DATE:  April 2003

Summary:   In states with a high percentage of immigrants, the controversy of how best to educate language minority children has spilled over to the political realm with ballot initiatives for the elimination of bilingual education programs and establishment of a structured English approach.  The research from California, the first state to legislate the demise of bilingual education, is showing that the children are learning English faster than in bilingual programs.  This article shows that the analysis of the data used to promote the positive results of an English only approach are flawed and that the media has reported and expanded on the flawed data.

Issue: As the test data come in on the reported success of California’s Proposition 227, New York city public schools might be pressured politically to eliminate bilingual programs and institute an English Only approach as a money saving move.   With the $3.4 billion budget shortfall and Mayor Bloomberg’s hope not to layoff any teachers, he might feel pressure to eliminate unpopular programs.   The media is publishing articles, which fuel a political point of view rather than the scholarly research.  For example, articles in the BRJ, Journal of Educational Measurement, Review of Educational Research show that test scores after Prop. 227 have gone down for second language speakers.  What is reported in the press and by the media is that the scores have gone up.  Some of the articles in the press quote the studies from the journals but with opposite conclusions.  The articles seem to show that eliminating bilingual education programs is a cost saving move with positive results for the schools.  We need to look at the primary sources quoted to show if there are any benefits of an English only approach.  This issue will not go away since the percentage of non-English speakers is projected to grow to 40% of the school population by 2030.

Recommendations:
1. Analyze what states with anti-bilingual programs encountered:
2. As a money saving move, we need to look at Massachusetts to see the financial impact (projected $15 million needed to retrain bilingual ed. Teachers)
3. Look at Massachusetts to see how the lack of certified teachers has caused class size to increase until more teachers are found.
4. Look at Arizona’s test scores after Proposition 203, which is more stringent than Ca. Prop. 227.  Examine Arizona test scores and class size increases as recommended below.
4.   Watch for any initiative organized by Ron Unz or English for the Children.

Recommend that we gather research on:

 1.  alternative explanations for the test data and data analysis decisions; for example, California instituted class size reduction, phonics-based reading programs and a focus on teaching for the standards, at the same time.  Any one could raise test scores with these conditions.
2.  go to the original research, primary sources and not comments on it
3.  Look at what is left out of the analysis.  In California, high achieving school districts were used to generalize the results across the state.
Look at regression to the mean and sample selection in the reports since the statistics quoted by the media are from the second administration of the test which was new last year.
4. Disregard information which comes from English for the Children website which is funded and maintained by supporters of Ron Unz and English Only advocates.
5. Use more than one measure to determine whether we need to make changes in the language acquisition program in our city.  (triangulate)

Conclusion:  This measure has not been shown to be a money saver or a score raiser.  It has only been a politically pleasing measure for those who think that teaching the public school curriculum in a language other than English is unpatriotic.  The political agenda overshadows the need for reason in looking at what is best for NYC English language learners.