University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Impact of Proposition 227 on bilingual teachers' beliefs and practices

(USC Thesis Other)

Impact of Proposition 227 on bilingual teachers' beliefs and practices

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content IMPACT OF PROPOSITION 227 ON BILINGUAL TEACHERS’
BELIEFS AND PRACTICES
Copyright 2005
by
Lorenza Arengo-Yames
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
(EDUCATION)
August 2005
Lorenza Arengo-Yames
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
UMI Number: 3196771
INFORMATION TO USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy
submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and
photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper
alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
®
UMI
UMI Microform 3196771
Copyright 2006 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest Information and Learning Company
300 North Zeeb Road
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
DEDICATION
This dissertation and everything that it represents is dedicated to the memory of
my father, Pedro Arengo—the past, who established my incessant love of learning; to
my husband Rick—the present, who sustains my energy and patiently supports my
explorations; and to my daughters, Sierra and Samara—the future, who inspire and
motivate me to keep learning and finding a better way for all children.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
It has been an incredibly long journey of 11 years. I started as a daughter and a
sister and ended as a daughter, sister, wife, and mother of two beautiful girls. With
those changes in mind, this accomplishment is not mine alone. Too many times I could
have and would have quit had it not been for some wonderful people. I share this
accomplishment with so many and am grateful to all.
First, I want to thank my chair, advisor, and mentor, Dr. Larry Picus. He gave so
much of his unlimited time and energy, believing in me when I did not. His patience,
encouragement, and constant faith guided me on the right path. He read my work with
diligence and care, ensuring that I was writing to my potential, yet never making me feel
that I failed. I have learned not only how to be a good researcher but also how to be a
good mentor. I hope that if I am fortunate enough to ever be in a position like his, I can
do half as good a job.
I also want thank Dr. Rey Baca for his time, intelligence, and support. When I
was confused and unsure of what direction to go in my dissertation, I knew that I could
go to him for help. Amidst a hectic schedule, he would sit and talk with me, aiding me
in the direction of my study and my thoughts. My dissertation would always be better
afterwards.
I also want to thank Dr. Robert Rueda for laying the foundation for my disserta
tion study. He asked me critical questions to consider as I attempted to formulate what I
wanted to study. He helped me focus, which I found to be the most difficult part of the
iii
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
research process. As he guided me, he kept my passion for what I wanted to study
intact, constantly asking me and reminding me of what it was I wanted to learn.
I want to thank Dr. David Lopez-Lee, who challenged my thinking and helped
my dissertation to be a good one. I am grateful for his judicious questions and com
ments that required me to work more, but ultimately, also to learn more. I have become
a better writer and researcher in the process.
As a teacher, I am inspired and encouraged by my fellow colleagues. It takes so
much energy and life to give to 20-35 children every day. I want to thank my fellow
teachers, who move me to write about their voices and to ensure that policy makers,
researchers, and the public never forget what teachers give and how much they give. I
thank them all.
I would also like to thank the almost 300 children who have had to share me
with doctoral classes and the dissertation. Every time the thought of quitting ever came
to mind, I remembered that my inner-city, minority, and English learner children, whose
needs are so many and are so neglected and forgotten, needed me to bring their voice to
research and policy. I will always fight for them.
I also want to thank the Ph.D.s I have met who, along the way, provided me with
constant encouragement. I would share my frustrations and self-doubt and was always
told that I could do this and would do it. I am very proud to be a part of this special
group and will make sure that I pass on that encouragement.
At a critical juncture, I received some special words, “Do it because then your
little girls will know that if mommy can do it, they can, too.” Thanks to Pati—I used
iv
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
those words as strength to get me through the many difficult parts of the process. I owe
her so much and will be celebrating with her when we are both done.
My heart also goes to my dear girlfriends. Thanks to Jennifer for her gentle
nudges and reminders to keep my focus on completing the degree. Thanks to Liwliwa
for her effervescent pride and faith. She has seen me through so much, and here we are.
