PROPOSITION 58 ENSURES ALL STUDENTS CAN ACHIEVE ENGLISH PROFICIENCY AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
Too many California students are being left behind and not given the opportunity to learn English with the most effective teaching methods possible. This is because of an outdated nearly 20‐year‐old law, Proposition 227, which restricts the instructional methods school districts can use to teach English.
Proposition 58 revises Proposition 227 to remove these restrictions so schools are able to use the most up‐to‐date teaching methods possible to help our students learn.
Proposition 58: • Requires local school districts to identify in their annual K–12 Local Control and Accountability Plans the instructional methods they will offer to help ensure all students become proficient in English as rapidly as possible. • Requires schools to offer a structured English immersion program to English learners. But schools also can adopt other language instruction methods based on research and stakeholder input. • School districts must seek input from educators, parents and the community.
PROPOSITION 58 ALSO EXPANDS OPPORTUNITIES FOR ENGLISH SPEAKERS TO LEARN A SECOND LANGUAGE.
Proposition 58 removes barriers hurting students by discouraging schools from expanding multilingual education. Proposition 58 encourages school districts to provide instruction programs so native English speakers can become proficient in a second language:
• School districts must include in their annual K–12 Local Control and Accountability Plans programs giving English‐speaking students the opportunity to achieve proficiency in a second language. • District choices of non‐English languages must reflect input from parents, the community and the linguistic and financial resources of schools. • Research shows that students participating in programs taught in more than one language attain higher levels of academic achievement.
PROPOSITION 58 RESTORES LOCAL CONTROL TO OUR SCHOOLS.
Proposition 58 allows local school districts to choose the most up‐to‐date language instruction methods to improve student outcomes free from legal restrictions imposed on them by a decades‐old law.
PROPOSITION 58 PROVIDES A BETTER FUTURE FOR OUR CHILDREN AND OUR STATE.
The world economy is changing rapidly. Today, technology allows even the smallest businesses to have a global reach. Students proficient in English and a second language will be more employable, start out earning higher wages, and make California's workforce better prepared to compete for jobs in the global economy.
PROPOSITION 58 HAS BROAD‐BASED SUPPORT FROM LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS, EDUCATORS, PARENTS AND EMPLOYERS.
Giving local schools the tools they need to improve outcomes for students is not a partisan or political issue. Proposition 58 was placed on the ballot by a bipartisan vote of the legislature. Support for Proposition 58's common sense reforms to improve language instruction in our schools is broad‐based and includes: Local school boards (the California School Boards Association), Teachers (the California Language Teachers' Association, the California Teachers Association, the California Federation of Teachers), Parents (California State PTA), and Employers (including the San Jose/Silicon Valley and Los Angeles Chambers of Commerce).
Proposition 58's reforms allow schools to adopt the most up-to-date methods of language instruction to improve student outcomes and make better use of taxpayer dollars.
More information at www.SupportProp58.com.
VOTE YES ON 58.
LENORA LACY BARNES, Senior Vice President
California Federation of Teachers
CHRIS UNGAR, President
California School Boards Association
TANYA ZACCONE, Executive Director
California Language Teachers’ Association
Twenty years ago California schools were forcing hundreds of thousands of children into mandatory Spanish‐almost‐only classes. Students, their parents, and employers don't want to return to those days, but the bilingual education "lobby" and teacher unions do, and so do the politicians who put Proposition 58 on the ballot.
We are two of the many Legislators who voted against it and urge you to vote NO as well.
In 1998, California voters approved an initiative requiring that children be taught English in our schools, unless their parents disagreed. They did this because children who were not native English speakers were struggling too long in "bilingual" classes and never moving up.
The results have been spectacular. Children are learning English faster than when they were forced into "bilingual programs" that dragged on for years. Because they are learning English faster and at an earlier age, record numbers of immigrant students are gaining admission to our state colleges and universities.
Those supporting Prop. 58 want to change that because these so‐called "language teachers" have jobs in our schools only so long as students stay in bilingual classes. The teachers and their unions benefit, but not the children.
Proposition 58 is not about modernizing the way we teach English, it's about forcing a failed method of English instruction on immigrant children against the wishes of their parents.
Proposition 58 eliminates current parental rights to an English‐language education for their children.
Vote NO on this deceptive ballot measure.
