| Original URL:
http://www.rethinkingschools.org/archive/17_02/Bili172.shtml Bilingual Education Is A Human and Civil Right Rethinking Schools Volume 17 No. 2
 Winter 2002/2003
 View this article in Spanish-La 
educación bilingüe es un derecho civil y humano
 In 1864, Congress prohibited Native-American children from being taught in their 
own languages. It took the U.S. government 70 years to overturn that law. Now 
they're at it again. The  federal government and the states have taken 
steps toward banning bilingual education in several states and weakening it in 
virtually every state. We hope it won't take another 70 years to restore 
students' right to learn their own languages in school.
 
 Silicon Valley millionaire Ron Unz has spearheaded four statewide ballot 
initiatives to ban bilingual education. Three of these have won and resulted in 
anti-child policies in California (1998), Arizona (2000), and now Massachusetts 
(2002). In this latest election in Massachusetts, 70 percent of the voters 
approved the "English for the Children" initiative, which will take bilingual 
education away from children who need it. (Ironically, Massachusetts was the 
first state in the nation to legislatively support bilingual education some 31 
years ago.)
 
 In Colorado, voters defeated a similar measure (56 percent to 44 percent) this 
past November, thanks to the hard work of bilingual education activists such as 
members of English Plus and the financial support of Pat Stryker, a wealthy 
parent whose child attends a two-way bilingual program in Fort Collins. But such 
state referenda are just the tip of the iceberg. The federal Elementary and 
Secondary Education Act (ESEA) includes significant anti-bilingual components 
that threaten bilingual students in all states.
 
 The ESEA requires English Language Learners to take standardized tests in 
English within three years of entering the U.S. school system - not enough time 
to gain academic English proficiency. This time crunch forces many bilingual 
schools to restructure their programs and emphasize English over native-language 
instruction. The mean-spirited way many states have decided to implement these 
assessment regimes makes them partners in the federal government's
 attack on bilingual education. (See www.rethinkingschools.org for background 
articles.)
 
 James Crawford, one of the nation's best-known writers on bilingual education, 
wrote in the Summer 2002 issue of Rethinking Schools that the ESEA was an 
"Obituary for the Bilingual Education Act of 1968." He explained that a 
provision of the ESEA eliminated the Bilingual Education Act and replaced it 
with the English Language Acquisition Act. Where the former stressed language 
development in both English and students' native languages and promoted equal
 access to the curriculum, the latter expects schools to focus on English only. 
And if these attacks weren't enough, "English Only" groups continue to organize 
to have cities, counties, and states proclaim English as their "official 
language." Such proposals build on public anti-immigrant sentiment and lead to 
divisive and unnecessary conflicts.
 
 XENOPHOBIC POLICIES
 
 It's no coincidence that all of this is occurring during the largest wave of 
non-English speaking immigrants in the history of the United States. The current 
xenophobic policies in our schools and communities are the newest chapter in a 
long, predictable book. (Previous chapters included, among other embarrassments, 
the outlawing of Native-American languages in schools in 1864 and a rash of 
shutting down German bilingual education programs in the Midwest during a surge 
of "nativism" around the time of World War I.)
 
 Many mark the beginning of this new anti-immigrant organizing with the 1994 
passage of California's Proposition 187, which made it illegal for children of 
undocumented immigrants to attend public schools. (Fortunately the Federal 
Courts ruled this law unconstitutional.) And Unz has since successfully 
dismantled bilingual ed in California, Arizona, and Massachusetts. Bush took the 
same side, using federal legislation to weaken bilingual education in those 
states that Unz has not yet conquered.
 
 A HUMAN AND CIVIL RIGHT
 
 The current attack on bilingual education denies children a basic human and 
civil right - the right to learn in their native language. Article 29 of the 
Convention on the Rights of a Child adopted by the General Assembly of the 
United Nations in 1989 (and ratified by all nations except the United States and 
Somalia) states that "the education of the child should be directed to ... the 
development of respect for the child's parents, his or her own cultural 
identity, language and values." Article 30 states that "a child belonging to an 
[ethnic, religious, or linguistic minority] should not be denied the right ... 
to use his or her own language."
 
 In 1998 the Linguistic Society of America also affirmed this basic human right. 
It passed a resolution supporting the right of all residents of the United 
States "to have their children educated in a manner that affirmatively 
acknowledges their native language abilities as well as ensures their 
acquisition of English."
 
 Not only is the right to learn in one's native language a human right, it is a 
civil right as well. In 1974, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Lau vs. Nichols 
that California schools without special provisions to educate language minority 
students were violating the students' civil rights. This decision gave impetus 
to the bilingual education movement.
 
 In our minds, the civil right to an equal opportunity in education is clearly 
violated when children are denied an education that is comprehensible. If 
students are placed in "English immersion" classes, large chunks of the 
curriculum will be incomprehensible. This violates a basic civil right to equal 
treatment under the law.
 
 We are disturbed by the way voters are manipulated by money and disinformation 
to vote for policies that harm children, but it's difficult to hold individual 
voters accountable for their actions. However, elected officials who voted for 
the ESEA can and should be held accountable for their actions.
 
 Any hope of overturning the current anti-bilingual policies begins with 
students, families, and educators. We need to show state and federal legislators 
how their discriminatory policies affect children and force them to change their 
positions before the ESEA comes up for reauthorization six years from now.
 
 As educators who believe in social justice we think it is important to fight for 
everyone's human and civil rights. Ultimately, we believe that all children 
should have the right to learn at least two languages, including their mother 
tongue. Throughout the world children become bilingual or multilingual and it is 
valued. We call upon everyone who believes in bilingual education to testify, 
organize, and demand that our childrens' rights be restored and protected.
 
 Winter 2002/2003
   |