Thanks to Nell for her boundless energy—I try so hard to keep up. Thanks to Ai for
shopping with me and helping me take a break from all the craziness. Those little
breaks reenergized me to write more. Thanks to Maria for being such an amazing
teacher and an inspiration. This dissertation is about teachers like her who care so much
for their students. These are all such powerful and strong-hearted women. They have
shown me my own inner strength, and I am so blessed to have them all in my life.
Thanks to Pete and Mom for linking me to the past that got me here. Thanks to
Linda for not only raising a son who helped me get through this but also for being my
second mom and believing in me. I am lucky to have a family that loves me so much.
Finally and most importantly, I thank Rick for everything that got us to where
we are. We have seen so much together, and I could not and would have done it without
him. I thank him for making me smile when I wanted to cry, for encouraging me to get
to work when I wanted to sit and watch TV or start another project, and for giving so
much of himself so that this could all happen. I took myself away from him and the
girls too much and will be so happy to now give him all of me. Thanks to Rick, Sy, and
Mai for their patience, love, and unconditional support. We made it!
v
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
DEDICATION........................................................................................................ ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...................................................................................... iii
LIST OF TABLES.................................................................................................. ix
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................ xi
ABSTRACT............................................................................................................ xii
Chapter
1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 1
Cognitive Dissonance Theory and Teachers.................................... 1
Multilingualism in California.......................................................... 3
History of Bilingual Education in California............................ 4
New Immigration Laws and the Return of Bilingual
Education .......................................................................... 6
Propositions 187,209, and 227 ................................................ 8
Statement of the Problem ................................................................ 10
Purpose of the S tudy........................................................................ 10
Importance of the Study.................................................................... 12
Limitations ...................................................................................... 13
Delimitations.................................................................................... 13
Definition of Term s.......................................................................... 14
Bilingual Teachers.................................................................... 14
Developmental Bilingual Education ........................................ 14
English Immersion.................................................................... 14
ELD .......................................................................................... 14
ELLs.......................................................................................... 15
Limited English Proficient (LEP).............................................. 15
SD A IE...................................................................................... 15
Transitional Bilingual Education.............................................. 15
Waivers .................................................................................... 15
2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ........................................................ 16
Teacher B eliefs................................................................................ 16
Teacher Beliefs and Teacher Education.................................... 17
vi
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Teacher Beliefs and Practice .................................................... 19
Teacher Beliefs, Bilingual Education, and E L L s...................... 21
Cognitive Dissonance and Self-Consistency Theories .................... 23
Bilingual Education in the United States ........................................ 27
Pre-Colonial and Colonial United States.................................. 28
Establishment of the United States............................................ 29
First Era of Bilingual Education in the United States................ 31
Restrictive Bilingual Education................................................ 31
Second Era of Bilingual Education in the United States .......... 33
Bilingual Education in the United States Today........................ 35
California Bilingual Education and Proposition 227 ........................ 38
History of California Policy for Education ELLs...................... 38
Controversies and Evolution of Proposition 227 ...................... 40
Impact on Teachers and Schools .............................................. 42
Impact on Teacher Attitude and Beliefs.................................... 45
Impact on Teaching Practices.................................................... 46
Impact on Students.................................................................... 49
Impact on Teacher Education.................................................... 50
Conclusion ...................................................................................... 51
3. METHODOLOGY.................................................................................. 54
Sample and Population.................................................................... 56
School Sam ple.......................................................................... 56
Teacher Sam ple........................................................................ 58
Instrumentation................................................................................ 59
Pilot Study........................................................................................ 63
Data Collection................................................................................ 64
Data Analysis .................................................................................. 66
4. FINDINGS.............................................................................................. 69
Participants’ Background ................................................................ 71
Descriptive and Inferential Statistics................................................ 73
