The Bilingual Schooling Battle Flares Anew

Nearly four years after voters overwhelmingly approved an initiative to effectively end bilingual education in California, forces on both sides of the issue are at war with the state over how the law should be applied in classrooms.

Ron Unz, author of Proposition 227, accuses the State Board of Education of trying to nullify his initiative. The board is weighing new regulations that Unz claims would funnel hundreds of thousands of immigrant children back into bilingual classes.

Bilingual advocates, meanwhile, charge that those same regulations do not go far enough to protect the rights of immigrant parents who want schools to make exceptions for their children.

The pro-bilingual forces have taken their case to the state’s most powerful Latino legislators, one of whom is preparing a bill that would protect parents’ ability to choose bilingual education. These programs have been largely dismantled but still exist on a small scale.

Unz, a Silicon Valley entrepreneur, has mounted a one-man media blitz, issuing news releases and calling reporters coast to coast to get his point across.

Proposition 227 opponents are trying to “completely restore the system of bilingual education in California,” said Unz, who backed a similar measure that passed in Arizona nearly 18 months ago and is now mounting campaigns in Massachusetts and Colorado.

Proposition 227 was supposed to settle the bilingual issue in California once and for all. But the rancor that has simmered for years flared in recent months. It is expected to rise again today at a state Assembly hearing on bilingual education.

“It’s a very emotional issue,” said John Mockler, executive director of the State Board of Education. “Our job is make sure the law works as it is written. It’s been difficult because people have strong feelings.”

The renewed debate could spell political peril for Gov. Gray Davis as he seeks reelection. Davis opposed Proposition 227 but has vowed to enforce it. The leading Republican challenger, former Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan, endorsed the initiative and contributed money to the Proposition 227 campaign.

Riordan has not yet made an issue of the bilingual controversy. But Unz and others are publicly questioning whether Davis’ appointees on the State Board of Education are trying to unravel the law at the governor’s behest--an accusation strongly denied by the Davis administration.

“The governor is certainly not trying to undermine the spirit of 227,” said spokeswoman Hilary McLean.

In broad terms, Proposition 227 requires all California schoolchildren to be taught in English. The measure also makes bilingual programs available if parents apply for waivers, or exceptions to the law, at their children’s schools. Most parents have opted for English instruction: just 12% of the state’s 1.5-million students remain in bilingual programs.

Many say the current debate stems from vague language in the law. Like many laws, it requires clarification through elaborate regulations. An initial set of rules was adopted after the law passed; now those rules are being revised and consolidated with other rules relating to immigrant students.

Unz and bilingual advocates agree on one thing: the new regulations are wrongheaded. Both sides fear the rules would inappropriately give teachers and administrators the authority to decide who receives bilingual education.

From there, they part ways. Unz says Proposition 227 clearly gives the final say to parents. But the regulations, as written, would allow school officials to subvert the initiative by giving them the authority to refer large numbers of students into bilingual classes, he says.

Bilingual advocates have the opposite concern--that school officials will use the regulations to block children’s access to bilingual classes. They want the rules revised to enhance parents’ choices of bilingual programs, customized to their children’s needs.

The advocates have long contended that schools either ignore parents’ wishes or fail to adequately inform them of their options--a contention that was supported by a recent independent analysis by the American Institutes for Research in Palo Alto.

The report, ordered by state law, found that parents were often unaware of their right to choose bilingual programs and that their options were often unclear.

“Our fear is that these regulations will be used by districts to deny parents the right to place their child in an alternative program,” said Mary Hernandez, a staff attorney with the group Multicultural Education, Training and Advocacy, which has helped organize parent protests at state school board meetings.

State Board Is Caught in Middle

Privately, state officials criticize the advocates’ demands, saying bilingual programs customized to individual students would bankrupt school districts.

“There’s no way we are going to allow that,” said one state board member, who asked not to be named for fear of reprisals. “It would break the system.”

Assailed from both sides, members of the California school board say they are merely trying to clarify the law and ensure parents’ rights are protected. “I’m confident that the regulations are legal and appropriate under Proposition 227,” board President Reed Hastings said.

Disputes have broken out on other fronts as well--over everything from the types of books to the tests that should be used for these students.

Both sides in the debate say their positions have been vindicated by the experience of the last four years.

Although the state has yet to thoroughly analyze test scores, Unz says his own calculations based on Stanford 9 tests show large gains among English-language learners.

Bilingual advocates say the gap between these children and fluent English speakers has in fact widened.

Even as bilingual-education advocates haggle with the school board, they also have pressed their case with Sacramento’s Latino power brokers.

Hernandez and others in the bilingual coalition have gained the support of state Sen. Richard Polanco (D-Los Angeles), chairman of the Latino Legislative Caucus.

Polanco shares parents’ concerns over the proposed regulations and has protested to the state school board. Separately, he has ignited debate with plans to introduce legislation that would require “appropriate instruction, curriculum and materials” for students with limited English skills.

Critics Upset by Wording of Bill

“The instruction shall be understandable to the pupil and shall be integrated into the regular school day,” a summary of the bill says.

That, critics say, constitutes a return to bilingual education.

“[Advocates] want separate teachers, separate books, separate classrooms,” said one state board member, who also asked to remain anonymous for fear of angering Latino lawmakers. “It fundamentally confuses my sense of justice and civil rights.”

Polanco says he is not trying to skirt Proposition 227, but to ensure that immigrant children get the opportunities they deserve.

“We think this is good, sound public policy,” he said of his pending bill. “Our interest is to teach kids to master the English language.”