A common language, Feb. 20.
Are “Latino immigrant kids … getting much better at
reading and writing English” as Jill Stewart claims?
Test scores increased in California for English
learners, but it is not clear that the increase is
real. The test used was first given in 2003. Research
has shown that the first time a standardized test is
given, scores appear low. They rise each year, as
teachers and students become more familiar with the
test. Some or all of the increase for English
language learners could be due to “test score
inflation.”
Stewart is misinformed about the nature and track
record of bilingual education. Bilingual education is
not “dumbed down,” and is not “teaching in Spanish,”
so that children “can talk to grandma.” Students in
bilingual education receive English instruction from
the first day, and learn subject matter in English as
soon as it can be made comprehensible. The first
language is used in ways that accelerate English
language development.
Scientific studies consistently show that students in
bilingual programs acquire English as well as or
better than those in all-English programs. Studies
also confirm that those in bilingual programs in
California are making the same gains in English as
those in all-English alternatives.
Stephen Krashen
A common language
Jill Stewart
Sunday, February 20, 2005
WHEN TEST SCORES came out recently showing that Latino
immigrant kids are getting much better at reading and
writing English, California Superintendent of Schools
Jack O'Connell urged schools to find ways to move them
out of special English and into mainstream classes.
Good idea, because many can't get access to advanced
placement courses for college so long as they're
designated as "English learners" and kept too long in
training-wheels-style English immersion classes.
I find it rich that O'Connell is urging schools to
act. To a large degree, it's his fault.
Under Proposition 227, immigrant children were only
supposed to stay in special immersion for a year or
so, and then go to a mainstream class. But O'Connell
has refused to credit English immersion for soaring
English literacy rates. His silence emboldens the
anti-English ideologues who still strive to keep
Latino kids in a separate world.
Again this month, O'Connell refused to credit English
immersion, telling The Chronicle he won't guess why
kids are learning English so well.
Guess? Year after year, he has failed to crunch data
that could compare kids still stuck in "bilingual" to
those in English. The state Board of Education finally
ordered O'Connell to produce a study with that in
mind. While we wait, I did my own study. I found that
school districts such as Los Angeles Unified, where
moderate Democrats stamped out failing "bilingual"
education amid fierce lefty resistance, are producing
big, lasting gains in English literacy.
By contrast, districts controlled by left-wing
Democrats with an attitude of "they won't be able to
talk to grandma" are producing smaller gains.
In 2001, of 244,000 L.A. kids who weren't native
English speakers, only 17 percent scored as "advanced
or early advanced" on statewide English tests. Today,
a stunning 49 percent get those high scores.
Back then, Los Angeles was paying 6,000 teachers a
yearly bonus ($2,500 to $5,000) to teach in Spanish --
the disastrous "bilingual" program. Now, only 679
teachers get the bonuses and teach "bilingual."
See any pattern there, Mr. O'Connell?
By contrast, San Diego Unified was run by sad,
fad-obsessed school honchos Alan Bersin and Tony
Alvarado, who kowtowed to its anti-reform teachers
union. It shows. In 2001, of 33,800 San Diego kids who
weren't native English speakers, 24 percent got
"advanced or early advanced" scores on the English
tests. Today, 41 percent get those high scores -- well
behind L.A.
Virulently anti-Prop. 227 Berkeley Unified is almost
frozen in place. In 2001, of the 1,000 Berkeley kids
who weren't native English speakers, 42 percent scored
"advanced or early advanced" on English tests. Today,
45 percent do. Los Angeles -- far more urban and
poverty-riddled -- has blown past leafy Berkeley.
O'Connell's silence emboldens the anti-immersion
advocates. In Sacramento, legislators will soon hold
education "hearings" aimed at dumbing-down Latino kids
with a separate curriculum. The key guest speaker is
an outrageous Pied Piper from the "bilingual" fiasco
days, dead-wrong Canadian theorist Jim Cummins.
