Introduction
Let us for the sake of argument agree that the current debate over whether to continue or deny public support for bilingual education is without exception a valid debate with strong argument on both sides. It is an argument that is rooted in the heart of the larger debate on immigration. That is " Should immigrant citizens receive the same rights and privileges that are guaranteed to native born Americans?" The answer to that question has been central to the shifting immigration policies in America throughout its history. And it is central to the policies that will guide the future of bilingual education programs in this country.
America has come to witness a bitter/sweet tale of its immigration policies and practices as they impact upon current social conditions. We need only to look at present education statistics, income levels and the general health and welfare of some immigrant populations (e.g. Mexicans, Haitian, some Asian and African groups) to recognize the bitter side of this tale. The sweet side of the tale is equally easy to recognize. We can look at the economic prosperity of America, partly due to the work of immigrants as a source of cheap labor. We can look at the cultural richness of America, partly due to the ethnic influences of immigrant groups. We can also see the "sweet side of this tale when we examine patterns of wealth and power attained by a selected few and protected by a number of legal practices in the U.S. government.
These ideas signal a need to look toward what will be the future of America with its immigrant population. While some Americans indulge in the debate over the effectiveness of bilingual education, immigrant children are left behind their peers academically. Eventually they are left out economically and socially as well. That increases the chances that many will become a part of the problem, rather than part of the solution to the American ideology.
If the country fails to provide quality public school education, in this case, bilingual education programs for immigrant children, their chances of succeeding at competitive rates are greatly diminished, as are the chances of native children who are educated in those same classrooms. I understand the call for immersion into English-only classes, but I fail to see how that is most useful to the child who does not yet speak the language or understand its structure. In this situation both immigrant and native children are hindered in the levels of their academic achievement. I am suggesting that individual levels of achievement will determine their collective input to society. Despite the claim that all are welcome, the bitter/sweet tale of American immigration is more accurately all who fit a particular profile are welcome to the riches of America, particularly a quality public education.
The Issue: California's Los Angeles school district makes the claim that current bilingual education programs are not effective. They argue that students who are taught major subjects in their native tongues are not learning the English language rapidly and adequately enough to become proficient speakers. Although these students are being taught English, their levels of achievement are extremely low. Even with the passage of Proposition 227 which requires that non-English speaking students be taught English as rapidly as possible, Los Angeles' school district is refusing to teach as many as 100,000 children how to read. An article which appeared in Forbes Magazine credits bureaucrats with the idea that children should not be taught reading until they have become "fully fluent" in English. Teachers were encouraged to concentrate on oral language and not even show students the written language.
What is often recommended in California and in other school districts is total immersion into English-only classes. The idea is that they will more quickly learn to speak English. What is seldom discussed is that for the sixty-seven percent Latino student population, there is only thirteen percent Latino teachers in the Los Angeles Unified school district. In many other districts, across the country non-English speaking or limited English proficient students outnumber the qualified bilingual staff.