Prop 227 Points of Contention Essay

More young americans nowadays are being raised in homes speaking non-English, but these students are falling behind in schools where there is not a bilingual program available. According to the U.S. Department of Education, in schools without a bilingual education program, 71% of English speakers are at or above the basic requirements for fourth grade reading while merely 30% of non-English speakers reach this level. 35% of English and 8% of non-English speakers reach proficient reading levels while only 9% of English and 1% of non-English speakers perform at advanced levels. It’s evident that the availability of a bilingual program is crucial to the success of an individual who needs the resources that can be given to them through the use of bilingual education. The percentages of the non-English speaking students previously mentioned could undoubtedly be comparable to those percentages of the English speaking students if the education they were being provided with was cohesive to their comfortability, and the material being taught was in a language they could better understand.

• Proposition 227 created a negative few towards bilingualism, because it called for the rapid assimilation of all other minority languages. In whole, the objective of Proposition 227 was to outlaw bilingual education.

According to the No Child Left Behind Act of (NCLB) of 2001, one of the Titles III’s purposes was “to develop high-quality language instruction education programs designed to assist states, district and schools in teaching limited English proficient children and serving immigrant children and youth” ( ESEA Section 3102 (3) as stated in Language Instruction Educational Programs ( LIEPs), 2012 p. viii). As such, Article 14-C of the Illinois School Code recognizes two models to serve ELL students: a transitional bilingual education (TBE) program or transitional program of instruction

In the article, Speak Spanish, You’re in America!: El Huracan over language and Culture, Juan Gonzalez, a journalist and broadcaster of the daily show, Democracy Now, describes how bilingualism has impacted the United States’ modern education system. He describes an amendment that would constitute English as the official in the United States, which he believes can be a potential threat to the educational system. Gonzalez suggests that instead of having an amendment that constitutes English as the national language, American schools should implement Spanish to highlight the importance of being bilingualism in the American educational system. A constitutional amendment declaring English as the national language would be damaging to bilingual students because it would limit their capability of communicating in English or their native language, and therefore they have would fall behind in classes and will not succeed in the American educational system. To highlight the importance of bilingualism, even more the educational system should implement a variety of languages.

School principals will find in the following lawsuits the legal framework to provide educational services to ELLs in public schools. Baker (1997) points out that a landmark case in favor of bilingual education in the United States was a lawsuit in 1970. The case was a class-action suit brought by the parents of nearly 3000 Chinese students against the San Francisco School District (Lyons, 1990). This case originated that in 1974 the Unites States Supreme Court handed down its only substantive decision regarding the responsibilities of school districts serving ELLs (Lyons, 1990). The court indicated that under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, the Chinese students were entitled to receive specific support to allow them full participation in the school program (Crawford, 1989). This case was known as Lau v. Nichols and its verdict outlawed English submersion programs for language minority students, and resulted in nationwide ‘Lau Remedies’ (Baker, 1997). Lyons (1990) writes that the ‘Lau Remedies’ specified how to identify and evaluate language minority students, determine appropriate instruction, decide when ELLs were ready for mainstream, and determine the professional standards expected of teachers serving language minority students. Under the Lau Remedies school districts were encouraged to provide

Proposition 58 would undo almost 20 years of regulations limiting bilingual education. It repeals the English-only immersion requirements, along with the waiver provisions of the 1998 Proposition 227. Currently, under Proposition 227, all education is conducted exclusively in English, with a few exceptions. These exceptions include voluntary education programs, such as dual emersion classes, where students concurrently learn English and a second language. In effect, this proposition would bring back programs where students, that are not fully fluent in English, have education in both English and their native language. I understand the educational value of bilingual classrooms; however, I am concerned that it would cause segregation and significant disadvantages for students.

The greatest concern of mandating “English only” schools in California for example is that 80 percent of the population of students is Latino. Miner further explains, “Good bilingual programs are about more than learning a language, it should be about respect for diversity and multiculturalism (Bilingual Education, 1999).”

