Translate

Saturday, March 18, 2006

An eye-witness account of the Immigrant Rights March that took place in Chicago last week







Here is an eye-witness account of the Immigrant Rights March that took place in Chicago last week. It comes by way of George Schmidt, author of SUBSTANCE Magazine but who is now also research director for SEIU Local 73. The Local represents the largest percentage of the non-teaching people working for Chicago public schools (5,000 custodians and security people) and another 18,000 public employees across Illinois. A couple of news reports are included below as well.

Also, check out this link for video clips:
I'll also be posting George's narrative in other posts.

-Angela


3/11/06

Angela,

Yes, I am lucky to be working for SEIU, today even more so that two
days ago. What happened in Chicago yesterday was the beginning of
something bigger than any of us will appreciate yet.

If you want, I hope you will also share this with your students and
others. The march in Chicago yesterday was organized in part by SEIU,
which, as you know, represents a lot of people who have been left out.
I have photographs of the organizer who first came up with the idea,
and who was criticized for it until suddenly...

I stayed on the ground throughout the march and walked more than four
miles yesterday in the course of covering it and taking photographs.

Although police ultimately estimated that 100,000 people marched in
Chicago yesterday, I think that estimate is low -- very low. More about
that later.

The most important thing to note about the march is that it was the
largest civil rights (or human rights) march in Chicago history and
that it was probably the largest march of any kind in Chicago history.
The only event that might compare took place last year to celebrate the
World Series victory of our (international) Chicago White Sox. And the
tone was the same.

When I arrived at Union Park at Lake and Ashland Ave. in Chicago
yesterday at noon, at first it looked like there was a small turnout.
The park itself was half empty. The reason the park was half empty,
however, was that the street west of the park was filled with people
for at least two miles, curb to curb, and the crowd kept growing. I
arrived by elevated train at about noon, and was able to take
photographs looking north and south from the elevated stairs so that I
have some photographs of the crowd from above. It was virtually
impossible to get shots from ground level that showed the vastness of
the crowd.

North from my first vantage point, the crowd stretched at least
three-quarters of a mile to Grand Ave. However, that was as far as I
could see, and people told me it actually filled the street as far
north as Chicago Ave. (one mile north of the city's east west axis) by
the time the march began moving towards the Loop (two miles to the
east) at 1:00. So there were a mile's worth of people north of the
center point before the march began.

But then I looked south, and the sea of people stretched even farther
to the south. I could only see as far south as the Congress Expressway
(I-90), which is raised. I was later told that the people arriving from
the south were walking up Ashland Ave. from 18th St. (one of Chicago's
traditional Mexican communities) and that what happened was that as
people got farther north it became impossible to walk on the sidewalks,
so people spilled into the streets until, at about Taylor St., the
police realized they had to close Ashland Ave because it was filled
with people. That was a mile south of where I was, so by the time the
march actually began, there were about two miles of people spread along
Ashland Ave. from roughtly Chicago Ave. on the north to Taylor St. on
the south. Anyone with a Chicago map can see the great distance this
was. Anyway, if you are using a map to share this, think of that entire
space filled with people so tightly that it was difficult to walk.

I finally headed west one block in order to get near the point where
the march turned east (at Jackson Blvd.). By the time I got to Jackson,
the march stretched east as far as the eye could see, and Ashland was
still filled and filling up even more.

My son Danny attends school at Whitney Young High School, a public
school, which is one block east of Ashland. The marchers were streaming
down Jackson towards the Sears Tower, which loomed on the horizon like
a beacon or compass point. Everyone was heading towards the tallest
building in Chicago (once in the world).

Whitney Young High School has an overpass above Jackson Blvd. under
which the crowd was streaming. I called my son Danny on his cell phone
and left a message that he should join me for the march, since
participation in it would be a better way to deal with government
(which he is studying in an AP class) and U.S. History (which he is
also studying) than sitting in a classroom. Then I went into Whitney
Young, where the principal and I talked and she agreed I could take my
son out on what is called an "early dismissal" for the march. I went up
to the walkway and took photogaphs of the sea of people strecthing west
and east from that point, and then went down and joined the march again.

About a half mile to the east, I stopped when Danny finally called me
back and waited for him to reach me. By that point, it was clear that
Chicago was experiencing its "Day without Mexicans." I saw men walking
out of buildings wearing custodial worker uniforms and other men and
women walking out of those expensive restaurants in Greek Town. I have
a hunch that the owners of some of Chicago's most expensive restaurants
had to bus their own tables yesterday, because the working people along
the line of march were leaving work to join the march. When Danny
caught up with me at Halsted St., still a mile from the site of the
rally, we talked about what was happening, and I pointed to those huge
buildings ahead of us, framed around the Sears Tower.

"If Chicago really had to face a day without the people we're marching
with, every toilet in every one of those buildings would clog up within
a day and the whole place would have to shut down within two days," was
one of the things I said. I just couldn't help thinking of how stupid
has been the narrative that puts a "CEO" at the center of every story
about this country today.

The march was a family affair. There were thousands of children, many
in arms, on shoulders, and in strollers. The youngest marchers were
only a few days old. The eldest, some in wheelchairs, were in their 70s
or older. But most of the marchers were that wonderful "demographic"
that marketing and political people talk about -- teenagers and young
adults in their prime. Hard working people. There were thousands of
teenagers marching arm in arm with their boyfriends and girlfriends. At
some points it was like that scene from "Close Encounters..." where
everyone is heading towards the same place, almost a vision.

There were banners and signs, but most people were simply walking.
Although American flags dominated, second among the flags were the
Mexican flag, followed by the flag of every nation south of the Rio
Grande River, and other flags including (I saw and recognized) Poland
and Ireland. Although the main language of the march was Spanish, if
you were listening closely you could hear many other languages as well.

Although the flag of Mexico was the most common, flags of other nations
were also everywhere. You could feel the combination of both flags --
the stars and stripes and the others --- as almost a human poem to what
we have built in this country, when this country at its best is before
us in our humanity.

I didn't have a radio, but was told that the Spanish radio and TV
stations were reporting continually on the march, and that people were
being told to join the march from school or work. It was clear that
students were walking out of perhaps a dozen Chicago high schools also
day. I don't have attendance figures yet, but teachers I met from one
high school (Senn, which has had the anit militarism struggles) said
"attendance is way down." Senn is about ten miles from the assembly
point of the march. A teacher from Gage Park High School (about eight
miles south of the march) said that her school began emptying out
around noon and continued to do so. Nearby schools (especially Benito
Juarez High School, which is on Ashhland Ave. two miles south of where
the march turned towards the Loop) were reportedly empty by lunch time.

When we got across the Chicago River and into the Loop, I saw something
I had never seen before. The Chicago Police had closed off six streets
to all but emergency traffic. Wells St., LaSalle St., Clark St.,
Dearborn St., and two smaller streets that run north to south were shut
down -- except for thousands of people walking on them -- from Adams
St. south to Congress, a distance of a bout a quarter mile. I took
pictures of each street filled with people and empty of cars, because
that is unprecedented, too.

I have to leave for a union meeting, but there are a couple of other
things I'd like to share.

If, as I suspect, a quarter million people marched in Chicago
yesterday, it was the most peaceful assembly of that many people in the
history of this city. Police reported that a couple of people were
arrested for graffiti. That's it. My estimate of the numbers, which I'll
be revising, came after I tried to count the number in one block and
came up with "5,000 to 7,000" (curb to curb) in one Chicago block.
There are 16 blocks in a mile, and the front of the march was entering
the federal plaza by 2:00 p.m. while the tail of the march was still
stuck on Ashland Ave., two miles to the west, waiting to begin. But
people were also entering the march from all other points, not just
through the march itself.

There were dozens of songs. In federal plaza, a group of Mexican
dancers with huge feather headdresses danced the entire afternoon. All
of the streets were packed so tightly that it was at times impossible
to move. Yet people were making sure to look for the little ones, who
generally didn't look frightened, even in the tightest crowd.

Because the Chicago Board of Education building sits right above the
federal plaza, I was able to talk my way into one of the south offices
towards the end of the march (about 4:30 p.m.) and take my last
photographs from 14 floors above Adams St.

For a time as I was walking along, choruses from an old union song --
Solidarity Forever -- kept going through my head:

It is we who plowed the prairies, built the cities where they play,
Dug the mines and built the workshops, endless miles of railroad lay,
Now we stand outcast and starving midst the wonders we have made,
But the union makes us strong.

It was a day when all of us could be proud to be Americans and proud to
be truly for democracy. It was a day when the Plutocrats must have
trembled slightly after their years of lies and CEO worship, after
their foisting of stupid millionaires into the White House and
horrifying wars...

And so much more.

I'll share more as I find the time to work it up. I hope this -- one
narrative among thousands -- helps us build that counter narrative
we've talked about so long.

George N. Schmidt, Editor, Substance
www.substancenewsc.com
___________________________________________________________________________________________
A show of strength

Thousands march to Loop for immigrants' rights
Workers, students unite in opposition to toughening of law

By Oscar Avila and Antonio Olivo

Tribune staff reporters
Published March 11, 2006

In a show of strength that surprised even organizers, tens of thousand of immigrants poured into the Loop Friday, bringing their calls for immigration reform to the heart of the city's economic and political power.

