Dear Friends, Late Wednesday night, I returned to the Bay Area on a midnight flight from two exhausting days in Denver. Much of the time spent there was rather run-of-the- mill and typical, with an hour-long televised debate on our "English" initiative on the local PBS affiliate and additional live debates before an organization of Colorado business CEOs, the Denver School Board, the Editorial Board of the Denver Rocky Mountain News, and at the private home of a former Colorado governor. At the public forum, the hundred or more bilingual activists yelled, I smiled, and all was as it should be. The following morning, I participated in yet another debate, this one held at Stanford University before an audience of education journalists and sponsored by the National Association of Education Writers, headquartered in Washington. As this hectic schedule so indicated, Labor Day has passed, and we have now fully arrived in "campaign season." Having encountered virtually identical arguments by our opponents during some two hundred and fifty previous debates in California, Arizona, and elsewhere, the greatest surprise in these half- dozen debates was the lack of even any slight surprise. I could have probably recited the attacks on our initiative---which can easily be conjugated as ranging from the weak to the weaker to the weakest---before they were even made, and perhaps far more cogently, having personally had much more experience in this arena than the local bilingual advocates, or even their national counterparts. At times, this amusing situation has led me to consider offering my services as a paid political advisor to these various statewide No campaigns, sincerely assisting their campaign staff in better framing their arguments and critiques in return for a fat consulting fee that I might either donate to charity, or perhaps more cruelly use to fund further "English" campaigns elsewhere. In fact, far more interesting than these endless debates was a short visit I also took to a local Denver elementary school at the repeated urging of Eric Hubler, the education writer for the local Denver Post, who has occasionally expressed considerable skepticisms toward the arguments we make in our campaigns. I had several times pointed out to him that spending just an hour or two with a handful of immigrant students was hardly likely to produce much scientifically valid information on the effectiveness of Colorado's existing programs for some 70,000 English learners, and would provide neither objective data nor sufficient sample size. But since such a visit would obviously do harm either, I readily consented, allowing him to pick the school and the classes to visit. The results---despite the tiny sample size---were absolutely fascinating, and actually quite enlightening. The first visit was to an English Language Acquisition class, supposedly intended for fourth grade students who had already made considerable progress in learning English. Although the students said that a little instruction was in Spanish, most was in English. I was glad to hear this since a solid one-quarter of the supposed "English learners" in the class seemed likely native English speakers, being children who were either black or blue-eyed blonds. Seating myself at one of the tables with five Latino-looking girls, I spend twenty minutes or so chatting with them, gaining their confidence and learning some very interesting facts. First, although I have endlessly repeated the official national statistics that over half of America's limited-English students were born right here, and most of the rest arrived before first grade, empirical confirmation of such dry data is often heartening. Just as one might expect, three of the five girls were born in Denver, one came from Texas, and just one was Mexican-born, although all were of Mexican ancestry. Second, although their parents generally spoke Spanish at home, most of them had at least one parent who spoke "pretty good" English. The girl from Mexico and her friend from Texas seemed to speak flawless, even unaccented English, so I asked them when and how they had learned the language. To my considerable surprise, the former said she had learned English before starting school from her cousin, and the latter from her "auntie." Still, both had been placed in "bilingual" programs once they enrolled in Denver schools. By contrast, the girl sitting next to them had learned English in Denver's public schools, starting in her Kindergarten class, which according to her had been all in Spanish. Sadly, schools seemed a little less educationally effective than cousins or aunties, and this Denver-born fourth- grader seemed struggling in English, frequently asking her Mexican-born friend to translate words and phrases for her and clearly much more comfortable in Spanish. Although she seemed quite smart and alert, she mentioned that her English- reading level had barely reached the first grade. Perhaps Denver administrators should urge their young immigrant students to stay home to be taught by their cousins and aunties rather than waste their time playing "hooky" by attending school. Unfortunately, the next class I met---of "beginning" limited-English students---provided me a clear picture of why a Denver-born fourth grader would require her Mexican-born classmate to serve as an English translator. Although we had been told that these fourth-graders had only just arrived in America, the Spanish- language questions asked by Rita Montero, sitting next to me, provided a somewhat different picture. Nearly all the five or six Latino children sitting together at our table had been in Denver for almost all of 2002, having arrived in January or February. Obviously, five or six months of presumed Denver schooling would not have been enough to make them completely fluent in English, but to my shock most of these perfectly normal students seemed to speak not a single word of our language. They reacted with