We should pray that pragmatic Democrats and Gov.
Arnold Schwarzenegger stop the hard left. But
unfortunately, pragmatic Democrats are scared. One of
their own -- the brilliant Reed Hastings -- just lost
his job on the state Board of Education for defying
the lefties on immersion.
While the pragmatic Democrats base their views on
facts, the left nurses its longtime religious fervor
against immersion. Just to remind you how bad their
fervor is, let's look back to 1998:
-- Then-San Francisco School Board President Carlota
del Portillo declared that English immersion "has no
educational basis and would set our students back 30
years."
-- Jerry Perenchio, chief of Spanish-language
Univision, spent $1.5 million fighting Prop. 227. A
Republican, he adopted the views of lefty aides at
Univision. One Perenchio aide derided English
immersion -- the most common method used in the United
States -- as "an untested teaching method."
-- Then-Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa, now
running for mayor of Los Angeles, denounced Prop. 227
as another Proposition 187.
-- Then-state Sen. Richard Polanco, a Democrat from
Los Angeles, insisted, "[Prop. 227] will do more
damage to the [children] in the long run."
The left should grow up. Each year, California must
educate a massive, new influx of non-English speaking
kids from Third World Mexico and other Central
American countries, in numbers seen nowhere else in
the nation. Ronni Ephraim, the gifted chief
instructional officer at L.A. Unified, says Latino
parents "recognize that at school their child should
acquire a strong base of English, and at home they can
support them in maintaining their home language.
Parents want their children to be competitive."
So why is the Legislature still pursuing a separate
curriculum and lower standards for Latinos, and
inviting in one of the worst Pied Pipers of the
bilingual fiasco?
"I don't understand Sacramento," Ephraim told me.
"Why would anyone want to hold a kid back?"
Well, that's a true conundrum. But abetted by
O'Connell's silence, that's precisely what's afoot.
Jill Stewart, a print, radio and television
commentator on California politics, can be reached at
www.jillstewart.net.
A common language, Feb. 20.
Are “Latino immigrant kids … getting much better at
reading and writing English” as Jill Stewart claims?
Test scores increased in California for English
learners, but it is not clear that the increase is
real. The test used was first given in 2003. Research
has shown that the first time a standardized test is
given, scores appear low. They rise each year, as
teachers and students become more familiar with the
test. Some or all of the increase for English
language learners could be due to “test score
inflation.”
Stewart is misinformed about the nature and track
record of bilingual education. Bilingual education is
not “dumbed down,” and is not “teaching in Spanish,”
so that children “can talk to grandma.” Students in
bilingual education receive English instruction from
the first day, and learn subject matter in English as
soon as it can be made comprehensible. The first
language is used in ways that accelerate English
language development.
Scientific studies consistently show that students in
bilingual programs acquire English as well as or
better than those in all-English programs. Studies
also confirm that those in bilingual programs in
California are making the same gains in English as
those in all-English alternatives.
Stephen Krashen
A common language
Jill Stewart
Sunday, February 20, 2005
WHEN TEST SCORES came out recently showing that Latino
immigrant kids are getting much better at reading and
writing English, California Superintendent of Schools
Jack O'Connell urged schools to find ways to move them
out of special English and into mainstream classes.
Good idea, because many can't get access to advanced
placement courses for college so long as they're
designated as "English learners" and kept too long in
training-wheels-style English immersion classes.
I find it rich that O'Connell is urging schools to
act. To a large degree, it's his fault.
Under Proposition 227, immigrant children were only
supposed to stay in special immersion for a year or
so, and then go to a mainstream class. But O'Connell
has refused to credit English immersion for soaring
English literacy rates. His silence emboldens the
anti-English ideologues who still strive to keep
Latino kids in a separate world.
Again this month, O'Connell refused to credit English
immersion, telling The Chronicle he won't guess why
kids are learning English so well.