What started as a word-of-mouth campaign, then spread through the foreign language media, grabbed the attention of the entire city by midday, as a throng 2 miles long marched from Union Park on the Near West Side to Federal Plaza.

Police estimated the crowd as large as 100,000, making it one of the biggest pro-immigrant rallies in U.S. history, according to national advocates.

Observers said the turnout could galvanize both sides in the immigration debate, launching a grass-roots pro-immigrant movement while provoking a backlash among those who want stricter controls.

The trigger for the rally was a controversial federal bill that would crack down on those who employ or help illegal immigrants. But the broader message--carried mostly by Mexicans, but also by a smattering of Poles, Irish and Chinese--was that immigrants are too integral and large a part of Chicago to be ignored.

The rally drew some of the state's most powerful politicans, including Gov. Rod Blagojevich, Mayor Richard Daley, U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin and dozens of aldermen and state lawmakers.

But the men and women who pushed baby strollers and waved homemade signs, the workers who clean hotel bathrooms and landscape suburban lawns, flexed their muscle too.

American flags bobbed overhead while also decorating shawls, placards and the scarf on a baby's head. That dominant motif was set off by the colors of Ecuador, Colombia, Guatemala and, of course, Mexico.

Urgent chants of "Si, se puede," or "Yes, you can," echoed off the walls of downtown skyscrapers, with drums adding a festive backbeat.

Despite the density of the crowd, shoulders and elbows rubbing from one sidewalk to the other, police said there were no incidents or arrests. But the event shut down traffic in parts of the Loop, and snarled the evening commute as marchers competed with office workers for space on jammed trains and rerouted buses.

As they transformed the Loop with their presence, immigrants made a powerful statement elsewhere by their absence.

Without his immigrant employees, a Northwest Side body shop owner gave up and closed for the day. An Italian restaurant in Downers Grove relied on temps to cook and managers to bus tables. High school students walked out en masse. "I have never been prouder to march, to show my commitment to a cause, than I have been today," U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.) told the crowd. "We have brought together the true fabric of what Chicago is, of what our country is."

After a moment of silence for soldiers in Iraq, a young girl led the crowd in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Jose Soberanis, 21, led a group with a poster of Martin Luther King Jr. that he had sketched with his 11-year-old sister, Cecilia. He equated his fight with the civil-rights movements of the 1960s.

"As the saying goes, `I have a dream.' Well, we have dreams, too," Soberanis said. "African-Americans were looking for social acceptance. That is what we want too."

Hundreds of high school students were no-shows, and officials speculated that most of them attended the rally. At Farragut Career Academy in Lawndale, about half the 2,500 students walked out after attendance was taken at 10:40 a.m.

Josue Martinez, a Tilden High School senior who attended, said: "We're supporting our parents and our parents' parents, who came here and worked hard. A lot of classrooms are empty today."

Whole shifts of workers left their jobs to underscore the importance of immigrant workers. One server from an Italian restaurant came in his work tie and apron, draped with a U.S. flag. Construction workers, still wearing hardhats, came straight from their job sites. Clerks from the El Guero market in Aurora piled into the store's delivery van, riding on produce boxes.

Alex Garcia and about 10 co-workers from a Joliet commercial sign company rode a Metra train to Chicago's Union Station, walked out to Union Park, and then retraced their steps as they marched back to the Loop.

"Most people don't realize how much work we do, but it's part of their daily lives," he said. "We are putting up all the buildings and cooking all the food. Today, they'll understand."

Crowds stretched back at least 20 blocks from Federal Plaza at one point. The procession was so long that some marchers still hadn't made it to the plaza when the two-hour rally ended.

Sensing the scope of the rally, critics of illegal immigration from around the country had flown into Chicago to support local activists at a news conference earlier in the day.

Sandra Gunn, government relations field associate for the Washington-based Federation for American Immigration Reform, said she hoped politicians would ignore the "display of arrogance and intimidation" from protesters who she said flout immigration laws: "It is our voices that they must heed."

Some bystanders, marveling at the crowd's size, shared similar opinions.

"They have a right to march," said Alicia Corley, an insurance claims adjuster standing outside a Potbelly sandwich shop on Adams Street. "But we can't even take care of our own people without more coming in from other countries. Look at all the homeless in the city. Let's take care of them first."

Rally organizers originally mobilized to fight H.R. 4437, a bill approved in the U.S. House of Representatives that would drastically strengthen immigration enforcement, including extending a fence along the Mexican border and severe punishment for those who aid illegal immigrants.

They back a competing bill that would provide legal status for most undocumented immigrants and make it easier for legal immigrants to bring in relatives. That legislation, sponsored by U.S. Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Edward Kennedy (D-Mass), also would expand temporary work visas.

Frank Sharry, executive director of the Washington-based National Immigration Forum, said the Chicago rally would get the attention of Capitol Hill lawmakers. Sharry's first reaction when a Chicago participant e-mailed him photos from his cell phone: "Wow."

----------

oavila@tribune.com
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Chicago Sun Times
March 10, 2006

Thousands protest immigration bill

BY NATHANIEL HERNANDEZ ASSOCIATED PRESS



Tens of thousands of immigrants from throughout the Chicago area, many carrying U.S. flags, marched into downtown Chicago on Friday in a show of support for immigrant rights.

The rally came as the U.S. Senate struggles with a bill to stiffen border enforcement and a new report estimates the illegal immigrant population has grown from about 8.4 million in 2000 to nearly 12 million.

Shouts of "Si se puede" (Yes, it can be done) could be heard throughout city streets as marchers descended upon the plaza across from the Dirksen Federal Courthouse, where they listened to speeches voicing support for pro-immigrant legislation and opposition to a measure that would toughen penalties for illegal immigrants.

"Raise those American flags!" shouted U.S. Rep Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill. "This is our country, and this is where we will stay."

The peaceful marchers stood shoulder-to-shoulder at the plaza. Some carried signs that read "Keep our Families Together," "No human being is illegal" and "Do not criminalize the American dream."

Abigail Marquez, 35, said she came to the rally with her husband and teenage son to express her support for Latino issues.

Marquez, a native of Guadalajara, Mexico, said she did not expect so many people to participate in the march, organized by dozens of activist groups.

"I had no idea. There are just so many people here," she said in Spanish. "I feel very happy because it shows that we are all united."

From a platform, Democratic Gov. Rod Blagojevich addressed the massive crowd in Spanish, telling them that he is the son of immigrant parents and understands the issues that are important to them.

His proclamation that "Ustedes no son criminales. Ustedes son trabajadores" (You are not criminals. You are workers) elicited loud cheers.

Hours later, marchers still thronged streets in the city's downtown business district, sometimes clogging streets and preventing vehicle traffic from moving.

The Illinois Minuteman Project, which is affiliated with a national volunteer civilian border patrol group that aims to stem illegal immigration, held a news conference before the march began to speak out against it.

Rosanna Pulido, the group's state director, said she doesn't want to see Chicago become "sanctuary city" for illegal immigrants.

"There are 14 million underemployed Americans. Don't they have the right to have a better life and support their families? Let's give them an opportunity because this is their country," she said.

The march began at noon at a park several miles west of the downtown Loop business district. Police estimated that more than 75,000 people marched into downtown, sporadically shutting down traffic in the Loop and many surrounding streets.

Students and housewives pushing strollers marched side-by-side with construction workers, mechanics and senior citizens. Some marchers called out the names of their neighborhoods or suburbs; communities across northern Illinois were represented.

One worker said he hadn't seen that many people in the Loop since a ticker-tape parade was held for the Chicago White Sox after they won the 2005 World Series.

"In terms of a protest, I've never seen anything this big. I'm impressed by the magnitude," of the crowd, said Tom Bonk.

But one person who wasn't impressed was Pulido, who said that the demonstrators were essentially promoting illegal immigration.

"What it means is that 75,000 people marched for lawlessness in Chicago," she said.

Thursday, March 09, 2006

Education dollars are scarce — except for private companies with lots of pull.

This piece by Betty Brink is a real eye-opener. I just tracked it down in the FORT WORTH WEEKLY. It addresses the purchase by Dallas ISD of a reading curriculum for middle school special education children called, "Voyager," alongside an alleged ethics violation by Marsha Sonnenberg, a staff person in charge of the district's reading program. Specifically, Sonnenberg had recommended that the district buy a reading program produced by a company (SOPRIS West Educational Services) for which she was a consultant and for whom she had previously worked. Here are some pertinent quotes from this piece.

"When schools in the state of New York bought Voyager under pressure from Lyon, Big Apple public advocate Betsy Gotbaum blasted the state’s decision as one that chose what was best for a company rather than “what’s best for our children.” After observing it in the Birmingham schools for a year, University of Alabama professor Fran Perkins called Voyager’s curriculum “the best example of the worst reading program for young children” she’d ever seen.