Proposition 227 was a bill to allow students from foreign countries be given the most adequate help to be English Learners to help them succeed in the educational system and society. Most students who migrate to the US are places in LEP or ESL classes where they are forced to be treated less than the english speaking students. Teachers who teach these classes are not the most informed, prepared and positive teachers, instead of understanding these students struggle to learn a new language most of time they are discouraged from attending school and being seen and treated as a burden. Proposition 227 would bring in more classes for these students rather than just having a limited number of teachers leaving a big number of students who need help in learning the english language. “The students come from various socioeconomic, linguistic, cultural and educational backgrounds, and there are many of them do not fall into the high-achiever category” (Pyon, 66). Due to the lack of funding for teachers to be prepared to teach these students this proposition would also provide money to the schools as long as they would spend it for ESL.LEP students and classes, this would allow students to have a better chance to understand english and learn it in a higher rate preparing them for the regular classes and not falling behind. Since LEP/ESL classes were not seen as necessary prop 227 was able to bring students, parents and educators to see the importance in having our children to learn

2) Clearly present the beliefs of those on both sides of this issue. What are their key ideas

It is no secret that the debate over what is the best course of action to educate our non-native English language students across the country is a highly charged topic that runs from the classroom to Capitol Hill. There have been many shifts in direction and focus of educational programs for English Language Learning (ELL) students during the past century in our nation's history. In 1968, with the passage of the Bilingual Education Act (Title VII of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act) legislation was

However, this issue would take far more than funding. The issue of bilingual education in our public school system is a much debated topic in this country, and especially in this state. The Education Topic over Bilingual Education in our School Systems Spanish-speaking populace has grown tremendously in these past decades, much of which have immigrated with Spanish as their only language. This has left the public school system with an interesting problem; how to successfully transition Spanish speaking students into an English environment. Public school systems have adopted an immersion program; where students learn English and other subjects in classrooms where only English is spoken (Parkay, 2013). Students are not necessarily aided, they are required to learn like their peers from the teacher and ask for direction when needed in English. This program might aid some fast learners, but students who do not adapt to English; which is a foreign language to them, are left to learn on their own. If the student does not get the

Vote no on Prop 58 because bilingual education is a waste of time. Vote no because I'm bilingual schools teachers will have to repeat everything twice. In my parent meetings our principal has to translate to the parents and it takes more time. Also, the teachers would have to print double the papers in both English and Spanish. Kids will not develop the language as quickly. Kids will get frustrated and won't try. They will think that they suck so there's no point in trying. Some kids are not interested in learning a second language. When learning a new language, your 1st language will interfere. They will be learning 2 languages so they might get confused. In conclusion, vote no on Prop 58 because it is a big waste of time and

I agree completetly wth you that the laws against bilingual education in the Arizona are not adequate undermining the freedom of equity education. It is sad that eventhough in Arizona there are many immigrants from different in countries living here their native language is being put aside. The fear of replacing English as the only official language in Arizona is so huge that politicians and priviligie people has establish this language laws that at the end of the day affect students learning negatively.

The purpose of Proposition 58 is to require that public schools ensure student to become proficient in English. It gives school district the option to teach either English only or bilingual in schools in California. ‘This could ensure that all students can achieve English Proficiency as soon as possible. (supportprop58.com). It is also a revision of to Prop. 227, and if passed it would remove restrictions, that “would allow schools to be able to use up to date methods to teach students the English language much faster. (supportprop58.com) In will not have fiscal effect on school districts of state government”. (CA Official Voters Information Guide, pg. 11.)

Passed in California in 1994, this dangerous bill aimed to , among other things, deny public education to undocumented immigrants and anyone else that was suspected to be undocumented. Naturally, major opposition to the bill sparked many giant protests and displays of resistance. The powerful vocalizations made by the many who opposed it, along with a few lawsuits, successfully prevented Proposition 187 from ever going into effect.