School Is Top Issue for 2 Immigrant Groups

Salvadoran and Guatemalan immigrants in Los Angeles believe inadequate schools are their children’s most pressing problem and fault the quality and effectiveness of instruction in English, which they view as critical for assimilation to American life, according to authors of a study released Wednesday by two leading Latino institutes.

And, in a response that echoed the overwhelming Latino support that secured passage of the Proposition BB school bond initiative a year ago, the immigrants said they are willing to pay higher taxes to improve the services they need, according to the study, which was billed as the most detailed portrait yet of the emerging Salvadoran and Guatemalan communities in Los Angeles County.

Concern over schools was cited at the top of the list of issues facing children by 24.3% of Guatemalans and 24% of Salvadorans, followed by language difficulties and poverty for Guatemalans and poverty and immigration status by Salvadoran respondents.

English-language education got high marks--18% described it as excellent--from those who applauded the quality of adult education available in the county and low marks--23% called it fair to poor--from those concerned about children’s schools, leading the study’s authors to link the two, said one of the study authors, Harry Pachon.

“There is a frustration among Latinos on the teaching of English,” said Pachon, president of the Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, which conducted the study with the National Assn. of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials Educational Fund. “Our repeated surveys show English and language acquisition are what they see as most important to success in this country.

“That frustration, that their kids are not learning English fast enough, is manifest,” Pachon said.

The study’s authors cautioned against drawing any quick conclusions about the study at a time when bilingual education is the subject of a polarizing debate that will go to the ballot in June. The study began before the ballot proposal, and parents were not asked about bilingual education.

But even study authors were divided over whether the findings highlighted parental criticism of bilingual education programs or the school system in general.

“It does not constitute a vote of no confidence for bilingual ed,” Pachon said. “Some of these children are doing poorly in reading, but no one is suggesting that we eliminate reading programs. This is an overall frustration.”

But Louis DeSipio, who managed the survey component of the three-part study, believes that the study stumbled across what respondents perceive as a flaw in bilingual education.

“Parents are concerned often in bilingual programs that the English component of the program does not keep kids up with their native-speaking peers,” said DeSipio, an assistant professor of political science at the University of Illinois. “Even at the end of a four-year transition, the kids can’t keep up in their subject matters in English. These parents are saying that there’s a component of bilingual ed that’s not working at some level.”

*

But that doesn’t mean parents want to scrap it, others at the news conference said.

“Parents support bilingual education,” said Angela Sambrano, the executive director of the Central American Resource Center, who wore a button saying “No on 227,” the proposition that seeks to replace bilingual education in its current form with a one-year immersion transition to English. “What they would like to see happen is to improve the transition from monolingual Spanish to English.”

The study did underline a deep involvement in issues of their children’s education and concerns over the school system that mirror those of other American parents.

Respondents reported high membership in the PTA--29.5% for Guatemalan parents and 22.5% for Salvadorans.

And though median salaries are relatively low--a quarter of respondents earn less than $9,999 and only a tiny percentage earn more than $19,999--the Salvadorans and Guatemalans said they were willing to pay higher taxes to improve the delivery of services.

That was not a complete surprise. In April 1997, Latino voters voted 82% in favor of the Proposition BB school bond initiative, compared with 76% of black voters and 67% of whites.

Male respondents were more supportive of higher taxes than women, with Salvadoran men the most affirmative, at 75%. Support among female respondents hovered around 50%, the study said.

“There’s always been this tendency to say certain Latino cultures don’t value education, but all the data contradict that,” Pachon said. “In this politicized environment, their frustration will be seen as an indictment of bilingual ed, but it is really overall frustration with the entire school system.”

The study interviewed Salvadorans and Guatemalans in Los Angeles and Dominicans and Colombians in New York in an effort to give greater consideration to leading Latino groups whose needs are often overlooked by studies that focus on the historical Latino majorities: Mexicans in Los Angeles, Cubans in Miami and Puerto Ricans in New York.

In the segment released Wednesday, schools topped the list of most important services for Salvadorans (34.7%) and Guatemalans (30.1%), followed by health care, whose use ranged from 15.4% by the Guatemalans to 19.2% by Salvadorans. Three out of four Salvadorans and Guatemalans said they used public transportation.

*

The 1990 census showed 120,000 Guatemalans and 250,000 Salvadorans in Los Angeles County. Those populations are relatively young, which helps explain the respondents’ emphasis on education. Only 18% of non-Latino whites are under 18, Pachon said, compared with 29% of Salvadorans and 28% of Guatemalans. Currently, 64% of Salvadorans and Guatemalans 18 to 24 have not completed high school.

“We’re looking at the future work force and the future consumer, a minimum of 300,000 to 400,000 people,” Pachon said.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Top Issues

Salvadoran and Guatemalan immigrants in Los Angeles named inadequate schools as the mostpressing problem facing their children.

*

Guatemalans

Inadequate schools: 25%

Language problems: 12.5%

Poverty: 8%

*

Salvadorans

Inadequate schools: 24%

Poverty: 8.8%

Immigration status: 8.5%

Sources: NALEO Educational Fund, Tomas Rivera Policy Institue.