Others see Voyager as part of a larger right-wing push to privatize public education. In the October issue of the Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, university researchers Patricia Hinchey and Karen Cadiero-Kaplan wrote that by “putting public funds into private pockets” with its blatant promotion of companies such as Voyager, the Bush administration is setting the stage for a widespread acceptance of for-profit charter schools funded by public money, a threat “not only to public education, but democracy itself.” Ultimately, the authors wrote, the No Child Left Behind initiative is designed to fail, and when it does, public school teachers will be the “scapegoats” and the private sector will become the rescuers....

And in spite of all of the millions that have poured into the district for new reading programs since 1998, reading scores for most Fort Worth students have not improved.

Larry Shaw, head of a local teachers union, noted the same trend when he commented a few years ago on the schools’ sale of “branding rights” to private companies, allowing them to put their names on auditoriums, football stadiums, and the like. When a visitor shows up on one of these campuses, Shaw said, “he better not bend over, or a Pepsi-Cola banner might be slapped across his backside....”

Entrepreneurs of every stripe, it seems, have realized in the last decade or so that schools are not just places where scholars and future presidents are made. They are places were fortunes can be made — especially with a few friends in the right places."

Check it out.

-Angela

Voters sent a clear message, PAC's official says

I know a lot of folks are headed out soon for spring break (including myself). Want to share with you some current news that illustrates the power that parents and grassroots communities have when they exercise it. -Angela

Thu, Mar. 09, 2006
Voters sent a clear message, PAC's official says
By JOHN MORITZ
FORT WOTH STAR-TELEGRAM AUSTIN BUREAU

AUSTIN - Voters sent a clear message Tuesday that they expect their lawmakers' loyalties to remain with the people who placed them in office and not with the partisan leaders who control state government, said the head of a grassroots organization that helped topple one of the Texas Legislature's powerful incumbents.

"People back home expect results. And they want public servants who will listen to their concerns, not to the viewpoints of certain political leaders," said Carolyn Boyle on Wednesday. Boyle's Texas Parent PAC is credited with defeating state Rep. Kent Grusendorf, the Arlington Republican who is chairman of the House Public Education Committee.

Boyle's Austin-based organization targeted Grusendorf and a handful of other veteran lawmakers who its members believed had lost touch with their constituencies during last year's effort to overhaul the state school finance system and reshape public education.

Grusendorf and state Rep. Elvira Reyna, R-Mesquite, were defeated. San Angelo Republican Scott Campbell finished second to a Parent PAC-backed candidate in a three-person race but will advance to a runoff next month, as will Parent PAC candidates who ran in open seats in Lampasas and Denton counties.

Boyle said her organization was instrumental in helping many of the House Republicans, including Fort Worth's Charlie Geren, who were targeted for defeat by San Antonio millionaire James Leininger because they did not support his push for private-school vouchers.

Several political observers agreed that Parent PAC and other grassroots efforts managed to tap into voters' discontent over the failure by top state leaders to fix what the Texas Supreme Court has ruled an unconstitutional school finance system. Gov. Rick Perry has called three special legislative sessions but has been unable to reach an agreement with House Speaker Tom Craddick and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, the Texas Senate's president, on a plan to fix the problem.

All three are Republicans.

Political analyst Harvey Kronberg, who publishes the online Quorum Report, said the vote tallies in many key House districts spell bad news for Craddick.

"The speaker is weaker today than he was a week ago," Kronberg said. Grusendorf has been Craddick's point man on public education ever since the Republicans gained control of the House in 2002. "The speaker forced a lot of members to cast votes on school finance and other issues that were not always popular with the folks back home, and that's what a lot of members were having to defend themselves on during this campaign."

Not so, said Craddick spokesman Chris Cutrone.

"Elections are local matters, and there are a lot of factors that go in to determining their outcome," Cutrone said. "Overall, the speaker was very pleased with the outcomes in most of the races."

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/state/14056134.htm


© 2006 Star-Telegram and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.

House changes may needle session

I quote: "House Democratic Chairman Jim Dunnam of Waco said the election results should send a message to Republican members that they need to work more with education and parent groups." In viewing the election results, I have to agree with Dunnam. Education groups still have their muscle in Texas, counter-balancing special interests that pervade the legislative process. -Angela

March 8, 2006, 10:16PM


ELECTION 2006

House changes may needle session
Primary election triumphs, defeats will affect debate on school finance

By JANET ELLIOTT and R.G. RATCLIFFE
Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle

AUSTIN - Lingering hard feelings over primary election battles, lame ducks and a few new lawmakers will contribute to changing dynamics in the Texas House that could make it more difficult to overhaul school finance in a special session expected to begin next month.

ADVERTISEMENT

"There's plenty of animosity out there," Austin political consultant Bill Miller said Wednesday, a day after the primaries. "It begs the question of, 'Where from here?' "

During last year's first special session on school finance, an education-funding bill passed in the House by seven votes, and a business and sales tax bill to pay for property tax cuts squeaked by with only one vote. In the second 30-day session, the House killed both bills.

Lawmakers are facing a June 1 deadline set by the Texas Supreme Court to resolve the problem. But several major changes have occurred in the House between last year and this week's elections.

Two Republican incumbents were knocked off in their primaries by candidates backed by public education supporters who thought too much emphasis was put on property tax cuts and not enough on funding education. One of those defeated was House Education Chairman Kent Grusendorf, R-Arlington.

A third Republican incumbent ran second in his primary and was forced into a runoff.

All three will serve in the House during the special session. According to House rules, Grusendorf will keep his position as committee chairman, although House Speaker Tom Craddick could name a special committee to handle school finance legislation.

Also in Tuesday's primaries, three House Republicans survived major challenges mounted by wealthy school-voucher advocate Jim Leininger of San Antonio. Two other Republicans targeted by Leininger did not win re-election. But all five will be in the House for the special session.

Additionally, five House Republicans created tension by campaigning against state Reps. Charlie Geren of Fort Worth and Carter Casteel of New Braunfels. Geren won his GOP primary while Casteel lost hers.

Another change involves Craddick's power structure. At least five members of his leadership team are lame ducks who will be leaving the Legislature at the end of next year. They include Reps. Peggy Hamric and Joe Nixon of Houston, who lost races for the Texas Senate.

And two Democrats will join the school finance debate for the first time. Rep. Ana Hernandez, D-Houston, won election in December to the seat held by the late Rep. Joe Moreno, D-Houston.

Rep. Donna Howard, D-Austin, won a special election last month to the seat held during last year's sessions by Rep. Todd Baxter, R-Austin. Baxter had been a sure vote on Craddick's team.

Miller, a consultant who is close to Craddick, said the success of the session will depend largely on whether legislators can set aside their differences over the elections.

"The whole business is built on relationships."

Rep. Rob Eissler, R-The Woodlands, did not have a primary opponent but does face a Democrat in the general election this fall.

"The leverage you have is November. Even more pressing is June 1," he said, referring to the court deadline.

On the positive side, legislators' job may be easier if Gov. Rick Perry limits the special session to paying for schools and drops some of the more controversial school changes pushed by Craddick, including November school board elections, a uniform school start date and teacher merit pay.

Leininger doesn't want the House to debate vouchers during the special session, said a spokesman for the physician and businessman.

"The plan is to do it in a regular legislative session. It's so important that no one wants to rush that debate," said Ken Hoagland.

"I hope they will come back and just focus on solving the problems of how to pay for our schools and reduce property taxes, and not get distracted by special interest legislation," said Carolyn Boyle, whose Texas Parent PAC helped defeat Grusendorf and Rep. Elvira Reyna, R-Mesquite.

House Democratic Chairman Jim Dunnam of Waco said the election results should send a message to Republican members that they need to work more with education and parent groups.

janet.elliott@chron.com

r.g.ratcliffe@chron.com


This article is: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/3711038.html

Senator pans Texas' $2 billion storm aid request

What all this means is that Texas was going to withdraw this from its surplus and the surplus monies are probably ear-marked for bailing out the state in the upcoming April session on school finance--which gets underway, I hear, on April 18, 2006. The state's really going to be in a fix now. -Angela


Senator pans Texas' $2 billion storm aid request

09:39 AM CST on Thursday, March 9, 2006


By ALLEN PUSEY / The Dallas Morning News


WASHINGTON – An influential Missouri senator urged Senate colleagues Wednesday to vote against a Texas request for $2 billion in hurricane relief funding, likening its reception to more than 450,000 Katrina evacuees to those of a "paid companion."

A startled Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, later rejected the remarks as "unfair." But the sentiment expressed by Republican Sen. Christopher "Kit" Bond suggests rough sailing ahead for the state's bid for federal funds.

"I know there are costs and burdens, but I need to be convinced that they [Texas] should be compensated," said Mr. Bond, describing the state's absorption of hurricane victims as mutually beneficial.

"They took in displaced families who receive benefits, fill empty housing and take on important jobs," he said. "And that should be part of the calculus.

"I think it's time we get back to being a good neighbor and not a paid companion," said the senator, who left the committee room by the time Ms. Hutchison had a chance to reply.

Ms. Hutchison told the committee that what Mr. Bond said "was particularly harsh and not at all fair or realistic."

