Return-Path: <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost.nifl.gov [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA26823; Thu, 20 Nov 1997 09:54:17 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 09:54:17 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <l03020900b0998cb1a261@[204.48.132.66]> Errors-To: lmann@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "Dr. Zulmara Cline" <evenstrt@fillmore.sbceo.k12.ca.us> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-ESL:1520] Re: The Unz Initiative (fwd) X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Status: RO Content-Length: 2191 Lines: 50 In response to some of the comments concening Lau and the Unz initiative, I do not see the court issue here. Lau never authorized nor mandated primary language instruction. It is very clear in its language that it is not prescriptive and only mandates that students be educated in a manner that they can learn. This is very broad. For the most part, primary language instruction has been supported by Castaņeda vs Pickard and another Colorado case that I do not recall. (See California Compliance Document). In regards to Hispanic parents. I cannot blame them. Most of the transitional programs in California are poorly implemented, designed, and supported. As a researcher, I can understand the scholarly arguments and the research in support of bilingual education. As a practitioner, I see such poorly implemented programs that I would not put my own children in the program and I often recommend to my friends not to put their children in the programs either. We need to look, not at the theoretical basis, which is sound, but the implementation, which is haphazard, sloppy, and not in keeping with what we know is best practices in education. Unz has gained support because the evidence is clearly on his side, in over 70% of the districts in California, bilingual education is a dismal failure. However, what Unz and the public fail to understand is that it is a failure throgh faulty implementation, not through bad theory. It is time that we, as practitioners, got a clue and stopped defending a system of bilingual education that barely gives us the floor and started shooting for the cieling. I do not support Unz and I feel we should be advocating maintenance programs and dual immersion programs, however, I cannot agree that we will be hurting kids more if Unz passes, because of what I have seen in the schools themselves, is that we are already hurting kids with the mediocre implementation of poorly implemented programs. When teachers cannot speak Spanish and trying to develop CALP in Spanish, the students get niether the benefit of bilingual education or a strong monolingual program. Zee Cline Even Start Director Lompoc Unified School District
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Apr 14 2005 - 14:09:42 EDT