Orange County Register

Saturday, March 7, 1998

Bilingual Education Faces Test
COURTS: Orange district officials say a judge's ruling allows California schools to scrap such programs without state approval.
By DENNIS LOVE, The Orange County Register

A Sacramento County Superior Court judge might have opened the door for school districts to dismantle bilingual education programs without approval from the State Board of Education.

Judge Ronald B. Robie has ruled that the state board's decision last year to grant the Orange Unified School District a waiver from bilingual education so that it could institute an English-immersion program was "contrary to law."

As a result, Orange Unified Assistant Superintendant Neil McKinnon said, the district and, potentially, all California school districts now are free from the sometimes onerous bilingual waiver process.

"We still have the obligation to serve these kids," McKinnon said. "But this ruling backs our contention that we should have local control and be able to make those decisions ourselves about how to serve those kids."

The ruling stemmed from a suit filed last year by a group of Hispanic parents and activists against Orange Unified and the State Board of Education. The suit sought to disallow the waiver granted by the board to the district and to force Orange Unified to return to a traditional bilingual instruction program.

The judge said the State Board of Education could no longer try to enforce an old state law requiring bilingual education because the law expired in 1986.

"We simply must demonstrate, as we always have had to do, that we are providing equal access to education for all students," McKinnon said.

Bill Lucia, executive director of the State Board of Education, said the state board will meet next week to study the ramifications of the ruling. But he indicated the state board is unlikely to appeal the ruling, and may adopt provisions of the ruling as policy.

Ruling Just Another Day at Orange Unified
EDUCATION: It becomes the fourth county school district to obtain the bilingual instruction waiver.
By ELIZABETH CHEY and DENNIS LOVE, The Orange County Register

Leave it to the Orange Unified School District to land right in the middle of the latest skirmish in the battle over bilingual education.

Orange Unified's decision last year to end bilingual instruction in favor of an English-immersion program has resulted in a judge's ruling that appears to have overturned the state Board of Education's right to control such decisions.

Just another day at Orange Unified, which has grabbed headlines recently as its "back to basics" school board has initiated other changes such as barring psychological counselors from campus.

"This ruling takes the pressure off," said Martin Jacobson, a school board member who helped usher through the English-immersion curriculum change.

Now, said Orange Unified Assistant Superintendent Neil McKinnon, the 29,000-student district will not have to go through the time and expense involved with petitioning the state board later this month for an extension of the bilingual waiver.

Sacramento Superior Court Judge Ronald B. Robie ruled that the state board does not have the authority to force districts to seek its approval for the discontinuation of bilingual instruction programs.

"We can get on with what we want to do," Jacobson said.

Orange was the fourth California school district all in Orange County to obtain a bilingual waiver from the state board. The other three districts are Westminster, Magnolia and Savanna.

The bilingual education battle in California began in 1976, when the state Assembly enacted the Bilingual-Bicultural Act. It outlined how local school districts should provide instruction to students whose primary language was not English. The law required academic instruction for non-English-speaking students in their primary language.

In 1986, the Legislature enacted a "sunset" provision which was to end the bilingual act. The Legislature did not enact new law to continue the program, but the state Board of Education determined that it was legally obligated to enforce the provisions of the state bilingual law.

That approach apparently is in jeopardy now, although all sides still are debating the impact of the ruling. McKinnon and Bill Lucia, executive director of the state Board of Education, said the ruling means districts will have more latitude; Deborah Escobedo, attorney for the plaintiffs, disagreed, saying the ruling means districts will have to abide by the traditional structures of bilingual instruction.

And then there is Ron Unz, the Palo Alto entrepreneur who is leading a drive in support of a proposition which would require school districts to engage in English-immersion instruction.

"It seems like an ambiguous legal ruling, with everyone disagreeing on what it means," Unz said. "But as a practical matter, it probably won't affect that many students. The vast majority of bilingual programs are in large school districts (such as in Los Angeles and Santa Ana) which are totally committed to bilingual instruction and aren't likely to change."

Other reaction to the ruling was mixed. "Anything that the state can do to make it easier for schools to implement their best plans is a good idea," said Trish Cannady, spokeswoman for the Westminster school district. "It sounds like the courts are granting more local control to schools."