"He seemed to indicate that he thought that we were asking for charitable contributions for the millions of dollars and hours that were put in by volunteers in Texas," she said. "That is not the case."

Texas received $70 million of $11 billion in Katrina-related federal grants, Ms. Hutchison said. And the state still houses more than 400,000 evacuees, including 38,000 school-age children. The Texas request includes nearly $1 billion in community block grant funding for various projects.

She said the state had exhausted its allotments of community grant funding by the time Hurricane Rita hit just a few weeks later, and victims of that hurricane have been shortchanged in federal aid.

The state's $2 billion bid for reimbursement has had trouble getting traction in Washington.

Three weeks ago, Texas was excluded from a White House emergency request for hurricane funds, a rebuff that Ms. Hutchison blamed on a lackadaisical state response to requests for documentation of its needs.

This week, Texas officials were told that they are unlikely to receive federal funds for 70,000 homes and businesses in southeast Texas devastated by Rita because high winds, rather than floods, caused the damage.

Housing Secretary Alphonso Jackson, a Texan, added another blow to the state's bid Wednesday, testifying that Texas cities have been reimbursed by FEMA "very well" for millions they advanced for housing for Katrina evacuees.

"Have we reimbursed them completely? No. But to say that they have not been reimbursed is not true," Mr. Jackson said.

Dallas officials say the city has received about $3.4 million of $6.8 million submitted to FEMA for reimbursement. City officials say they have no indication that the funds will not be reimbursed.

Mayor Bill White of Houston said FEMA has been conscientious about reimbursements for housing and police costs related to nearly 200,000 evacuees in the Houston area, but the payments have slowed in recent weeks. A recently signed contract with the agency should help rectify the problem, he said. But when those funds end, he said, the community grant funding requested by Texas should be provided to bridge the gap.

E-mail apusey@dallasnews.com

Online at: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-katrelief_09tex.ART.State.Edition2.50c9537.html

Wednesday, March 08, 2006

WALKOUT shown on Saturday, March 18 at 8PM ET/ 8:30 PT

I saw this inspiring film myself last week. It was excellent! Here is a good summary comment of the film from the film's website.

"WALKOUT is the story of the birth of the Chicano civil rights movement and a testimony to the inspired leadership and courage of those who led the way: a high school teacher and a a 17-year-old Latina, who literally changed the world."

Also, great for all ages. You can see it on HBO on Saturday, March 18 at 8PM ET/ 8:30 PT. Check out the HBO announcement as well.

-Angela

HBO film teaches EP teens about '68 protests


Gustavo Reveles Acosta
El Paso Times
Tuesday, March 7, 2006

High-schooler Melina Carachure didn't know about the 1968 student demonstrations in East Los Angeles before watching an early screening of the film "Walkout" on Monday.

Carachure -- who along with 500 other students from the El Paso district viewed the movie -- left the screening at the Abraham Chavez Theatre with a newfound need to learn more about her Hispanic heritage.

"I wish they would teach us more about this kind of stuff in history classes. I feel really proud right now," said Carachure, who attends the district's School Age Parent Center.

"Walkout" is the dramatic story of the true events behind the 1968 Chicano-organized protests that called for equal educational opportunities and facilities for Hispanics in Los Angeles.
Award-winning actor Edward James Olmos ("Stand and Deliver") directed the film, which will air March 18 on HBO. It stars Alexa Vega of "Spy Kids" fame and Efren Ramirez, who played Pedro in "Napoleon Dynamite."


Arty Piñeda, a senior at El Paso High School, said he thought he would be watching a documentary, but instead was surprised at how involved he became with the film.

Piñeda cheered as actors playing high-school students walked out of their classrooms and carried picket signs, and booed as movie police used clubs to stop the peaceful demonstrations.

"It made me mad that the students were beaten for standing up for their rights," he said. "I'm glad I got to see the film and learn about our history."

Before watching the film, the students heard from area leaders who told them about the Chicano movement and the pivotal role young people played in it.

"What I wanted them to know is that what was going on in California in 1968 was happening here in Texas, too, at the same time," said Gregory Rocha, a political science professor at the University of Texas at El Paso. "What a film like this does, is tell our youth what their parents did to make things better for them."

According to the movie, the walkouts lead to better conditions in the heavily Hispanic East Los Angeles schools. The filmmakers also credit the events of that year with increased enrollment at the University of California, Los Angeles.

The California walkouts inspired other Chicano student protests in the Southwest, including one at UTEP in 1971 that lead to the creation of the Chicano Studies program.

The EPISD board of trustees signed a resolution last week proclaiming March as César Chávez Month. Chávez's birthday, March 31, is a state holiday in Texas. The Chicano civil rights leader, who died in 1993, and his nonviolent protests were mentioned throughout the film.

Gustavo Reveles Acosta may be reached at greveles@elpasotimes.com ; 546-6133.

Tuesday, March 07, 2006

Testing Our Sanity

Here's an earlier piece that a friend shared with me that is relevent to the bilingual education and English language learner assessment debate currently. -Angela



A fourth-grade bilingual teacher shares her story of preparing students for mandated tests that are not developmentally appropriate.


Summer 2003

By Kelley Dawson

President George W. Bush claims no child will be left behind under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. But testing required by the ESEA results in educational practices that are developmentally inappropriate and discriminatory for English language learners. In addition, pressure to raise test scores is causing significant negative changes in bilingual programs.

I teach fourth grade at a bilingual elementary school in Wisconsin. Our school, our district, and our state all have a commitment to bilingual education. But our ability to follow through on that commitment has been seriously compromised by the ESEA.

Last November my colleagues and I administered standardized tests to about 50 fourth graders, roughly half of them English proficient and the other half Limited English Proficient (LEP).

In September, the state informed teachers that all students with an English proficiency level of three or above must take the state standardized tests in English. Previously these students had been tested in Spanish, but the state Department of Public Instruction had negotiated the level-three cutoff with the federal Department of Education. This cutoff was of great concern to bilingual educators, because level-three and -four students, by definition, do not read and write at grade level in English. In fact, most level-three and -four students I know have good verbal English but are just beginning to read and write in English.

When we learned our level-three and -four students would be tested in English, the rush began. We were supposed to prepare about 25 LEP students to take a fourth-grade battery of standardized tests in English. We had about a month to get them ready.

We created small, intensive English transitional reading groups, unrealistically hoping that we could raise students’ reading levels from roughly a first or second grade level to a fourth grade level in a month. We began teaching math bilingually, explaining concepts in Spanish but pushing students to write explanations of their mathematical thinking in English because that’s how they’d have to do it on the test. Several non-classroom teachers were enlisted in this test preparation effort so that students could learn in small groups.

The teaching strategies mentioned here — transitional reading groups, a focus on math problem solving, and helping students write in English — are normal, positive aspects of our fourth-grade program. Most fourth graders make great gains in all of these areas over the course of a year as they make the academic transition to their second language — but it cannot be done in one month. What was inappropriate about this test preparation scheme was not necessarily the teaching methods we used, but the fact that we tried to force our students to make nearly a year’s worth of progress in one month so they would be ready for the test in November.

Another problem that this test-prep routine presented for our school was that several specialists and non-class-room teachers, including our special education teacher and mentor teachers, were pulled from their other duties in order to work intensively with our fourth-grade students on test-prep and to administer the tests. This helped our students but negatively impacted students at other grade levels.

In addition, our normal curriculum was interrupted for two months while we carried out this emergency test preparation plan. We put our math statistics and data unit on hold so that we could focus on general problem-solving skills and explaining mathematical thinking in English. We shortened Spanish reading instruction to 40 minutes a day. We shortchanged our social studies unit on conflict resolution and our science unit on the Milwaukee River ecosystem. We focused instead on packing in English reading and math before November.

In the two months leading up to the test, I attended planning meetings and work sessions with my partner teacher and several other staff members. We planned test-prep curriculum, organized the testing groups, and tried to figure out how to make the necessary accommodations for our LEP students. Each of us spent between two and six hours a week outside of the school day doing this work. This not only diverted our time away from other planning and teaching duties, but also cost our school a considerable amount of money, since we were paid for our work.

Finally the tests began.

THE TESTING BEGINS

Department of Public Instruction officials had informed teachers that they expected us to make every allowable accommodation so that LEP students could do their best on the tests. Allowable accommodations for LEP students included extra time on all five tests (English Reading, English Language Arts, Science, Social Studies, and Math); reading aloud the science, social studies, and math tests; and providing a verbal translation in Spanish of the science, social studies, and math tests.

These accommodations nearly tripled the time that LEP students needed to complete their tests. Our English proficient students spent about 6.5 hours altogether to complete their five timed tests. It took us seven days at two-and-a -half hours a day to finish the tests with our Limited English Proficient students . 17-and-a-half hours of tests.

One day I asked students to write about their experiences with the tests. The LEP students and English proficient students had different kinds of responses. English proficient students said things like: " was fun because we took the test for an hour and we got to play math games and read for the rest of the morning" (while they waited for their LEP counterparts to finish). LEP students wrote things like: " was hard because it took so much time, and I got tired."

