Schools Begin to Implement 227

* “With Gestures, but Not Chaos, Prop. 227 Begins” (Aug. 4) failed to mention how the observed English language learning classrooms were formed. The classrooms mentioned include both fluent and limited English speakers. That is not what Prop. 227 calls for. These students’ parents could not have chosen the best program for their children because districts have not had time to inform them of their choices. Therefore, many parents are not necessarily aware of their option for bilingual education. But then, why offer a waiver if it’s almost impossible to obtain?

Many parents are in the process of obtaining permanent residency. Though not illegal, they don’t want to ruffle any feathers for fear of jeopardizing the possibility of later becoming American citizens. To them, under 227, asking for bilingual education is like going against the law.

ANA-MARIA GREENE

Garden Grove

*

Now that Prop. 227 is being implemented in California schools, a couple of facts about the former bilingual program have surfaced.

L.A. teachers were not assisting their students in their native languages so they could learn their lessons in English. The curriculum was done in the students’ native language until grade five, making the program monolingual and not bilingual. It is no wonder children of non-English-speaking families were having little success in higher education. They hadn’t learned English well enough by the fifth grade to succeed in higher education.

The new programs require the teachers to aid children in their native languages so they can teach the lessons in English. This is a bilingual education! It is not the total-immersion-into-English concept, as its opponents would have us believe. So I question their motives--why did you want to limit the education of our most precious resource, the children?

ELIZABETH MARY ROBERTS

Lakewood