Research Question 1 .................................................................. 73
Research Question 2 .................................................................. 80
Research Question 3 .................................................................. 83
Correlations...................................................................................... 85
Correlations Between the Variables Belief and Change in
Practice.............................................................................. 85
Correlations Between the Variables Belief in Bilingual
Education and Program Acceptance.................................. 86
Summary of Findings ...................................................................... 91
Research Question 1 .................................................................. 91
Research Question 2 .................................................................. 93
vii
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Research Question 3 .................................................................. 94
Correlations...................................................................................... 95
Conclusion ...................................................................................... 96
5. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS ...................... 97
Review of Problem Statement.......................................................... 97
Summary of Findings ...................................................................... 98
Research Question 1 .................................................................. 98
Research Question 2 .................................................................. 100
Research Question 3 .................................................................. 101
Conclusions...................................................................................... 102
Implications...................................................................................... 105
Research Implications .............................................................. 105
Policy Implications.................................................................... 107
Practitioner Implications .......................................................... 108
REFERENCES CITED .......................................................................................... 109
APPENDICES........................................................................................................ 115
A. SURVEY ............................................................................................... 116
B. INFORMED CONSENT....................................................................... 124
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
LIST OF TABLES
1. Frequency of Bilingual and Nonbilingual Credential Teachers............... 60
2. Frequency of Pre-Proposition Bilingual Teachers and Non-Pre-
Proposition 227 Bilingual Teachers .................................................. 60
3. Frequency of Mean Scores for Bilingual Teachers’ Beliefs in
Bilingual Education .......................................................................... 61
4. Research Questions and Corresponding Survey Statements ................... 64
5. Frequency of Bilingual and Nonbilingual Credentialed Teachers........... 72
6. Frequency of Pre-Proposition 227 Bilingual Teachers Non-Pre-
Proposition 227 Bilingual Teachers .................................................. 72
7. Predictions: Means, t Tests, and Significance for Pre-Proposition
227 Bilingual Teachers Non-Pre-Proposition 227 Bilingual
Teachers’ Beliefs About Bilingual Education.................................... 74
8. Predictions, Mean Scores, t Tests, and Significance for Pre-
Proposition 227 Bilingual Teachers and Non-Pre-Proposition
227 Bilingual Teachers for Aversive Consequences for English
Language Learners (ELLs) in an English Immersion Program 82
9. Predictions: Means, t Tests, and Significance for Pre-Proposition
227 Bilingual Teachers Non-Pre-Proposition 227 Bilingual
Teachers Regarding Change in Practice............................................ 84
10. Correlation Between Beliefs in Bilingual Education and Change in
Practice for Pre-Proposition 227 and Non-Pre-227 Bilingual
Teachers ............................................................................................ 87
11. Summary of Regression Analysis for the Variables Change in
Program and Belief in Bilingual Education ...................................... 88
12. Correlation Between Beliefs in Bilingual Education and Program
Acceptance for Pre-Proposition 227 and Non-Pre-Proposition
227 Bilingual Teachers...................................................................... 90
ix
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
13. Summary of Regression Analysis for the Variables Change in
Program and Belief in Bilingual Education ..................
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
LIST OF FIGURES
1. Conceptual model of study....................................................................... 55
2. Fit line showing regression between beliefs in bilingual education
and change in practice for bilingual teachers.................................... 88
3. Fit line showing regression between belief in bilingual education and
program acceptance by bilingual teachers........................................ 89
xi
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
ABSTRACT
In 1998 California voters passed an initiative known as Proposition 227. The
initiative, which would later become the English Language Education for Immigrant
Children Act, required bilingual teachers to conduct instruction for English learners
primarily in English. Before the implementation of the law, bilingual teachers taught
English learners subject matter in their primary language most of the day, with English
language development taught at a separate time. At the onset of the law, bilingual
teachers were required to teach opposite of the way they had been teaching, with which
they were familiar and knowledgeable.
The purpose of this study was to determine what bilingual teachers’ beliefs and
subsequent practices in teaching English learners were 7 years after the implementation
of a law that contradicted their beliefs. Through the self-consistency perspective of
cognitive dissonance theory, the study surveyed bilingual teachers in 3 different urban
schools with over 90% English learner students asking teachers to respond to statements
on a 4-point Likert scale regarding their beliefs and practices. The analysis involved
comparisons between bilingual teachers who had taught prior to Proposition 227 and
those who taught after the implementation of the law.