absolutely blank stares to very simple questions like "What is your name?," "How old are you?," and "Do you like school?" When Rita asked them (in Spanish) to say any English words they knew, the silence was deafening. By contrast, they eager chattered away to themselves and to Rita in Spanish. The sole exception to this utter lack of English was a little boy who did know quite a few words of our language despite having arrived from El Salvador just nine days earlier. Perhaps this means that Salvadoran schools teach considerably more English than those in Denver. Certainly, these Latino fourth-graders who have failed to learn a single word of English after eight or nine months in Denver will obviously do so over the next year or two, perhaps from their cousins or aunties or parents or television shows if not by American public school teachers. By fifth grade, they may know a few words, by junior high they may be able to actually make themselves understood in spoken English, and probably by the ninth or tenth grade, they will proudly but slowly be reading "The Cat in the Hat" in the language of their new country. Most importantly, by the time they graduate from the Denver Unified School District, they will have reached the important pinnacle of comprehending complex multi-syllabic phrases such as "double whopper with cheese to go," and be ready to embark on a long and illustrious professional career in our growing service sector industries. Given this impressive track-record of educational achievement for the immigrant students under their authority, the seven elected members of the Denver School Board were obviously justified in yesterday voting unanimously to oppose our "English for the Children" initiative. Perhaps they should all celebrate by visiting the workplaces of some of their former students for lunch and proudly placing their orders in English.but speaking very slowly. Sincerely, Ron Unz, Chairman English for the Children http://www.onenation.org/column.cfm P.S. On a far happier note, my partner in yesterday's Stanford University debate was Ken Noonan, the Mexican-American founder of the California Association of Bilingual Educators, whose willingness to follow the law after the passage of Proposition 227 rapidly doubled his immigrant student test scores, leading to his sudden public conversation to support for "English" and his endless subsequent vilification by bilingual advocates from coast to coast. Just last month Noonan was named California Superintendent of the Year by his thousand-odd California colleagues, less a reflection of their sudden discernment than of their remarkable newfound political courage. ==================== "Anti-bilingual activist visits Denver school" Chats with students fail to sway Unz on issue Eric Hubler, Denver Post Thursday, September 5, 2002 Ron Unz made his first visit to a Colorado classroom Wednesday, and while he learned a few things from the 9-year-olds, he saw nothing to convince him bilingual education works. Unz became a national figure for saying bilingual education is so flawed that state constitutional amendments are needed to ban it. Though he is the co-author of Amendment 31, Colorado's anti- bilingual amendment, he had never visited a school here. "It isn't obvious to me what really it contributes to my understanding of the program," he said. "What if, for example, they spoke English reasonably well but their test scores were very, very low?" On his visit Wednesday to Richard T. Castro Elementary, he quietly observed for about 30 seconds and then chatted with the students. He found some could chat back, but some couldn't. Castro is a school where 45 percent of students are native Spanish speakers. The school has an "unsatisfactory" rating from the state based on its Colorado Student Assessment Program test scores. Joining the field trip was Rita Montero, the former bilingual advocate who turned against the technique and now heads Unz's Colorado organization. Aside from a brief visit to a California kindergarten, it was Unz's first trip to a school since 1998, when he launched his first anti-bilingual initiative. He spearheaded a similar initiative in Arizona and is doing so in Massachusetts this year, but never asked to see schools in either state. At The Denver Post's suggestion, Unz and Montero visited Castro fourth-grade teacher Diego Ceron. The complexities of his job were immediately evident. "I'm confused," Unz said. "If this is a transitional class, why would there be blond kids and black kids?" Ceron is an ELA-S teacher - meaning English Language Acquisition for kids who speak mostly Spanish. But he swaps math classes with a colleague and was teaching math - in English - to the other teacher's ELA-E kids. That's an in-between phase where native Spanish speakers are grouped together, with some English speakers, and learn in English. Unz peppered the children with questions: Where were you born? Do your parents speak English? Do you like math? Their answers could have provided ammunition for either side of the bilingual debate. "These kids really talk a lot of English!" Montero said. But after half an hour chatting with three 9-year- olds, Unz said something was troubling him. All had been at Castro since kindergarten or first grade. The only one who constantly had to ask her friends for translations was the Denver native. The others, Cassandra Mendez, who was born in Texas, and Diana Chacon, who is from Mexico, both said they learned English chiefly from relatives. "Now that's not much of a sample size, but it is an interesting pattern," Unz said. "The one taught by the public schools is the one having the most trouble with English." Classes switched, and in came Ceron's ELA-S bunch. Many were stumped by simple questions like, "What's your name?" "What surprised me a bit - and again, it's a small sample size - is that some of these kids have been here nine months and didn't seem to know a single word of English," Unz said later. "I was surprised by the little kid from Salvador who knew all kinds of words," Montero said. "He's only been here nine days." "Nine days? Probably watches a lot of TV," Unz said. Ceron's job gets even more complex. Among the ELA-S kids, five cannot function at all in English, so he teaches lessons in Spanish to them and in English to the other six. Unz and Montero's more streamlined plan - put off "content areas" like math until a one-year immersion course is completed - could work, Ceron said. The trade-off would be the English-learners falling behind their age group academically, he said. Principal Frank Gonzales said he shares Unz's goal of English acquisition: "As soon as they come in, we start teaching them English." What if they had to do so without Spanish-language support, which Amendment 31 would abolish? "I have issues with that," Gonzales said. "If we can use students' native language to help them improve in the academic realm, then do it. To limit the resources available to them, that's not good for kids." Unz was in town to address business leaders and the Denver school board about Amendment 31. He has said the initiative is aimed at Denver, yet it would also affect Colorado's other school districts. Ironically, Denver might be the only district unaffected by the amendment because its bilingual program is governed by a federal consent decree. About 23,000 schoolchildren are in some form of bilingual education in Colorado, according to a recent study by the University of Colorado School of Education. That's 3 percent of the state's 742,000 public-school students. Most English-learners in Colorado are in English as a Second Language programs that are similar to the immersion approach Unz favors, the report said. After thanking Gonzales for the visit, Unz resumed a series of cellphone calls about wire transfers, pausing to reflect on his new "anecdotal data." "Very interesting," he said. ============= "DPS officials hostile to Amend. 31" Anti-bilingual activist takes heat during school board meeting Eric Hubler, Denver Post Thursday, September 5, 2002 Denver school officials told constituents to keep cool Wednesday but almost lost their own tempers as they questioned the authors of a proposed constitutional amendment banning most bilingual education. The special session drew so many observers that more than 100 had to watch on TV in the Denver Public Schools lobby. Board members hosted the meeting so they could learn enough about Amendment 31, which goes before voters in November, to decide whether to support or condemn the measure today. As they berated amendment co-author Ron Unz of California for giving long, professorial answers and even chastised him for not turning off his phone, there was no doubt which way they were leaning. "It's not fair. It's not smart. And I don't think it's a panacea for student achievement," board member Kevin Patterson said. "This initiative restricts parent choice even more than I originally interpreted," member James Mejia said. The amendment "is anti-choice at a time when many, many parents, including myself, want to see more choice," said Carmen Atelano, the mother of a child at Academia Ana Marie Sandoval, a dual-language Montessori school. Forty-nine members of the public spoke - only five in favor of the amendment. One of them was Republican state school board candidate Mel Hilgenberg, who said the amendment would give Hispanic Coloradans the same opportunities as his German-speaking ancestors. "Do you believe in choice for parents?" board President Elaine Gantz Berman asked him. "Yes, I do," he said. "By supporting Amendment 31, you are by definition an opponent of choice," she said. Another Republican voter, John Wren, said he came to support Amendment 31 but that now he's not sure. "It's sledgehammer democracy," Wren said. Much of the conversation concerned whether the amendment's waiver process would let schools continue to offer successful bilingual and dual- language programs. "It doesn't get rid of all the bilingual programs. It only gets rid of the 98 percent that are unsuccessful," said Unz, who persuaded voters to ban bilingual education in his home state in 1998 and in Arizona in 2000. Superintendent Jerry Wartgow pressed Unz for a scenario where such waivers could be granted and grew frustrated at answers from the ex-physicist, such as: "Clearly a factor of four or five outweighs the default value you get with a factor of three." Academic researcher Kathy Escamilla said the amendment requires new tests that would cost $800,000 a year in DPS alone but includes no funding mechanism. Jorge Garcia, a spokesman for the anti-amendment group English Plus, said the measure would destroy the Sandoval school and other dual-language schools in Colorado. Such schools rely on equal numbers of native English and Spanish speakers enrolling. Under the amendment, the Spanish speakers would have to get waivers. But Wartgow said he would be nervous about granting waivers because of provisions that could get him sued. =============== "Bilingual plan assailed" DPS board votes to oppose initiative on English instruction Holly Yettick, Denver Rocky Mountain News Friday, September 6, 2002 Denver school board members lashed out Thursday against a ballot initiative that would dismantle bilingual education and also condemned the behavior of parents on one elementary school's governance committee. The board voted unanimously to oppose Amendment 31, an initiative on the Nov. 5 ballot that would dismantle bilingual education that includes instruction in an English learner's native language. "This is a very dangerous law," said school board president Elaine Berman. The two-page resolution opposing the proposed amendment said it would eliminate local control, destroy parental choice, dismantle the district's dual language Montessori school and create legal and financial hurdles for schools. "This amendment is poorly drafted," said superintendent