Ron Unz, sponsor of the "English for the Children" initiatives, seems to have learned from his mistakes in California. Proposition 227 was amateurishly drafted, leaving far more flexibility than he intended. With Arizona's Proposition 203, he hopes to tighten the screws.In 1998-99, the first year of Proposition 227, the California State Board of Education provided minimal guidance on how to interpret Proposition 227. So the law's implementation varied widely. Its vagueness – featuring terms like "special educational needs" and "overwhelmingly in English" – gave school districts plenty of leeway, and many took advantage of it. For example, some decided that limited English proficiency in itself was a "special" need. Others reasoned that, since Unz called his 61 percent victory on election day "overwhelming," a program that was taught 61 percent of the time in English should meet the law's requirements. Relying on these and other loopholes, numerous districts continued to offer a range of educational options, from bilingual to English-only instruction, and they allowed parents to choose freely among them.
By year two, the legal picture began to clear. Parents' right to choose bilingual education, even after Proposition 227, was reaffirmed by a California attorney general's opinion and a state appeals court decision in McLaughlin v. State Board of Education (75 Cal.App.4th 196). The law "was designed to wrest from school boards and administrators decisionmaking authority for selecting between LEP educational options, and repose this power exclusively in parents of LEP students," the court ruled. Therefore, the attorney general concluded, school districts cannot arbitrarily reject parents' requests for bilingual instruction and they must provide a bilingual option for children learning English.
This was not what Ron Unz had in mind when he vowed to "eliminate bilingual education in California by 1998."
On the contrary, bilingual education programs have survived in many (though still not all) California districts where parents want them. In 1998-99, the first year of Proposition 227, nearly 170,000 children remained in bilingual classrooms – down from 410,000 the previous school year – according to the California Department of Education. Another 472,000 English learners received at least some "support" in their native language – vs. 306,000 in 1997-98 – despite threats of lawsuits by English-only advocates, who claimed this approach violated the spirit of Proposition 227.
Unz frequently reminded educators that – unless they followed his restrictive interpretation of the law – they could be held personally liable for financial damages: "There is a real possibility that some administrators and teachers will lose their homes and be forced into bankruptcy over this" (Los Angeles Times, 2 September 1998). But few educators were intimidated because – apparently unbeknownst to Unz – their professional associations insured them against such liability judgments.
In other words, Proposition 227 resulted in too much parental choice, too much professional discretion, and too much local control to suit Ron Unz.
So in rewriting the English-only initiative for Arizona, Unz has severely limited the options of parents, educators, and elected officials. While preserving the illusion of parental choice, by allowing them to seek "waivers" of the English-only rule, Proposition 203 includes new restrictions that, in practice, would mean the elimination of parental choice. For example, it provides that school officials "may reject waiver requests without explanation or legal consequence." If adopted, the Arizona initiative would impose virtually air-tight restrictions on the use of native-language instruction in public schools.
Consider the striking differences between the two measures (emphases added):
| Proposition 227 – passed in California, June 1998 | Proposition 203 –
proposed
in Arizona,
November 2000 |
| SECTION 1. Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 300) is added to Part
1 of the Educational Code, to read:
CHAPTER 3. English Language Education for Immigrant Children |
Sec. 2. Repeal
Title 15, chapter 7, article 3.1, Arizona Revised Statutes [i.e., all current law regarding the education of English language learners], is repealed. Sec. 3. Title 15, chapter 7, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new article 3.1, to read: Article 3.1. English Language Education for Children in Public Schools |
| Sec. 306. Definitions
(b) "English language classroom" means a classroom in which the language of instruction used by the teaching personnel is overwhelmingly the English language, and in which such teaching personnel possess a good knowledge of the English language. (d) "Sheltered English immersion" or "structured English immersion" means an English language acquisition process for young children in which nearly all classroom instruction is in English but with the curriculum and presentation designed for children who are learning the language. |
Section 15-751. Definitions
2. "English language classroom" means a classroom in which English is the language of instruction used by the teaching personnel, and in which such teaching personnel possess a good knowledge of the English language. English language classrooms encompass both English language mainstream classrooms and sheltered English immersion classrooms. 5. "Sheltered English immersion" or "structured English immersion" means an English language acquisition process for young children in which nearly all classroom instruction is in English but with the curriculum and presentation designed for children who are learning the language. Books and instructional materials are in English and all reading, writing, and subject matter are taught in English. Although teachers may use a minimal amount of the child’s native language when necessary, no subject matter shall be taught in any language other than English, and children in this program learn to read and write solely in English... |
| ARTICLE 2. English Language Education
305. Subject to the exceptions provided in Article 3 (commencing with Section 310), all children in California public schools shall be taught English by being taught in English. In particular, this shall require that all children be placed in English language classrooms. Children who are English learners shall be educated through sheltered English immersion during a temporary transition period not normally intended to exceed one year. ... |
Section 15-752. English Language Education
Subject to the exceptions provided in Section 15-753, all children in Arizona public schools shall be taught English by being taught in English and all children shall be placed in English language classrooms. Children who are English learners shall be educated through sheltered English immersion during a temporary transition period not normally intended to exceed one year. ... Foreign language classes for children who already know English shall be completely unaffected, as shall special educational programs for physically or mentally-impaired students. |
| ARTICLE 3. Parental Exceptions
Sec. 310. The requirements of Section 305 may be waived with the prior written informed consent, to be provided annually, of the child's parents or legal guardian under the circumstances specified below and in Section 311. Such informed consent shall require that said parents or legal guardian personally visit the school to apply for the waiver and that they there be provided a full description of the educational materials to be used in the different educational program choices and all the educational opportunities available to the child. |
Section 15-753. Parental Waivers
A. The requirements of Section 15-752 may be waived with the prior written informed consent, to be provided annually, of the child’s parents or legal guardian under the circumstances specified in this Section. Such informed consent shall require that said parents or legal guardian personally visit the school to apply for the waiver and that they there be provided a full description of the educational materials to be used in the different educational program choices and all the educational opportunities available to the child. |
| 311. The circumstances in which a parental exception waiver may be
granted under Section 310 are as follows:
(a) Children who already know English: the child already possesses good English language skills, as measured by standardized tests of English vocabulary comprehension, reading, and writing, in which the child scores at or above the state average for his grade level or at or above the 5th grade average, whichever is lower; or (b) Older children: the child is age 10 years or older, and it is the informed belief of the school principal and educational staff that an alternate course of educational study would be better suited to the child's rapid acquisition of basic English language skills; or (c) Children with special needs: the child already has been placed for a period of not less than thirty days during that school year in an English language classroom and it is subsequently the informed belief of the school principal and educational staff that the child has such special physical, emotional, psychological, or educational needs that an alternate course of educational study would be better suited to the child's overall educational development. A written description of these special needs must be provided and any such decision is to be made subject to the examination and approval of the local school superintendent, under guidelines established by and subject to the review of the local Board of Education and ultimately the State Board of Education. The existence of such special needs shall not compel issuance of a waiver, and the parents shall be fully informed of their right to refuse to agree to a waiver |
B. The circumstances in which a parental exception waiver may be applied
for under this Section are as follows:
1. Children who already know English: the child already possesses good English language skills, as measured by oral evaluation or standardized tests of English vocabulary comprehension, reading, and writing, in which the child scores approximately at or above the state average for his grade level or at or above the 5th grade average, whichever is lower; or 2. Older children: the child is age 10 years or older, and it is the informed belief of the school principal and educational staff that an alternate course of educational study would be better suited to the child’s overall educational progress and rapid acquisition of basic English language skills; or 3. Children with special individual needs: the child already has been placed for a period of not less than thirty calendar days during that school year in an English language classroom and it is subsequently the informed belief of the school principal and educational staff that the child has such special and individual physical or psychological needs, above and beyond the child's lack of English proficiency, that an alternate course of educational study would be better suited to the child’s overall educational development and rapid acquisition of English. A written description of no less than 250 words documenting these special individual needs for the specific child must be provided and permanently added to the child's official school records and the waiver application must contain the original authorizing signatures of both the school principal and the local superintendent of schools. Any such decision to issue such an individual waiver is to be made subject to the examination and approval of the local school superintendent, under guidelines established by and subject to the review of the local governing board and ultimately the State Board of Education. Teachers and local school districts may reject waiver requests without explanation or legal consequence. The existence of such special individual needs shall not compel issuance of a waiver, and the parents shall be fully informed of their right to refuse to agree to a waiver. |
| ARTICLE 5. Legal Standing and Parental Enforcement
Sec. 320. As detailed in Article 2 (commencing with Section 305) and Article 3 (commencing with Section 310), all California school children have the right to be provided with an English language public education. If a California school child has been denied the option of an English language instructional curriculum in public school, the child's parent or legal guardian shall have legal standing to sue for enforcement of the provisions of this statute, and if successful shall be awarded normal and customary attorney's fees and actual damages, but not punitive or consequential damages. Any school board member or other elected official or public school teacher or administrator who willfully and repeatedly refuses to implement the terms of this statute by providing such an English language educational option at an available public school to a California school child may be held personally liable for fees and actual damages by the child's parents or legal guardian. |
Section 15-754. Legal Standing and Parental Enforcement
As detailed in Sections 15-752 and 15-753, all Arizona school children have the right to be provided at their local school with an English language public education. The parent or legal guardian of any Arizona school child shall have legal standing to sue for enforcement of the provisions of this statute, and if successful shall be awarded normal and customary attorney’s fees and actual and compensatory damages, but not punitive or consequential damages. Any school board member or other elected official or administrator who willfully and repeatedly refuses to implement the terms of this statute may be held personally liable for fees and actual and compensatory damages by the child’s parents or legal guardian, and cannot be subsequently indemnified for such assessed damages by any public or private third party. Any individual found so liable shall be immediately removed from office, and shall be barred from holding any position of authority anywhere within the Arizona public school system for an additional period of five years. |
| [No Comparable Provision] | Section 15-755. Standardized Testing for Monitoring Education Progress
In order to ensure that the educational progress of all Arizona students in academic subjects and in learning English is properly monitored, a standardized, nationally-normed written test of academic subject matter given in English shall be administered at least once each year to all Arizona public schoolchildren in grades 2 and higher. Only students classified as severely learning disabled may be exempted from this test. The particular test to be used shall be selected by the office of the state superintendent of public instruction, and it is intended that the test shall generally remain the same from year to year. The national percentile scores of students shall be confidentially provided to individual parents, and the aggregated percentile scores and distributional data for individual schools and school districts shall be made publicly available on an internet web site; the scores for students classified as "limited-English" shall be separately sub-aggregated and made publicly available there as well, although administration of this test is required solely for monitoring educational progress, Arizona public officials and admistrators may utilize these test scores for other purposes as well if they so choose. |
| ARTICLE 8. Amendment.
Sec. 335. The provisions of this act may be amended by a statute that becomes effective upon approval by the electorate or by a statute to further the act's purpose passed by a two-thirds vote of each house of the Legislature and signed by the Governor. |
Sec. 5. Application
The provisions of this act cannot be waived, modified, or set aside by any elected or appointed official or administrator, except as through the amendment process provided for in the Arizona constitution [i.e., no amendment or repeal except by a vote of "at least three-fourths of the members of each house of the legislature" and approval by the governor.] |
Copyright © 2000 by James Crawford. Permission is hereby granted to reproduce this page for free, noncommercial distribution, provided that credit is given and this notice is included. Requests for permission to reproduce in any other form should be emailed to this address. But before writing, please read my permissions FAQ.
