When Proposition 227, the anti-bilingual-education initiative, passed in a landslide in 1998, bilingual-ed advocates predicted disaster. Prop. 227 requires that limited-English-proficient (LEP) students first receive intensive English-language instruction and then be placed swiftly into mainstream classes with English speakers. Opponents of Prop. 227 argued that LEP students would be lost without instruction in their native language, which often lasted five years or more, causing poor student performance. Early results, however, show that Prop. 227 is improving the achievement of LEP students.

According to a recent San Jose Mercury News analysis, as the requirements of Prop. 227 are implemented in the classroom, "students are rapidly acquiring at least a basic understanding of English." The San Jose Mercury News study examined enrollment and test data for LEP students for the 1998-99 school year—the first year under Prop. 227—and the preceding year. The study divided LEP students into those with enough English fluency to be enrolled in mainstream classrooms where they received no special assistance (29 percent), those enrolled in English-immersion classrooms (49 percent), and those using waivers to remain in bilingual-education programs (12 percent). In the second, third, and fourth grades, based on the state’s STAR test data, LEP students in mainstream or English-immersion classes made more reading and math progress than those students who continued to receive bilingual instruction.

For example, in 1999 LEP second-graders in mainstream classrooms scored at the 35th percentile on the STAR reading test, those in English-immersion classes scored at the 24th percentile, and those in bilingual-ed classrooms scored at the 19th percentile. On the second-grade STAR math test, mainstreamed LEP students scored at the 43rd percentile, English-immersion students scored at the 34th percentile, and bilingual-ed students scored at the 30th percentile.

Although fifth-grade students receiving bilingual instruction performed slightly better than those receiving English-immersion instruction, San Jose Mercury News education columnist Joanne Jacobs notes that "when ‘99 scores are compared to ‘98, fifth-grade scores improved more in elementary schools that switched to English immersion than in bilingual schools." "Except for fourth-grade math," observes Jacobs, "there was more progress in every grade in English immersion schools." Indeed, the districts that dumped bilingual education made the most startling progress.

Oceanside Unified School District near San Diego, for example, totally eliminated bilingual education and saw LEP students’ second-grade reading scores climb from the 12th to the 23rd percentile and second-grade math scores jump from the 18th to the 32nd percentile.

At La Primaria Elementary School in Los Angeles County, where the switch from bilingual to English instruction caused test scores to rise, one pro-bilingual teacher admitted that the 227-initiated change has helped. Although still supporting bilingual ed, she says that since her school never had an ideal bilingual program, "I’d rather they learn English."

By breaking the stranglehold of the bilingual-ed establishment, Prop. 227 is finally allowing LEP students to learn English in an effective and timely manner, but this is not a strictly academic question. In contrast to their previous experience, many of these students will now be going on to college and emerging prepared for good jobs and a brighter future. Bilingual ed, like whole-language learning and other failed fads that victimized students, is destined for the ash heap of education history. Good riddance.

— Lance T. Izumi