Readers React: Bringing back bilingual education

It’s about time we reconsider the research that tells us that a transitional bilingual program leads to fluency in two languages. (“Is bilingual education worth bringing back?,” Editorial, June 5)

Let’s not fall into the trap of testing a subject in English that has been taught in the primary language. Let’s not expect a child to be truly bilingual before five or six years of instruction. It’s a gradual process. Let’s find “top-notch programs with outstanding teachers.”

Everyone needs a chance to succeed academically. It’s possible. It will be good for all students, and for the future of Los Angeles.

Frances Goldstein


Sherman Oaks

The writer is a retired L.A. Unified School District bilingual education teacher.

SB 1174 by state Sen. Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens) to allow for the return of bilingual education is a horrible idea.

In 1998, Proposition 227 passed easily, not because a bunch of xenophobes were behind it but because leaders in non-English-speaking communities supported it. They understood that to be successful, you had to know English.


Teaching a second language to all students is a great idea. This should start in the early grades, but non-English speakers should not be given credit for studying English or the language they already know.

All other instruction must be in English if our children are to have the skills they will need to succeed in a more competitive world.

Chris Daly


A cure for the common opinion

Get thought-provoking perspectives with our weekly newsletter.

You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.