Guess? Year after year, he has failed to crunch data
that could compare kids still stuck in "bilingual" to
those in English. The state Board of Education finally
ordered O'Connell to produce a study with that in
mind. While we wait, I did my own study. I found that
school districts such as Los Angeles Unified, where
moderate Democrats stamped out failing "bilingual"
education amid fierce lefty resistance, are producing
big, lasting gains in English literacy.
By contrast, districts controlled by left-wing
Democrats with an attitude of "they won't be able to
talk to grandma" are producing smaller gains.
In 2001, of 244,000 L.A. kids who weren't native
English speakers, only 17 percent scored as "advanced
or early advanced" on statewide English tests. Today,
a stunning 49 percent get those high scores.
Back then, Los Angeles was paying 6,000 teachers a
yearly bonus ($2,500 to $5,000) to teach in Spanish --
the disastrous "bilingual" program. Now, only 679
teachers get the bonuses and teach "bilingual."
See any pattern there, Mr. O'Connell?
By contrast, San Diego Unified was run by sad,
fad-obsessed school honchos Alan Bersin and Tony
Alvarado, who kowtowed to its anti-reform teachers
union. It shows. In 2001, of 33,800 San Diego kids who
weren't native English speakers, 24 percent got
"advanced or early advanced" scores on the English
tests. Today, 41 percent get those high scores -- well
behind L.A.
Virulently anti-Prop. 227 Berkeley Unified is almost
frozen in place. In 2001, of the 1,000 Berkeley kids
who weren't native English speakers, 42 percent scored
"advanced or early advanced" on English tests. Today,
45 percent do. Los Angeles -- far more urban and
poverty-riddled -- has blown past leafy Berkeley.
O'Connell's silence emboldens the anti-immersion
advocates. In Sacramento, legislators will soon hold
education "hearings" aimed at dumbing-down Latino kids
with a separate curriculum. The key guest speaker is
an outrageous Pied Piper from the "bilingual" fiasco
days, dead-wrong Canadian theorist Jim Cummins.
We should pray that pragmatic Democrats and Gov.
Arnold Schwarzenegger stop the hard left. But
unfortunately, pragmatic Democrats are scared. One of
their own -- the brilliant Reed Hastings -- just lost
his job on the state Board of Education for defying
the lefties on immersion.
While the pragmatic Democrats base their views on
facts, the left nurses its longtime religious fervor
against immersion. Just to remind you how bad their
fervor is, let's look back to 1998:
-- Then-San Francisco School Board President Carlota
del Portillo declared that English immersion "has no
educational basis and would set our students back 30
years."
-- Jerry Perenchio, chief of Spanish-language
Univision, spent $1.5 million fighting Prop. 227. A
Republican, he adopted the views of lefty aides at
Univision. One Perenchio aide derided English
immersion -- the most common method used in the United
States -- as "an untested teaching method."
-- Then-Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa, now
running for mayor of Los Angeles, denounced Prop. 227
as another Proposition 187.
-- Then-state Sen. Richard Polanco, a Democrat from
Los Angeles, insisted, "[Prop. 227] will do more
damage to the [children] in the long run."
The left should grow up. Each year, California must
educate a massive, new influx of non-English speaking
kids from Third World Mexico and other Central
American countries, in numbers seen nowhere else in
the nation. Ronni Ephraim, the gifted chief
instructional officer at L.A. Unified, says Latino
parents "recognize that at school their child should
acquire a strong base of English, and at home they can
support them in maintaining their home language.
Parents want their children to be competitive."
So why is the Legislature still pursuing a separate
curriculum and lower standards for Latinos, and
inviting in one of the worst Pied Pipers of the
bilingual fiasco?
"I don't understand Sacramento," Ephraim told me.
"Why would anyone want to hold a kid back?"
Well, that's a true conundrum. But abetted by
O'Connell's silence, that's precisely what's afoot.
Jill Stewart, a print, radio and television
commentator on California politics, can be reached at
www.jillstewart.net.
No comments:
Post a Comment