The findings indicated that all bilingual teachers, regardless of whether they had
taught before or after the implementation of English immersion, continued to believe
strongly in bilingual education 7 years later. Bilingual teachers believed that teaching
students in their primary language would benefit English learners more and that English
xii
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
immersion could have aversive consequences for their students. The findings further
showed that as bilingual teachers’ beliefs in bilingual education strengthen, bilingual
teachers would be more likely to change their practice in their classroom to accommo
date their English learners. The study confirmed the self-consistency revision of cogni
tive dissonance theory, whereby the strength of belief does increase the likelihood of
change in practice. This study concluded with a discussion of implications for research
ers, policymakers, and practitioners. In particular, the final chapter highlighted sugges
tions for the area of teacher education.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Cognitive Dissonance Theory and Teachers
On June 2,1998, bilingual teachers were placed in a state of cognitive disso
nance when 61% of California voters supported an initiative that required instruction in
public schools conducted primarily in English (Stritikus & Garcia, 2003). This initia
tive, known as Proposition 227, required that bilingual teachers teach opposite from
how they had been teaching English language learners (ELLs).
According to Harmon-Jones and Mills (1999), dissonance exists when two
cognitions or beliefs are relevant and opposite from one another. This existence of
cognitive dissonance is psychologically uncomfortable and motivates an individual to
reduce dissonance. Cognitive dissonance theory indicates that these individuals will
work to reduce that dissonance. Removal of dissonance can entail changing behaviors,
changing cognitions, adding consonant cognitions, reducing the importance of disso
nant cognitions, or increasing the importance of consonant cognitions.
Prior to the implementation of the new law, California instruction in public
schools for ELLs followed a method of teaching students subject matter in their primary
language most of the day, with English language development (ELD) taught at a sepa
rate part of the day. This was known as bilingual education.
With Proposition 227 and the law that followed (English Language Education
for Immigrant Children Act of 1998), schools were now required to provide classroom
1
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
instruction for ELLs predominantly in English. This method, known as sheltered Eng
lish immersion, structured English immersion, or English immersion, mandated bilin
gual teachers to teach in English and not in the students’ primary language. This act
required that teachers work opposite from cognitions that they had learned through
teacher education courses, where primary language instruction was advocated. Bilin
gual teachers would now teach the opposite of how they had been working with ELLs,
and they would experience cognitive dissonance.
Cognitive dissonance theory, which originated in 1957 by Leon Festinger, has
evolved into new perspectives that now look at the impact of the self in dissonance and
the motivations that incite the self to react to dissonance. One of these new perspectives
of dissonance theory is the self-consistency revision of dissonance. Harmon-Jones and
Mills (1999) defined the self-consistency interpretation of cognitive dissonance theory
as “the idea that situations that evoke dissonance do so because they create inconsis
tency between the self-concept and a behavior (p. 13).” According to Aronson (1999),
the self-consistency revision looks at an individual’s “mindfulness,” their awareness of
a belief in a particular subject. Some individuals have a high self-concept, a strong
awareness of their belief and/or knowledge. Other individuals have a low self-concept,
a minimal awareness of their beliefs and knowledge. Most individuals fall in the mid
dle of that continuum. Furthermore, according to Aronson (1999), mindfulness is a
strong determinant in how much individuals will change either their beliefs or their
practices. High mindfulness and strong beliefs, therefore, might be more resistant to
change, whereas low mindfulness and low beliefs might result in changed practices.
2
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
It is now 7 years later, and bilingual teachers continue to teach in English im
mersion classrooms. Seven years before, these bilingual teachers conducted instruction
in bilingual classrooms in the students’ primary language. Using the self-consistency
revision of cognitive dissonance theory, this study examined bilingual teachers’ beliefs
and practices 7 years after Proposition 227 and raised issues asked with respect to
bilingual teachers’ beliefs and practices after 7 years: (a) whether their beliefs about
bilingual education changed, (b) whether their practices changed and how much, and (c)
how changes in practice impacted bilingual teachers’ ELLs.