SHANNON GROVE, Assemblywoman
JOEL ANDERSON, Senator
San Diego County
THIS BALLOT MEASURE IS A DISHONEST TRICK BY THE SACRAMENTO POLITICIANS
• The official title of Proposition 58 is "English Language Education." But it actually REPEALS the requirement the children be taught English in California public schools. It's all a trick by the Sacramento politicians to fool the voters, who overwhelmingly passed Proposition 227, the "English for the Children" initiative in 1998. • The worst part of Proposition 58 is hidden away in Section 8, which REPEALS all restrictions on the California Legislature to make future changes. This would allow the Legislature to reestablish SPANISH‐ALMOST‐ONLY instruction in the public schools by a simple majority vote, once again forcing Latino children into those classes against their parents' wishes. • Teaching English in our public schools is overwhelmingly supported by California parents, whether immigrants or non‐immigrants, Latinos or Anglos, Asians or Blacks. That's why the politicians are trying to TRICK the voters by using a DECEPTIVE TITLE.
VOTE NO AND KEEP "ENGLISH FOR THE CHILDREN" —IT WORKS!
• For decades, millions of Latino children were FORCED INTO SPANISH‐ALMOST‐ONLY CLASSES dishonestly called "bilingual education." It was an educational disaster and never worked. Many Latinos never learned how to read, write, or even speak English properly. • But in 1998, California voters overwhelmingly passed Prop. 227—the “English for the Children” initiative —providing sheltered English immersion to immigrant students and requiring that they be taught English as soon as they started school. • Jaime Escalante of Stand and Deliver fame, one of America's most successful teachers led the Prop. 227 campaign as Honorary Chairman, rescuing California Latinos from the Spanish‐only educational ghetto. • It worked! Within four years the test scores of over a million immigrant students in California increased by 30%, 50%, or even 100%. • All the major newspapers, even the national New York Times, declared the new English immersion system a huge educational success. • The former Superintendent of Oceanside Unified School District announced that he'd been wrong about bilingual education for thirty years and became a leading national advocate for English immersion. • Since "English for the Children" passed, there has been a huge increase in the number of Latinos scoring high enough to gain admission to the prestigious University of California system. • Prop. 227 worked so well in California schools that the whole issue was forgotten by almost everyone except the bilingual education activists. Now they're trying to trick the voters into allowing the RESTORATION OF MANDATORY SPANISH‐ALMOST‐ONLY CLASSES.
Vote NO, keep "English for the Children," and protect Jaime Escalante's educational legacy for California's immigrant schoolchildren.
For more information, visit our website at www.KeepEnglish.org
RON UNZ, Chairman
English for the Children
KENNETH A. NOONAN, Former Superintendent
Oceanside Unified School District
PROPOSITION 58 ENSURES ALL STUDENTS CAN ACHIEVE ENGLISH PROFICIENCY AS RAPIDLY AS POSSIBLE. PROPOSITION 58 EXPANDS OPPORTUNITIES FOR ENGLISH SPEAKERS TO MASTER A SECOND LANGUAGE.
That's why Proposition 58 is supported by our state's leading educators and parent advocates —classroom teachers, the State PTA, school principals and local school board members —and Governor Jerry Brown.
PROPOSITION 58 IS NOT A "DISHONEST TRICK."
Don't be fooled by opponents' scare tactics. Prop. 58 is NOT a "trick" to abandon English instruction in favor of "mandatory Spanish‐almost‐only classes." Here's what Prop. 58 actually says:
• School districts must provide their pupils with "effective and appropriate" language acquisition programs "designed to ensure English acquisition as rapidly and as effectively as possible" (Education Code Sections 305(a)(1) and 306(c)). • "All California school children have the right to be provided with a free public education and an English language public education." (Education Code Section 320). • School districts "shall, at a minimum, provide English Learners with a structured English immersion program" (Education Code Section 305(a)(2)).
THE EVIDENCE DOES NOT SUPPORT THE OPPONENTS' CLAIMS. Opponents claim Proposition 227 was wildly successful, but a comprehensive five‐year evaluation by the American Institutes for Research concluded "there is no conclusive evidence" to support their claims.
EDUCATORS AND PARENTS ASK YOU TO REJECT OPPOSITION SCARE TACTICS. Under Prop. 58 local school districts will decide —with input from parents, educators and their communities —the most appropriate language instruction approaches for their students to achieve English proficiency as rapidly as possible and expand opportunities for English speakers to master a second language.
SUPPORT OUR CHILDREN AND OUR SCHOOLS. VOTE YES ON 58.
JUSTINE FISCHER, President
California State PTA
TOM TORLAKSON, State Superintendent of Public Instruction
RALPH GOMEZ PORRAS, President
Association of California School Administrators
Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency.