TEACHING ENGLISH WINS

The State of California seems to have a problem with English. As our common language, English should be used for all government business. However, some special interest groups out west feel otherwise.

For instance, a quick look at the California Secretary of State web page(1) shows that voters there do not need to read and write in English in order to vote. Among the languages in which California will provide voter information are English, Spanish, Japanese, Vietnamese, Tagalog, and Chinese.

Of course, those who do not understand English obviously also do not know the issues and have little or no idea what they are voting about. But, evidently that is acceptable there.

Even worse was those groups demanding that children of resident aliens be taught in the native language of their parents. All that does is hold the student back from learning properly. Thirty years experience with bilingual instruction proved that. No matter what these special interest groups may wish, our language is English. Therefore, English is what all children should learn.

So, when a group proposed Proposition 227 on the California ballet in 1998, it was approved by 61 percent. More interesting, according to published reports, was that Proposition 227 was supported by 84 percent of California's Latino voters.

However, not everyone liked the idea of teaching in English instead of the student's native language. So, into federal court went a coalition group called the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF). Meanwhile, kids were educated in English and results were compiled.

When California's public schools implemented English-only instruction, critics said students with limited English-language skills would fail miserably. But, they have not.

Conservative activist Linda Chavez called the program "a whopping success," and she was supported by official exam scores. Within a year, elementary test scores rose significantly more in schools that adopted English-only instruction than at those that got waivers to retain bilingual instruction. According to The Washington Times, from 1998 to 2001, the official statewide STAR testing of second-graders showed a steady upward trend of scores in spelling, language, reading and math for children in English- immersion programs. The percentage of Latino students in the top half of the statewide grade scores in spelling almost doubled from 21 percent to 39 percent; in reading 35 percent were in the top half, up from 21 percent; and math standing rose 19 points with 47 percent of students exceeding the 50th percentile.

The MALDEF coalition lost in federal court and appealed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals -- the most reversed appeals court in the nation.

This time, however, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals got it right(2). On October 7, they affirmed the ruling of the lower court and (it appears) the people at MALDEF suddenly disbursed and became unavailable for comment.

The case is posted as "Angel v. Davis" (01-15219). Below are a couple significant excerpts from that opinion.

On behalf of a class of California public school students and their parents, Angel V. appeals from the district court's judgment, entered after a bench trial, dismissing plaintiffs' claim that California's Proposition 227, which replaces bilingual education programs with a curricular program designed to teach students in English, facially violates the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. . . .

On June 2, 1998, California voters approved Proposition 227 by a margin of 61 to 39 percent. Declaring that "[t]he government and the public schools of California have a moral obligation and a constitutional duty to provide all of California's children . . . with the skills necessary to become productive members of our society, and of these skills, literacy in the English language is among the most important," Proposition 227 dismantled California's public school bilingual education programs, which taught limited English proficient ("LEP") students in their native language. . . .

Proposition 227 replaces bilingual education with a system of "structured English immersion," in which children are "taught English by being taught in English." The initiative provides that LEP students of similar English proficiency be taught together and that "[c]hildren who are English learners shall be educated through sheltered English immersion during a temporary transition period not normally intended to exceed one year." Once LEP students become proficient in English, they are transferred into mainstream English language classrooms. . . .

Given Proposition 227's facial neutrality, and the lack of evidence that it was motivated by racial considerations, we hold that Proposition 227's reallocation of political authority over bilingual education does not offend the Equal Protection Clause.

As our common language, English should be used for all government business. However, some special interest groups out west feel otherwise.

California voting info is provided in English, Spanish, Japanese, Vietnamese, Tagalog, and Chinese. Of course, those who do not understand English obviously also do not know the issues and have little or no idea what they are voting about. But, evidently that is acceptable in Cal.

When taught in English only, students learned better.

I have a friend who was born and raised in Chekoslovakia and came here nine years ago. She is now a citizen. But when she got here she didn't know a lick of English and she didn't have a Slovakian community to rely on. So, she set about learning English herself. She watched TV, read magazines and would go to the grocery store and read labels on cans. She said she can not imagine her life in this country had she not learned English. She would be a virtual prisoner and would not be able to work.

She also said that when she was growing up, she was forced to learn Russian and hated it. Now that her old country is no longer under the Soviet thumb everyone wants to learn English. Can you imagine that? People who actually WANT to learn English.

When taught in English only, students learned better.

I knew this was the case before it was "proven." We have 100 years of case studies to prove it so: all non-English speaking immigrants to America learned English and have done quite well: Italians, Cubans, Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Vietanmese, Polish, Russians, Irish and Scotts (who have their own forms of non-English gaelic, etc.), French, Spaniards, etc. In fact, I don't know many of their descendants who struggle with English. The only ones who seem to struggle with English are the "experts" who want to promote bi-lingual education.

Watch Gray Davis claim that it was his leadership that improved school performance, when it was actually Prop 227 that got it done over his opposition.

Simon had better have that little factoid on the tip of his tongue, or perhaps even in his commercials (especially Spanish language commercials). It's that important.

This was a big, big stink here in San Diego. The results of English only were astounding! There were rumors of teachers not implementing the English-only program. When kids told their parents, parents complained to the right people, and the teachers were told - either, or!

"those who do not understand English obviously also do not know the issues and have little or no idea what they are voting about"

This is exactly what the democrats want! They don't care if you understand the issues. They don't want you to have a choice - they want you to vote democrat!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.