Lowering the Language Barrier

Gov. George Deukmejian endorsed a report from a commission on bilingual education that supported the program, with reservations. In voting to extend California’s bilingual-education program until 1992, the Legislature addressed those reservations, and its bill awaits his signature. The changes ought to satisfy the governor, and he ought to sign the bill.

The purpose of California’s bilingual-education program is simply this: to assist the half-million schoolchildren whose primary language is not English to learn it as quickly as possible, without losing ground to fluent English speakers in the meantime. The more zealous critics of bilingual education have railed against such programs for fostering linguistic separatism, holding children back and wasting tax dollars. In fact, California’s 10-year-old program has succeeded remarkably. Students stay in bilingual classes until they are fluent in English--three years on average. Afterward, most students perform as well as, and in some cases better than, native English speakers.

More thoughtful critics, the governor among them, have contended that the state’s rules are too rigid for some schools. The Legislature’s bill would amend existing law to spell out more clearly for parents what options their children have, and would give districts more flexibility in mixing English speakers and non-English speakers. One controversial provision that the Legislature properly left alone allows teachers to participate in bilingual programs while working toward bilingual certification. As long as there is a shortage of certified bilingual teachers, those working toward certification must be allowed to teach.

All of California’s children deserve a chance to realize their potential, and none should be hindered because English is not their primary language. Bilingual education works, and California’s youngsters deserve to benefit from it.