Proposition 227 did not happen suddenly and in isolation. The law was bom out
of a very complex and problematic history in California and the United States in how to
teach ELLs and how to deal with the language diversity of the land. The following sec
tions will illustrate the historical, political, and social forces that influenced and eventu
ally resulted in this climate of dissonance for teachers.
Multilingualism in California
Language diversity in California and the United States in general is not a new
one. Multilingualism has always been a part of California since the first Europeans
arrived in the state (Wiley & Wright, 2004). When the first Europeans came to Califor
nia, they encountered a land where people spoke thousands of different languages
(Brisk, 1998). This multilingualism continues today where, according to 2000 census
data, California is the home to a population where 39.5% speak a language other than
English. Of that 39.5%, over 35 languages are spoken (U.S. Census Bureau, 2000).
3
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
This multilingualism permeates public schools even today where, according to
the 2000 census data, 26% of the total California population 5 years old and above is
foreign bom (U.S. Census Bureau, 2000). Whereas language diversity has been a
constant of U.S. and California history, the policies in teaching ELLs have not followed
a consistent path. The laws concerning the education of California’s ELLs have run the
gamut, ranging from laws supporting the use of the native language to laws outlawing
its use. The next section will examine the changing policies in educating ELLs and
suggest how the existing social and political climate influenced the kinds of policies
that resulted.
History o f Bilingual Education in California
An analysis of the history of bilingual policy in California suggests that incon
sistencies have been the norm. From the 1800s to the early 1900s and the beginning of
California’s statehood, educators taught ELLs through some form of use of the stu
dent’s primary language, also known as bilingual education. According to Ovando
(2003), no systematic form of bilingual education existed with a standardized bilingual
curriculum, program, or formal law. Instead, the use of the native tongue in some
measure was evident and tolerated, and not punished. Bilingual education was accepted
with the intent to educate non-English speakers and to assimilate them as soon as pos
sible into the American culture.
However, the policies shifted in the opposite direction decades later. In the mid
1800s to the early 1900s, Americans’ attitudes toward immigrants became more
4
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
restrictive and antagonistic. With rising numbers of immigrants entering the east coast
from European countries, the U.S. government began a policy of higher standards and
more restrictive requirements for entering the country. As these stricter immigration
laws evolved, the effect was to substantially limit the number of foreigners entering the
United States as legal residents able to work and live in the country with citizens. This
resulted in the subsequent slowdown of the population of foreign-born persons in the
United States.
According to Census data, the percentage of the U.S. population that is foreign
bom and 5 years old and above declined steadily from a high of 14.7% in 1910 to a low
of 4.7% in 1970 (Gibson & Lennon, 2001). As a result, the number of language minor
ity students who were in the public schools in the early to mid 1900s decreased, and the
need for bilingual education lessened. As the country’s attitude toward immigrants
became more negative, so did its tolerance for the use of the student’s native language
in education. Different reviews of historical analyses of bilingual education policy in
the United States (Flores & Murillo, 2001; Ovando, 2003; Wiley & Wright, 2004)
found that at this time bilingual education and the use of the primary language in any
form were prohibited in schools. Between 1917 and 1922, legislation was passed in 34
states mandating English as the official language of instruction. In 1872, California had
already required English-only instruction (Mora, 2005) .
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
New Immigration Laws and the Return
o f Bilingual Education
California continued to maintain an English-only stance in its schools until
around the 1960s. In the mid-1960s through the 1970s, the social climate in the United
States changed. The passage of the 14th Amendment, the 1954 Brown v. Board o f Edu
cation ruling, and the 1964 Civil Rights Act (as cited in Mora, 2005) suggested the
changing positive attitude in America toward minority populations.
Another example of this change was the loosening of the restrictive immigration
laws. The U.S. government specifically lowered the requirements needed to enter the
United States, and these lower requirements aided in the rising influx of new immi
grants. The influx of new immigrants poured into all parts of the country and impacted
California, where the percentage of foreign-born individuals constituting the total pop
ulation increased. As immigration laws decreased the restrictions, the number of
foreign-born individuals rose from 6.2% in 1980 to 7.9% in 1990 (Gibson & Lennon,
2001).
