Prop. 227 aims to sink children’s hopes

Monday, May 11, 1998

Prop. 227 aims to sink children’s hopes

EDUCATION: Initiative

a reaction to frustrations of poorly funded system

By Graciela "Liz" Geyer

Proposition 227, the so-called "English for the Children"
initiative on the June ballot, is not an initiative that seeks to
rectify or improve a "failing" education system; it is an
initiative aimed at feeding on the public’s fears and frustrations
of a severely underfunded public education system. This initiative
is not for the children; it is for the politicians who hope to make
political gains with its passage.

Ron Unz, who wrote the initiative, is not an educator, does not
have any experience or a degree in education, and interestingly
enough, did not even investigate or evaluate the existing bilingual
programs. What he did do was run for governor against Pete Wilson
and lost. It wouldn’t be surprising if he ran for some other seat
in the near future. Not surprising at all is that educators from
all levels oppose this initiative: Delaine Eastin, state
superintendent of Public Instruction; the California School Board
Association; the California Teachers Association; the California
PTA; and other school districts and experts on bilingual
education.

The initiative proposes to isolate all children who are not
deemed "proficient" (it does not mention the criteria) to be placed
in a class regardless of age, grade level, native language,
culture, maturity or learning ability. Whatever superteacher has to
teach this class composed of various grade levels and subjects has
to know several languages and handle children of all levels of
learning and maturity simultaneously, in order to do a good job.
And this teacher only has one school year in which to do this.
After the year is out, the students will all be placed in their
respective grade levels where the teacher is prohibited by law –
and personally liable if he or she does – to help the transition
into English only instruction.

The children are basically helpless if they do not understand
English and continue not to understand; they are left to their own
devices. There is no research that supports this methodology. It
has never been tested, much less compared to existing programs. To
go about mandating a statewide, untested methodology, taking away
the discretion of school districts (and teachers themselves) to
adapt to local and individual student needs is absurd – they aren’t
creating initiatives like this for math or reading.

It is the educators and teachers who have the experience and
contact with the students and community, who need the use of all
the resources available to them (including state funding) to tailor
education to that school. According to Unz, it is sink or swim –
there are no lifeguards. Teachers, administrators and school
districts can be sued, for money out of their own pockets, for
doing their job – ensuring the best education for their
students.

The truth is, this initiative is not about bilingual education,
but education in California at large; we are the 50th state in
funding for public education per child. Yet this initiative does
the exact opposite of addressing this problem – it proposes to
divert state funding that would otherwise go to public schools, to
another untested, adult English program. The adults who must first
learn English themselves are then expected to tutor these children
without any teaching certificate or training, and then, only
outside of the classroom. But they are not even required to do so;
they can go though the program as long as they just pledge to
tutor.

I remember a while back in an episode of the "Simpsons," when
Bart is sent to France on an exchange program for a few months. For
those first couple months he does not understand a word, and he
feels lonely and isolated. But one day, like magic, without even
noticing, he is speaking French. This may be the idea most people
have of language immersion, but it is not magic; it does not come
effortlessly, even for children.

We are talking about the whole education of children, not merely
how well they can speak English; deserting them with "survival,"
conversational English skills is not enough for them to succeed. We
can not allow any child to fall behind for lack of attention or
instruction. Public schools have an obligation to graduate students
who are proficient in math and science, too. The only way to
reverse this initiative, if it were to pass, would only be through
another initiative! It would be such a waste of precious resources,
public money and time; all for the fame and name recognition of an
aspiring senator, congressman, what have you. It would cost the
children their education, and the teachers and parents their right
to ensure it.

This June 2, please vote no on Proposition 227. We should demand
better education for all of California’s children, with an increase
in funding for public schools, time and research to improve
education – not measures designed to feed on our frustrations about
our depleting resources. Education is not the state’s priority, but
we must demand that it become the priority.

If you would like to help the No on 227 Campaign, please call
(310) 825-7306.