The Implementation of Proposition 227 in California Schools: A Critical Analysis of the Effect on Teacher Beliefs and Classroom Practices

Abstract

This article explores the relationship between race and language as it relates to the educational experiences of bilingual students. Using Latino/a Critical Theory (LatCrit), Asian American legal scholarship, and Critical Theory as related theoretical frameworks, we examine the aftermath of Proposition 227 (Prop 227) in a case study of three California public school districts. Based on data collected at three different school districts, we focus on a case study of one school to discuss the impact of Prop 227 on teacher beliefs and classroom practices. In 1998, Ron Unz, a Silicon Valley billionaire sponsored Proposition 227, a voter initiative named on the ballots as “English for the Children,’’ aimed at reforming bilingual education in the state. The text of the proposition blamed bilingual education as the culprit for the poor academic achievement and high drop out rates of immigrant children in California and subsequently proposed that English Language Learners (ELLs) be “taught English as rapidly and effectively as possible’’ (Unz & Tuchman, 1997). Prop 227 decreed that all ELLs be placed in a “structured English immersion’’classroom—defined as a classroom in which “nearly all’’ of the instruction is in English. Students are to be placed in these classrooms for no longer than a year unless their parents personally apply for a waiver at the school. It is through these waiver exceptions that schools in California have been able to maintain bilingual programs. As similar voter initiatives go on ballots in other states, this allowance has been increasingly tightened. When Proposition 227 passed in June 1998, the media reported that school districts all over the state were scrambling to implement it. The ways in which school