The math, science, and social studies tests took the most time and were the most grueling. We administered the tests in groups of six LEP students. We read each test item aloud twice in English, stated the translation twice in Spanish, and then gave the students time to think, work, and mark their answers. We moved on to the next question when everyone was ready. Imagine being ten-years-old and paying attention to this type of a learning situation for almost three hours every morning . not to mention trying to "do your best" on the test!

Students coped with the test in their own ways. Some shrugged it off and did their best even though they got tired. One boy shut down each day after about half the time, putting his head down and refusing to answer any more questions. A bright girl who has very high expectations for herself and was making great progress in English before the tests appeared increasingly downtrodden as the days went on. A very quiet girl suddenly burst out with "Teacher, this is crazy!" as I read the umpteenth question on the science portion of the test.

We teachers did not have the easiest time of it, either. During testing weeks we blew off steam by taking the kids out for kickball every day at noon when the tests were done and by counting the days of testing left. But the months of time and energy we spent preparing our students for a test that we do not feel is educationally useful took its toll on many of us. One colleague said she felt she was going crazy trying to reconcile what we were doing with her own vision of what education should be. I, too, felt this way and experienced an enormous amount of stress and desperation about the whole situation.

This process of trying to prepare the LEP students for the tests and administering the tests to them was unreasonable and educationally inappropriate. But my school and other schools engage in these kinds of practices because law requires us to, and because the stakes are high. Many of our bilingual schools are on the "schools in need of improvement" list. If we do not improve our scores, we face sanctions.

The ESEA and its testing requirements are implemented somewhat differently in each state; the federal Department of Education negotiates the details with each state"s education department. Some states, like California and Texas, offer Spanish standardized tests to students who have been in the United States for less than three years; other states like Wisconsin did away with Spanish testing and give alternative assessments to the small percentage of students who are not required to take the tests in English. But all states are under pressure to test more English language learners and to begin testing them after fewer years of English language instruction.

The national research shows that English language learners learn English best when they learn to read and write in their native language first. Then they can make a successful transition to reading and writing in English. This process is not quick . research shows that it takes five to seven years for students to function at grade level in academic English. Unfortunately, there are too many teachers, principals, and schools that are feeling pressured to ignore that research. They are short-changing literacy in students' native languages and pushing English early because of pressure from the ESEA and English standardized tests.

Schools, districts, and states that want to provide quality bilingual education are finding that harder and harder to do given the pressure from the federal government. The ESEA seems designed to force English upon English language learners before they are academically prepared — a practice that is both pedagogically harmful and developmentally inappropriate."

Kelley Dawson (skoolied@yahoo.com) teaches fourth grade at La Escuela Fratney in Milwaukee, Wis. She is an editor at Rethinking Schools.

Friday, March 03, 2006

Exposing racism in education

Navarrette is dead wrong. Many, if not the majority of us, who oppose NCLB do NOT support the status quo. This problematic premise of his could be considered racist, as well. -Angela
March 1, 2006

Ruben Navarrette / The Indianapolis Star

SAN DIEGO -- You have to hand it to critics of No Child Left Behind. In trying to preserve the status quo, they're wrong. But at least they're persistent. In fact, they're persistently wrong.
They'll get another chance to blast away over the next several months as a bipartisan commission holds public hearings across the country to get an earful on what works with the law, and what doesn't. The commission will send recommendations to Congress, which is expected to renew the law in 2007.
It's easy to see why those who prefer the status quo detest NCLB. Under the law, children in every racial and demographic group in every public school must improve their scores on standardized tests in math and science.
The critics hate requirements like that for one reason, because good tests not only tell you if kids are learning but also if teachers and administrators are holding up their end. If the truth comes out, disgruntled parents might go from demanding accountability from schools to demanding it from the individuals who work in them.
The critics are nothing if not versatile. First they insisted that NCLB was unfair to schools because it was a one-size-fits-all approach with no flexibility. Then they said the law was unfair to teachers because it tied them to student performance when not all children learn at the same pace.
Now they're insisting the law is unfair to some students because it benefits middle-class white kids and hurts Latinos and African Americans. At least that is the conclusion of a troubling new study by the deceptively named Civil Rights Project at Harvard University. Troubling because the agenda it advances is dangerous and the thinking behind it is backward. Deceptively named because if this group cared about civil rights, it would push in the opposite direction.
It goes back to the flexibility the critics requested and eventually received. Now that 49 states have either amended the law or waived some of its provisions, the critics have the chutzpah to insist that the thing they wanted has produced a result they find unacceptable. They claim that schools that educate white and middle-class students are more likely to take advantage of loopholes and dodge accountability than those that teach poor kids and Latinos and African Americans. As a result, they say, schools with poor and minority kids are more likely to report low scores on exams and are thus more likely to incur sanctions. That is, according to the critics, an education law intended to help black and brown kids is, in fact, racist.
That criticism is half-right. There is racism here, but not in the law. Rather, it is built into the educational system that the law seeks to reform.
It begins when a teaching corps that is three-fourths white approaches minority students with what President Bush calls the soft bigotry of low expectations. It continues as those teachers, at a loss to explain why these students don't do as well in school, cling to the racist assumption that minority parents don't value education. And, finally, it is compounded when those who want to preserve the status quo do everything they can to undermine testing -- not to protect black and brown children but to protect the adults who are disenfranchising them.
The No Child Left Behind law didn't create racism in education. But it just might be helpful in exposing it.
I suspect that the Harvard study is right about one thing -- that some schools have come up with creative ways to skirt the law by taking advantage of waivers and the like.
But schools that resort to such maneuvers are only hurting the kids they're supposed to be teaching. Minority students are much better off for being held accountable with no exceptions and no excuses.
That can be messy. But whom are we kidding? It's nothing compared to the mess that the special interests have made of the educational system.

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2006603010314

Thursday, March 02, 2006

English-only immersion debated for schools

I'm glad that there is still a debate.... -Angela

English-only immersion debated for schools
Politicians, families, educators seeking common ground

Feb. 28, 2006 12:00 AM/ ARIZONA REPUBLIC

In November 2000, Arizona voters approved the most restrictive English-only education law in the country and prohibited textbooks, materials, bulletin boards, or teaching in any language but English.

Two years later, voters reinforced their message by electing a state schools chief who promised tougher enforcement of the new law.

The law nearly eliminated bilingual education programs that had been widely used in Arizona schools, classes with specially trained teachers that combined instruction in Spanish and English.

To help schools comply with the new law, the state developed a model English-only immersion program.

Under the model, English-learners would be placed in English immersion classes of five to 15 students with a specially trained teacher and a teaching assistant. State planners said most students would learn enough English in one year to keep up with their peers in regular classes by their second year.

To be prepared for English-learners moving into regular classes, the state requires all teachers to complete a 15-hour workshop in English-only teaching methods by August. And under the model, schools would track students who tested out of the English-learner programs and provide tutoring and other help for those who fell behind.

After six years, few schools have been able to establish that model. Schools say they can't afford the cost. The state can't afford to offer technical guidance or much oversight. And many teachers remain lukewarm on the entire idea.

So instead of a uniform approach, the state's English-only immersion programs are different from classroom to classroom and district to district.

In January 2000, before the vote on English-only schools, a federal court had already decided Arizona was not spending enough on English-learner programs. That court battle has continued for six years, through the vote, through a couple of studies and through a contentious Legislature.

So far, under orders from a frustrated federal judge, the state is approaching $1.5 million in daily fines while the governor and lawmakers continue to fight over what the state needs to spend to make English-learner programs work.

The daily fines began Jan. 25 at $500,000, increased Friday to $1 million and will hit $1.5 million in March while politicians try to fix the problem. If the Legislature adjourns without a solution, the fines will reach $2 million a day.

There is one thing, however, the different parties appear to agree on: Arizona needs to create an English-only education system that works.

Each side has its own twist on a plan, but the basic outline is the same. The state needs to create a variety of English immersion programs and send technical teams to schools to launch them.

Then, it needs to track students' progress and make changes to any program not helping English-learners keep up with their peers.

Beyond the basic plan, here is the status of English-learner issues today through the eyes of key players.

State: Politics and money


The battle among the court, Arizona legislators and Gov. Janet Napolitano is about how much extra money schools need to teach English-learners and how it should be distributed. Beneath the surface it is also about clashing political ideologies, illegal immigration and a November election.

For example, Republican lawmakers, who run both the state Senate and House, want the funding plan to include tax breaks for businesses that help pay for English-learners to transfer from public to private schools. Napolitano has twice vetoed that idea. The House did eventually approve a funding bill for English-language learning, backed by Republican leaders, that did not include corporate tax credits for private schools.

Republican lawmakers also want schools to use federal money earmarked for children living in poverty before they ask the state for more to teach English-learners. The governor has rejected that idea, too, saying the state is responsible for funding the programs.

Lawmakers and Napolitano are aware of growing concerns among state voters that illegal immigration is out of control and responsible for filling classrooms with kids who can't speak English.

In December, Arizona schools chief Tom Horne, citing Pew Research Center statistics, asked the federal government to reimburse the state $750 million a year for the cost of educating 125,000 children who are in the state illegally. But a Pew analyst said half of those children were born here and are U.S. citizens.

To Horne, that was splitting hairs. "It's the federal government's fault the undocumented parents crossed over, and had they not done so, we would not be presented with these students," he said.

State Senate President Ken Bennett, a Prescott Republican, said he has an obligation to voters to turn the current "mish-mash" of programs into a structured system that will teach English in a year or two. That was the promise that sold the ballot initiative six years ago.

Becky Hill is education adviser to Napolitano. She said the governor is most interested in tracking progress of students in any new program and making changes if the program isn't working.

"The governor wants schools to use what programs are within the letter of the law and that work," Hill said. "Then replicate them."

Rep. Linda Lopez, a Tucson Democrat, said the state should turn to the schools for direction. Schools have monolingual kids arriving throughout the year and at all grade levels. Some children speak survival English; others can't read in their own languages. Each school may need a variety of programs to help all the kids.

"People want to paint English-language-learner kids with the same brush," Lopez said. "You can't do that."

Republican lawmakers wanted the Arizona Department of Education, run by Horne, to develop the wider variety of model programs. They did not want the 11-member State Board of Education, with its growing number of Napolitano appointees, to take the lead. Now, they've agreed to a task force but continue to wrangle about who appoints members of the task force.

Schools: Different directions


Many schools don't have the money to follow the state's model program. Some aren't sure they would want to even if they could.

And the idea of separating English-learners all day from the rest of the students seems for many schools too close to discrimination. Many schools prefer to keep language-learners in regular classes with a specially trained teacher or pull them out for shorter periods of language classes.

"It's not a good practice to segregate like that," said Mona Arredondo, Tolleson Elementary District's language learning coordinator. "I understand the state's point, but it's hard for students to learn that way."

Tolleson blends all levels of English-learners into regular classes convinced that students just learning English need to listen to and talk to children who are better English speakers. Teachers often pair fluent English speakers with students who are struggling and encourage them to work together to solve problems and create projects.

All of Sunnyslope High School's 150 English-learners are in the state's model program.

In their first year, the north Phoenix school puts them with a highly trained teacher and teacher's aide in a small classroom of fewer than a dozen children, all at the same level of English fluency. In their second year, most are ready to attend a reading class where they spend their time in groups of eight learning English from a computer program and a teacher. Those who need it receive extended one-on-one tutoring.

Principal John Croteau said most of his English-learners not only graduate, they go to college, even if they must stay in high school an extra year.

The advantage at Sunnyslope is money. Like other schools, Sunnyslope gets about $350 in state money for each English-learner. The district also receives $98 in federal money for such learners.

But in the early 1980s, Glendale Union High School District settled two civil rights complaints over English-learner programs by agreeing to levy an extra property tax. That tax now nets the district about $3 million a year, or an extra $2,338 for each of the district's 1,283 English-learners.

Irene Frklich has directed Mesa Public Schools' English-learner program for 20 years and is a longtime supporter of English-only immersion classrooms. What shocks her about the state's model is the suggestion that English-learners could be put into regular classrooms with teachers who have little training beyond a 15-hour workshop.

Mesa is the largest school district in the state and requires that teachers for the English-learner program have a special degree or "endorsement." Teachers earn an endorsement by taking certain college courses that prepare them to teach children a new language while teaching history and science. Today, the district has 600 specially trained teachers. Frklich expects an additional 100 next school year.

Frklich calls the state's requirement of a 15-hour workshop to prepare teachers a shortcut, a waste of time and money.

"What do you learn in two days?" Frklich asked. "Would you send your child who needed special education to a special-education teacher with two days' training?"

Teachers: Language struggles


Restricted by law and limited by a lack of money, Arizona teachers work within English-only parameters. Many have doubts and wish for other options, but in the meantime, they use a variety of techniques to reach English-learners.

Deer Valley Unified District teacher Donna Newport, 42, teaches second grade at north Phoenix's Constitution Elementary. Three of her students don't understand English at all, two more understand at an intermediate level, and three students can read English but not comprehend what they read. The remaining 15 students grew up speaking English.

At her school, English-learners leave her class for up to 90 minutes each day to attend a smaller class where the teacher will speak a little Spanish.

Over the past few weeks, her children have been learning about weather, and using pictures, sounds and actions to create thunder and rain, and trips outside to look at and label clouds.

Even under the English-only rules, Newport said, "I truly believe I'm providing them with the best second-grade education." But she is worried.

When she taught this weather unit to students who grew up speaking English, it took about two to three weeks. In a class where eight of 23 students are struggling to understand English, it will take five.

In a recent geometry class at Tolleson's Arizona Desert Elementary, Eva Gómez sat in front of a graph and asked her fifth-grade students to describe a line on the graph that goes on forever. The class threw hands in the air, slowly spread them apart and made the sound, "Hummm," in unison, as their imaginary lines went on to infinity. When Gómez called on Philip to demonstrate a point on a graph, he punched the air with his finger and clucked with his tongue to show her his imaginary point.

"I'm trying to put a lot of movement into it so they can feel it, hear it, visualize it," Gómez said about her math lesson. With no teaching assistant, she works separately with students who are lagging behind, while she gives those ahead of the lesson independent work.

"It's hard," she said, "but it's not impossible."

Families: Trying to fit in


Back in the fall of 2000 when Arizona voters passed the English-only proposition, many Hispanic parents voted for English-only. For them, learning English was one of the most important things their children could do. Those in favor of the proposition saw it as way to speed the learning.

At the same time, many of Arizona's English-learners come from poor families. For most, Spanish is their first language and remains so at home. Many parents do not have the financial means nor the English skills to help their children learn, be it with computers or books or talking through a homework assignment.

Jorge Solis, newly arrived from Mexico, stood five minutes outside the door of his seventh-grade classroom, too frightened to open the door to his first class in a new country. His mother's words spun through his head: "You have to learn English to be successful." They gave him the courage to finally open the door, he said, and it was his classmates who helped him learn English.

Today, he is a senior at Sunnyslope and ready to graduate in May. But Spanish is still spoken at home, and his mother now admonishes him to be proud of his Mexican heritage.

"I say to my son, at my house only speak Spanish," Maria Solis said in slow but solid English. "And when I go to learn English and when I understand English, I will speak English with you."

Vanessa Abarca, 19, is a sophomore at Glendale Community College and a fourth-generation Glendale resident. But her first language is Spanish, as is her 8-year-old brother's. Everyone in her house speaks Spanish. It's an important way the younger generations stay close to her grandparents.

Before kindergarten, Abarca knew a little English from her aunts and cartoons. Her Glendale elementary school wanted to put her into a bilingual class, but her mother objected. Her mother said she'd take care of Spanish, English was the school's responsibility. Abarca is grateful to her mom and promotes the "sink or swim" English immersion method for all language learners.

Abarca said she understands that many Latino kids, including English-learners, lag behind their peers and drop out. But she hesitates to blame that on language.

"It could be a lot of things," Abarca said. "Problems they're having at home or the income of the family."

Glendale mother Norma Alvarez calls all the debate about how best to educate English learners "an insult."

"I guess we're dumb and we don't learn fast," said Alvarez, an administrator for Glendale.

Alvarez, who spent 2000 campaigning for English-only classrooms, said there should be no distinction between children who know English and those who don't. There never was when she grew up in Glendale.

"You're putting more money into it because you believe this little kid can't learn like others," Alvarez said. "If you treat him differently from everyone else, he'll always feel different."

Former state legislator and lobbyist Alfredo Gutierrez is now a radio talk-show host and businessman. He grew up in the small mining town of Miami with teachers who taped his lips shut if he spoke Spanish.

"Some of us succeeded, but we're the small minority," he said. "We all remember the kids we left behind."

When Gutierrez recalls the faces of those children who weren't as lucky, the debate is no longer about one side vs. another. Many children thrive in an English-only environment, but others fade.

"We want to make sure our kids make it, and immersion is good for a lot of kids," Gutierrez said. "But you can't impose it on every youngster. Some kids need a longer bridge."

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/0228ellprimer0228.html

Barely Half of High-School Graduates Have College-Level Reading Skills, Report Says

By ERIC HOOVER /CHRONICLE OF HIGHER EDUCATION

Only 51 percent of last year's high-school graduates who took the ACT examination had the reading skills they needed to succeed in college or job-training programs, the lowest proportion in more than a decade, according to a report scheduled for release today.

Twenty-one percent of black students, 33 percent of Hispanic students, and 33 percent of students from families with annual incomes below $30,000 were prepared for college-level reading, the report said.

The report, which was prepared by ACT Inc., the nonprofit Iowa-based organization, is based on the scores of 1.2 million high-school students who took its popular college-entrance test.

Among other things, the report found that students' reading skills did not develop throughout their high-school years. According to ACT, the percentage of students who were on track to mastering "complex" reading assignments was higher in the eighth and 10th grades than in the 12th grade. The organization also found that more than half of the states defined reading standards only through the eighth grade.

"The states are silent," said Cynthia Schmeiser, senior vice president for research and development at ACT. "When states aren't communicating what students should know, the bottom line is you can't get what you're not being asked to learn."

The report also said that a student's ability to read at a college level affected his or her performance in a range of subjects, including English, mathematics, and science.

ACT has also found that students who are ready for college-level reading are more likely than other students to enroll in college immediately after graduating from high school, to earn higher grades in college, and to return to college for their sophomore year.

The report includes recommendations for improving reading instruction in high schools and lists what the organization defines as the essential features of complex texts.

The ACT's report, "Reading Between the Lines," is available online on the organization's Web site.

http://chronicle.com/temp/email2.php?id=qzvzBrgZckZs3FxdTXbb4nRygqqtCrfh

Wednesday, March 01, 2006

1880s Nativists replaced by modern day Nativists but message remains the same

This is an excellent, albeit brief, synopsis of the history of nativism in the U.S. by Patrick Osio, Jr.HispanicVista.com
February 23, 2006 -Angela

 
  A Nebraska elementary school teacher was arrested and convicted for teaching in a foreign language.  He was fined and jailed as the law read that teaching elementary school children a foreign language or using a foreign language to teach was a crime. How can this possibly happen in America?

Were this article to end at this point, letters would pour in suggesting that the teacher and I go back to Mexico. Letters would include hoorays for Nebraska along with reminders that English is the language of America and that Mexicans do not want to assimilate to the American culture and way of life and are stealing jobs from Americans.

Hold off on the letters, there is more to the article. The teacher arrested and jailed was not a Hispanic, he was of German ethnicity and the language he used was not Spanish, it was German. The teacher appealed to the Supreme Court (Meyer vs. Nebraska) that in turn overturned the conviction as an infringement on personal liberty.

Since the creation of the country after the American Revolution there have been those, known as nativists, who oppose immigration, foreign language usage and the practice of religions and cultures not conforming to those of the nativists. Today’s similar in attitude group are but the latest batch, whose commonality with past groups is their claims that unless we make a final stand the country, culture and sovereignty will be overrun and forever lost.

Teacher Myer’s Supreme Court case was in 1923. But the question of language dates to the organization of the new country as the founders debated which language to adopt. German was of prime consideration, as was Dutch and even Greek was considered. There was good reason, about one-third of the population was foreign born and numerous languages were in use. English was chosen as the nation’s language (though never as the official language) simply because the majority of the founders in power were English users.

Early day nativists argued that immigrants depressed the wages of "artisans and laborers because newcomers would work for less pay than native-born workers." This argument was heard in the early 1800s about the Irish and German immigrants, today it’s about Mexicans.

We also hear that Mexico through Mexican immigrants is hatching a Reconquista, a plot to take back the “conquered land.”  In 1844, the argument was that the Pope in Rome was secretly planning to seize control of America through Irish Catholics. In those days opportunistic political candidates campaigned to deny citizenship to Catholic immigrants denouncing Catholicism as an evil foreign influence.

To diminish the power of those already citizens a secondary argument was that "a set of citizens, German and Irish, wanted to get the Constitution of the U. S. into their own hands and sell it to a foreign power."  From 1840 through 1880, German immigration was in excess of 4 million and Irish immigration over 1.5 million – their number making them the target.

Some prominent figures in those days carried the nativist banner: Henry Francis Bowers founder of the American Protective Association; John Bell, presidential candidate in 1860, John J. Crittenden, Senator from Kentucky; Nathaniel Banks, Speaker of the House, Jerome Smith, mayor of Boston; Henry Wilson, Vice President under Grant; Secretary of State Edward Everett; Lincoln’s Attorney General Edward Bates and many more.

Those names are today replaced by Congressmen Tom Tancredo, James Sensenbrenner, Duncan Hunter, Charlie Norwood, Lamar Smith, and about 80 other Congress representatives. From outside government there is John Tanton, founder of a multitude of anti immigrant, disguised as ‘immigration reform’ nativist organizations: Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), Numbers USA, Pro English, and others that replace the Know Nothing Party, the Immigration Restriction League, Order of United Americans and Order of the Star Spangled Banner organizations of the 1800s.

Nativists attack and periodic influence continued into the 1900s. Germans after WWI once again became targets as happened to Myers in Nebraska. The 12+ million Italian, Jewish, Poles, Austrians, Czechs, Hungarians and Slovaks immigrants arriving through the 1920s, suffered the same wrath, in some cases worse at the hands of nativists.

Fortunately nativists have always been a minority in the Unites States but their power to create national division and cause fear about immigrants is always present. We are again faced with such force. 
Nativists don’t want immigration reform because to them it’s not about immigration; it’s about the kind of people coming to America – modern day nativists don’t want Mexicans of color.
________________________________________________________________
Patrick Osio, Jr. is Editor of HispanicVista.com (www.hispanicvista.com).  Contact at Posiojr@hispanicvista.com

Tuesday, February 28, 2006

The Computer-Module-for-Course-Credit Fraud

I had an interesting conversation with my undergraduate students in my UT Center for Mexican American Studies Education Policy Seminar. Specifically, they shared with me how at least in their high schools, great use was made of "computer modules" by various names that allowed students to earn course credit. They provided numerous examples of how this was being abused by the students themselves. Basically, students could go to sleep in their courses, do poorly, or fail altogether and then make up for it at the end of the year via these modules through which they can earn credit in short time for an entire course. (They, of course, have to pass the TAKS test so we're only referring to students who take and pass it.)

This was very interesting to talk about today. Perhaps these opportunities were designed with good intentions, but they've since been corrupted since at least for some students, it's their safety net if other things fail. For the school, it keeps their dropout numbers low (which are in turn connected to the school's state accountability rating), but the students are not better off--though there are surely some exceptions.

I shared with them how it's curious that the high-stakes testing system in grades 3, 5, and 8 was devised with precisely the rationale of not fostering social promotion--that is, promoting kids up the system who are not qualified to be at that grade level. Despite this rationale, this other problem appears to persist, at least in some places; yet, to my knowledge, it seems not to have registered much attention for policy makers. They talked about how a perverse incentive is created to NOT attend class and basically acquire course credit through examination so that they can get their diplomas even if they're goofing off during the regular year.

Given the way that these modules are playing out for kids, one can't help but think that our children through insidious means are being robbed of the education that they deserve and for what? Cynically, the answer seems to be for a higher state rating rather than for what's good for the children. Money/profits for the software vendors is surely part of the story as well. I need to look into this more. I hope that at least some of my students comment on this matter. -Angela

Graduates versus Oligarchs

We're increasingly polarized by class in our society, as this article suggests. Because race and class overlap so much in our society, this is, of necessity, a racial problem as well. This cannot be healthy for our already fledgling democracy. -Angela

Graduates versus Oligarchs

By Paul Krugman

February 27, 2006, The New York Times

Ben Bernanke's maiden Congressional testimony as chairman of
the Federal Reserve was, everyone agrees, superb. He didn't
put a foot wrong on monetary or fiscal policy.

But Mr. Bernanke did stumble at one point. Responding to a
question from Representative Barney Frank about income
inequality, he declared that "the most important factor" in
rising inequality "is the rising skill premium, the increased
return to education."

That's a fundamental misreading of what's happening to
American society. What we're seeing isn't the rise of a
fairly broad class of knowledge workers. Instead, we're
seeing the rise of a narrow oligarchy: income and wealth are
becoming increasingly concentrated in the hands of a small,
privileged elite.

I think of Mr. Bernanke's position, which one hears all the
time, as the 80-20 fallacy. It's the notion that the winners
in our increasingly unequal society are a fairly large group
- that the 20 percent or so of American workers who have the
skills to take advantage of new technology and globalization
are pulling away from the 80 percent who don't have these
skills.

The truth is quite different. Highly educated workers have
done better than those with less education, but a college
degree has hardly been a ticket to big income gains. The 2006
Economic Report of the President tells us that the real
earnings of college graduates actually fell more than 5
percent between 2000 and 2004. Over the longer stretch from
1975 to 2004 the average earnings of college graduates rose,
but by less than 1 percent per year.

So who are the winners from rising inequality? It's not the
top 20 percent, oreven the top 10 percent. The big gains have
gone to a much smaller, much richer group than that.

A new research paper by Ian Dew-Becker and Robert Gordon of
Northwestern University, "Where Did the Productivity Growth
Go?," gives the details. Between 1972 and 2001 the wage and
salary income of Americans at the 90th percentile of the
income distribution rose only 34 percent, or about 1 percent
per year. So being in the top 10 percent of the income
distribution, like being a college graduate, wasn't a ticket
to big income gains.

But income at the 99th percentile rose 87 percent; income at
the 99.9th percentile rose 181 percent; and income at the
99.99th percentile rose 497 percent. No, that's not a
misprint.

Just to give you a sense of who we're talking about: the
nonpartisan Tax Policy Center estimates that this year the
99th percentile will correspond to an income of $402,306, and
the 99.9thpercentile to an income of $1,672,726. The center
doesn't give a number for the 99.99th percentile, but it's
probably well over $6 million a year.

