<b> Forum for the discussion of all aspects of bilingual education </b>
4 posts • Page 1 of 1
Several studies have shown that the achievement gap between native English speakers and English language learners still exist and Prop 227 did not increase the rate of English learners' reclassification as fluent English Proficient. What factors can be attributed to the failure of Prop 227? Or do you believe that Prop 227 has been successful?
Prop 227 seemed to be created more as a response to negative views of bilingual education and ELLs versus out of a desire to actually help ELLs. California attacked the wrong issue. Supporters of Prop 227 weren't trying to improve the language skills of those they deemed 'limited' in English, they were trying to limit ELLs' choices and chances to learn at the least possible inconvenience to the state.
I just started my first class for my esl certification and I am simply amazed about all the different policies that have been in place. It seems like a big roller coaster when it comes to bilingual education and all these different policies. I was reading an article "Educators working around prop 227districts plan bilingual programs that don't violate law" and it explain how the people thought that these plans were going to wipe out the native languages completely but however the native languages still lives and children expect to get some help regardless of the policies. I totally disagree with prop 227 thus far. As I still have alot to learn and I am finding out and learning new things I wonder if my views will change? To say that prop 227 made a difference, I really don't know. I am not sure if I could count on the studies and numbers that show otherwise. I just can't get it through my mind to think of a child that has no knowledge of the english language to actually succeed and academically do good well in an all english classroom.