Jerry Wartgow. "It is extremely ambiguous. It will almost certainly result in a legal quagmire that will bog us down in this state for years to come." Ron Unz, the Silicon Valley businessman financing the initiative, said the board's decision was not unexpected. "We recognize their right to oppose this," he said. "We think it's completely misguided given the data and information, but if the people decide to support the initiative, despite their opposition, we trust they will honor and enforce the law." Board members also voted to support the suspension of Bromwell Elementary's school governance committee until the end of the year. Bromwell's students have some of the top test scores in the state. But for several years, infighting has plagued the parents and staff who serve on the governance committee. The suspension is meant to give everyone a chance to cool off and attend training to help them get along. "If the children behaved on the playground like these adults behaved, we'd be ashamed," Wartgow said. Board members also directed the governance committee to make decisions by majority rule. Many Denver school governance committees have been requiring unanimous decisions, even though it's unclear that they must do so. At one point during the lengthy debate about the issue, Wartgow got so impatient, he proposed that the Denver school board seize control of the Bromwell committee. "This whole process has been an embarrassment to Bromwell," Wartgow said. "It's been, to me, unconscionable behavior. He said. She said. Who cares?" Wartgow said the Bromwell situation illustrates why the district is appointing a task force to examine what future, if any, the district's school governance committees should have. The committees were written into the teachers' contract more than 10 years ago as part of former Gov. Roy Romer's efforts to prevent a strike. Jeanne Price, a Bromwell parent and school committee member, said some of the Bromwell problems stemmed from staff members who "don't want to sit at the table with me." But she said the issue had grown bigger than that. She supported the temporary suspension, but not the majority rule proposal. Another parent, Peter Kirsch, supported both board actions. "We want to put the past behind us," he said. =================== "Question of lawsuits arises over English proposal" Holly Yettick, Denver Rocky Mountain News Thursday, September 5, 2002 An attorney hired by Denver Public Schools has raised new legal questions about a proposed constitutional amendment that would require English language learners to be taught in English. Under the initiative, "the parent or legal guardian of any Colorado school child" has the right to sue school officials to enforce the amendment. That term's exact meaning is unclear, Denver attorney Richard A. Westfall said in an opinion distributed at a Wednesday school board forum on the initiative that attracted a standing-room-only crowd. "Read literally," Westfall wrote in his opinion, "a parent or guardian could bring a claim even though the alleged violation had nothing to do with that parent or guardian's own child." Initiative backer Rita Montero said the language is aimed at parents to act on behalf of their own children. DPS hired Westfall for $250 an hour because it wanted a neutral opinion on the initiative's possible legal impacts. But Montero questioned whether an attorney could remain neutral if hired by a school board that is expected to vote today to oppose the initiative, which Coloradans will vote on in November. "He did a lot of wordsmithing as a lawyer on this thing and created boogey men where there are no boogey men," Montero said. "They're just pulling straws out of the sky to create the illusion to the voters that this is going to create all these legal things and there are going to be a huge number of lawsuits filed." Westfall also raised questions about a section stating "all Colorado school children have the right to be provided at their public school of choice with an English language public education." "The grant of such state rights can give rise to claims for the denial of such rights, including federal and state constitutional claims under the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of both constitutions," Westfall wrote. Montero denied this is a problem. Westfall also said there could be a basis for legally challenging a section that prevents school officials from using insurance to protect themselves against lawsuits resulting from violations of the amendment. "It is questionable whether a state constitutional provision can legally prevent such action," according to Westfall. But Montero said attorneys for the legislative council that reviewed the initiative before the wording was finalized would have called it to her attention if this had been a problem. Westfall also advised that school officials should "counsel that significant caution is in order" when granting waivers. Parents have 10 years to sue if certain kinds of waivers are wrongly granted. Montero said the amendment was purposely tough on waivers because many school districts, including Denver, have a history of forcing English language learners into classes taught mostly in Spanish without parents' permission. At Wednesday's forum, which attracted more than 100 viewers and 50 speakers, many people complained the waiver process was so tough parents would no longer have a choice of educational philosophies. Of particular concern was whether waivers would allow the continued existence of Sandoval Montessori, a school where English speakers learn Spanish and Spanish speakers learn English. Montero said the initiative would not necessarily eliminate Sandoval. But board members and speakers questioned that argument. "I resent the fact that an outsider can make decisions about my child and my child's future," said Shelley Flanagan, mother of a Sandoval student. The school board meeting today is at 5 p.m. at 900 Grant St.