Proposition 227: Tales for the schoolhouse

Bilingual Research Journal, Winter 2000 by Schirling, Elsa, Contreras, Frances, Ayala, Carlos

Abstract

This article explores the impact of Proposition 227 on students and teachers based on interviews with parents, teachers, and administrators of a school in the Bay Area. We discuss four themes that emerge from the data: parent involvement, academic impact on students, the instructional challenges posed by Proposition 227, and the emotional impact on teachers and students. Connecting these themes is an overemphasis on language of instruction, which we found to overshadow other issues critical to the education of language minority students.

The passage of Proposition 227 brought much debate about its impact on classrooms, students, and teachers. Historically, there has been a focus on language in education, particularly when language of instruction took prominence early on in the fight for bilingual education in the 1960s and 1970s (Crawford, 1999). Proposition 227 further magnified this focus through the development of an argument that reduced the issues of educating English language learners (ELLs) to solely comprise that of the language of instruction, thus diminishing the critical roles of access to grade-level content, appropriate instructional materials, and prepared teachers.

Here, we present the findings of a case study that explored how administrators, teachers, and parents of one elementary school in the Bay Area responded to and were impacted by Proposition 227. For reasons of anonymity, this school is identified as the Bay Area School (BAS). It is important to note that BAS is atypical from many California schools in that it has a late transition bilingual program, meaning that students in the bilingual track tend to remain in that track through the fifth grade, at which point they transition into English, and after which they proceed to junior high school. Students in this track are gradually exposed to more English instruction in the classroom as they progress through the fifth grade.

This paper begins with a brief description of the methodology used to conduct this study. The remainder of the paper is structured around four themes that emerged from the data. These themes include parent involvement, academic impact on students, the instructional challenges posed by Proposition 227, and the emotional impact on teachers and students.

Methodology

This study contained two phases. Phase 1 took place in the months following the initial implementation of Proposition 227. It consisted of interviews with four groups of people: parents, district and school site administrators, teachers, and advocacy groups, and included classroom observations. Phase 2 was conducted one and a half years later. We employed interviews with many of the individuals interviewed for Phase 1, as well as observations in classrooms of the teachers interviewed. In total, six parents and five teachers participated in the study. The majority of the parents we interviewed were immigrants from Mexico and tended to be limited English proficient. The teachers interviewed included two from the bilingual track, two from the English-only (EO) track, and one resource teacher. The methodology employed in this study provides an opportunity to gain insight into the ways in which Proposition 227 impacted these particular people. While we fully recognize that these findings are not representative of parents or teachers beyond those interviewed, these findings provide specific examples of the impact of Proposition 227. The research team involved in collecting data was comprised of three graduate students with varied experiences in the education of language minority students. A more detailed description of methods used for this study can be found on the ERIC database, where the full text of the paper is available. Pseudonyms are used throughout the paper.

Results

Parent Involvement

Parents unite, parent involvement increases

The parents interviewed in Phase I first heard about Proposition 227 in March of 1998 when they were attending a women's group session at the school's Healthy Start center. They spoke of their surprise at what they characterized as the racist nature of the proposition. This group of parents decided to find out more about the proposition and the district's response by attending the regular school board meetings. They each brought at least one other person with them such that parent attendance at these meetings dramatically increased. After the proposition passed, these parents heard about parent groups forming at other schools. They decided to come together in a united force at the next school board meeting to express their condemnation of Proposition 227 and to urge the district to take an anti-Proposition 227 stance similar to that taken by San Francisco Unified School District, who, under Federal Court order mandating bilingual education, refused to implement Proposition 227 and obtained a districtwide waiver.

The parents indicated that nearly 500(1) parents attended this school board meeting. According to parents, teachers, and administrators interviewed, the school board was shocked at the large number of concerned parents. The board meeting lasted four hours as parent after parent came forward in support of the district's bilingual program. The parents applauded after each presentation even though a board member had told them not to do so. They returned to.subsequent meetings until one of the board members told them that there was nothing that could be done and that they should go sign waivers at their individual school sites.