachers was crucial.

“We need more bilingual teachers to aid in the increased number of limited-English-speaking students,” said Tercero, a fifth-grade bilingual teacher in Santa Ana. She said teachers who do not speak Spanish very well and who are poorly trained for bilingual education are part of the reason the program has not fared as well as it should.

“I think it needs to be improved, but . . . philosophically I believe in bilingual education. I know it works.”

In Los Angeles, Bill Rivera, spokesman for the city’s school system, said the district welcomes more flexibility in the use of its $550,000 a year in federal bilingual funds, “but we’re also governed by state regulations that are very specific.”

Other Districts’ Agreements

Hundreds of school districts around the country have worked out agreements with government officials to teach bilingual education as their immigrant populations grew steadily. It is unclear how the Education Department’s proposed changes would affect those agreements, which mandate that when a certain number of students speak a given language, they must be taught by a teacher who also speaks that language.

In addition to the submersion program, in which students are taught all subjects solely in English, Education Department officials mentioned these alternatives to current programs:

--Immersion, in which a little of the student’s native language is used to clarify instruction in English.

--English as a second language, a combination of submersion and extra instruction in English, sometimes using the student’s second language.