Why would someone as smart and well informed as Mr. Bernanke
get the nature of growing inequality wrong? Because the
fallacy he fell into tends to dominate polite discussion
about income trends, not because it's true, but because it's
comforting. The notion that it's all about returns to
education suggests that nobody is to blame for rising
inequality, that it's just a case of supply and demand at
work. And it also suggests that the way to mitigate
inequality is to improve our educational system - and better
education is a value to which just about every politician in
America pays at least lip service.

The idea that we have a rising oligarchy is much more
disturbing. It suggests that the growth of inequality may
have as much to do with power relations as it does with
marketforces. Unfortunately, that's the real story.

Should we be worried about the increasingly oligarchic nature
of American society? Yes, and not just because a rising
economic tide has failed to lift most boats. Both history and
modern experience tell us that highly unequal societies also
tend to be highly corrupt. There's an arrow of causation that
runs from diverging income trends to Jack Abramoff and the K
Street project.

And I'm with Alan Greenspan, who - surprisingly, given his
libertarian roots - has repeatedly warned that growing
inequality poses a threat to "democratic society."

It may take some time before we muster the political will to
counter that threat. But the first step toward doing
something about inequality is to abandon the 80-20 fallacy.
It's time to face up to the fact that rising inequality is
driven by the giant income gains of a tiny elite, not the
modest gains ofcollege graduates.

Exit exam a test of determination: Language barrier adds unfair burden, critics say of requirement

This was a front page article in the San Francisco Chronicle. This year in California, the exam goes high stakes. This piece addresses how this exam is a very hard burden for English language learners. -Angela


by Nanette Asimov, Chronicle Staff Writer

Monday, February 27, 2006


For a 16-year-old, Iris Padilla's resume looks pretty good: Not only is she already a senior close to completing all the credits needed to graduate from Richmond High, she's president of a Latin American culture club and is active in political and religious clubs at school. Next year, Iris wants to go to college and study psychology.

But Richmond High might not let her graduate this spring.

That's because Iris hasn't passed the exit exam, and she has only one more chance before graduation day to tackle the two-day test, on March 21-22.

Iris is one of 73,270 California high school seniors in the same pickle -- unable to fulfill a new state law requiring students to pass a test of basic English, math and algebra to graduate. That's 1 in 5 members of the state's Class of 2006, says the state Department of Education.

More than half of those who still need to pass -- 40,002 students -- are like Iris: They don't speak much English.

The question of whether to deny diplomas to otherwise qualified students is divisive, with passions high on both sides. Critics sued state educators earlier this month, challenging the legality of the exam, while the same state educators say they are acting in the best interests of students.

"I need a diploma," said Iris, a chestnut-haired girl who was born in Los Angeles and grew up in the Mexican state of Jalisco. "I want it. I deserve it. I've been going to school and studying. I want to have a profession."

Iris said all of this in Spanish. She returned to California in 2004 after the grandmother she'd been living with in Mexico died. Now she lives with her Spanish-speaking mother in an apartment near Richmond High in the West Contra Costa Unified School District.

Iris' English is so iffy that pronouncing the words makes her blush. When pressed, she easily identified a shrimp but was stumped by a spoon. Asked by a reporter to write something in English, Iris crafted several simple sentences, including, "I was born in the United States," and "I think that the exit exam is innecesary." But like many students in her position, she's studying hard.

Her school day begins at 7:30 a.m. with an exit-exam prep class in math. Then it's on to geometry, economics, computer graphics, world history and an English-language class. She is passing them all. After school, Iris attends another prep class for the English portion of the test.

Her teacher, Isadora Martinez-McCoffey, has been teaching English to newcomers in the same classroom for 30 years and has seen most of them graduate, and many go on to college.

"Some have become dentists, hygienists, nurses, psychologists, teachers," said Martinez-McCoffey.

But now, she fears, students like Iris will stagnate.

With one month left to go before her final shot at passing the exit exam, Iris still finds an Edna St. Vincent Millay poem on the practice test impenetrable, and word problems in math as clear as Greek.

Does that mean Iris should be barred from walking across the graduation stage with her classmates, or that she should receive an empty envelope when theirs contains a diploma?

State Superintendent Jack O'Connell, who wrote the exit exam law in 1999 while a state senator, calls it "immoral" to award diplomas to students who can't pass the test.

"I was heartbroken by stories of high school graduates who could not read or write or understand basic computing," he told the state Board of Education recently. "Too many of those students were poor, Latino or African American, or students with disabilities."

Before the exit exam requirement, he said, "some schools pushed each and every student to succeed, while others, wallowing in the status quo of low standards, handed out diplomas to any student who simply put in seat time."

The exit exam has been administered for several years without a diploma penalty. Independent evaluators credit it with forcing thousands of schools to raise standards and push students to improve academically.

Joining O'Connell in applauding the exit exam's influence is a number of employers, lawmakers and state education officials who like having a consistent, minimum academic standard for all graduating seniors. Many say the standards, which measure skills taught between grades 6 and 10, should be even tougher.

"The need for the (exit exam) is simple," said Jim Lanich, president of California Business for Education Excellence, which includes some of the state's largest employers, from IBM to SBC. "Too many students graduate from high school unprepared for the challenges that lie ahead."

Not every business professional sees merit in a test that may turn out thousands of diploma-less adults, year after year.

"This exam is punitive," said Rene Antonio Mendieta, a San Lorenzo Realtor. "I would not have passed this test, and I got four or five 'Fs' in San Francisco State University. But I got help from tutors and professors. They took care of me, and now I'm giving back to the community."

A member of the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce in Alameda County, Mendieta showed up at a news conference this month in the San Francisco law offices of Morrison & Foerster, where attorneys announced they had filed the lawsuit challenging the exit exam.

Meanwhile, Iris is attending exit-exam prep classes each weekday.

Recently, she sat with 14 students in Martinez-McCoffey's English test-prep class studying sample pages from the exit exam. The test asks students to write one essay and answer 72 multiple-choice questions about passages they read, and about grammar.

Students who speak little English may have the test directions read to them in their home language. They may also use a hand-written glossary when taking the test, but only if there is no explanation of the English word beyond its exact translation. And they may take all day to finish.

In the prep class, the students studied a three-paragraph essay about zookeepers who kept poisoning koalas by feeding them young eucalyptus leaves, which can carry a toxin. Eventually, the zookeepers learned that only older leaves were safe.

Martinez-McCoffey called on a young man to read the essay aloud, which he did, stumbling over most of the words.

"Very good, caballero," Martinez-McCoffey told him, calling him a gentleman.

Then the class underlined unfamiliar words, and there were many: "wilds," "supply," "grove," "within," "quantities," "senses," "unknowingly," "starve," "trapped," "distinguish" and "thriving."

Martinez-McCoffey asked Iris to read a question about the essay. Haltingly, as if trying on a stiff new pair of shoes, Iris read: "What is the purpose of this article?" Then she correctly identified "to inform" as the answer.

But when the class turned to St. Vincent Millay's "The Courage That My Mother Had," the questions got tougher. The poem relies on the phrase "rock from New England quarried" as its primary metaphor, and one of the questions asked students to identify which poetic phrase created a tone of sadness and regret.

Only four students got it right. And two of them admitted they guessed.

"My heart just breaks, because many of these students have been in this country just six months or a year," Martinez-McCoffey said later, her eyes welling with tears.

She said the students are bright -- one is doing well in chemistry, and others are taking college-level Spanish -- but that it can take years to learn a language well enough to pass a 10th-grade English exam.

"Some have missed passing by 10 points. Some by 1 point," she said. "They're so disappointed. So hopeful."

If a student does not pass
Before the end of their senior year, California public school students have six opportunities to try to pass the exit exam.

Under state law, a 10th-grader can take the test one time, an 11th-grader twice and a 12th-grader three times.

Students who finish 12th grade without passing the exit exam can enroll in adult school and then have two opportunities per year to take the test, as long as they are enrolled in school, according to the state Department of Education.

Individual school district policies may vary on whether students enrolled in community college can take the exit exam after high school.

State law also offers these options for students who do not pass the exit exam by the end of their senior year in high school and want to earn a diploma:

TUTORING

Students are entitled to at least one year in a free class designed to tutor them after they complete 12th grade.

GRADE 13

At any time after their senior year, former students can ask the district where they attended school to let them enroll for a 13th year. If the applicant is under 18, "the district is required to serve the student in an appropriate program," according to the state Department of Education. If the applicant is older than 18, admission is at the district's discretion.

INDEPENDENT STUDY

Districts may permit students to move directly from grade 12 into an independent-study program to try to pass the exit exam.

CHARTER SCHOOL

Students who move directly from grade 12 into a charter school (an autonomous public program) can study at the charter school until age 22 in order to pass the exit exam and earn a diploma.

DIPLOMA-AWARDING COLLEGES

Some community colleges award high school diplomas through their noncredit adult-education programs and do not require students to pass the exit exam.

-- Nanette Asimov

E-mail Nanette Asimov at nasimov@sfchronicle.com.
Page A - 1
URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/02/27/MNG2GHFBFJ1.DTL
©2006 San Francisco Chronicle