Two major events in the reemergence of bilingual education nationally and in
California, particularly, occurred at this time. One was the 1967 signing of Senate Bill
(SB) 53 legislation, which allowed the use of other languages other than English and
overturned the 1872 English-only law (as cited in Mora, 2005). The other event was the
1974 Lau v. Nichols ruling (as cited in Ovando, 2003). In San Francisco, Chinese par
ents filed a class action suit against the state, claiming that their children did not have
equal educational opportunities because they were not able to access a curriculum they
6
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
could not understand. The Supreme Court unanimously found in favor of the parents
and legitimized bilingual education, referred to as the use of the native language to
ensure access to the curriculum. The ruling, however, did not identify a specific type of
curriculum, program, or exact definition of bilingualism; that decision was left up to the
states.
Another major factor in the evolution of California’s bilingual education in the
1970s and 1980s was the successful bilingual education program that flourished in
Florida (Crawford, 1991). Cuban immigrants coming into the United States in the
1950s and 1960s in Florida stressed the need for their children to learn both English and
Spanish simultaneously. The intention of these Cuban immigrants was to return to their
homeland.
The Florida Cuban immigrants successfully implemented programs that used
the students’ primary language and found that the students not only were able to learn
concepts in their primary language but also were successfully learning English. These
results encouraged other states to form bilingual education programs and policies. Cali
fornia implemented its own bilingual education policies such as the 1974 Chacon-
Moscone bilingual-Bicultural Education Act and the 1981 Bilingual Education Act
(Mora, 2005).
As a result of the need for qualified bilingual teachers and the need for all teach
ers to have specific strategies in teaching ELLs, the state credentialing commission
began adding new requirements for teacher certification. These requirements outlined
specific theories and strategies to address the needs of ELLs and involved new
7
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
credentials, such as the Bilingual Certificate of Competence (BCC); Language Devel
opment Specialist (LDS); Bilingual Cross-Cultural, Language and Academic Develop
ment (BCLAD); and the Cross-Cultural, Language, and Academic Development
(CLAD) certificates (California Commission on Teacher Credentialing [CCTC], 2001).
Subsequently, college and university teacher education programs added courses
that addressed how to best teach ELLs. Because of the very large and salient number of
minority students and the increasing number of ELLs, all teachers were required to learn
programs such as Specifically Designed Academic Instruction in English (SDAIE) to
address the needs of ELLs. Hence, teachers began developing belief systems and prac
tices that supported the use of the primary language.
Despite a limited number of qualified teachers and insufficient state funding,
California implemented bilingual education across the state. The state law mandated
the use of the primary language for ELLs. However, partly because of the problem of
inadequate funding and unqualified teachers and also because of time, bilingual educa
tion was never given the opportunity to develop into its ideal (Gutierrez, Baquedano-
Lopez, & Asato, 2000). Gutierrez et. al. found that only 29% of the total population of
ELLs at that time received any type of bilingual education; of that number, only 15%
had an ideal bilingual program.
Propositions 187, 209, and227
In California, as bilingual education grew in the schools in the late 1980s and
through the mid 1990s, the political climate shifted against immigrants again, just as it
8
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
did in the early 1900s. Examples of this shift were demonstrated in California’s Propo
sitions 187 and 209. The intention of Proposition 187 was to make it illegal for
hospitals and schools to provide services to illegal immigrants. Not only would hospi
tals and schools would have had to deny services to this specific population, but they
would also have had to report children and ill people to the authorities. The health care
and school communities did not support the law.
Proposition 209 made it illegal for any kind of public university or college pro
gram to give preferences to students because of race. Both laws passed overwhelm
ingly, yet only Proposition 209 was implemented. Still, the California citizenry made it
very clear that it was less compassionate toward minority and immigrant populations.
Furthermore, these laws set the tone and led the way for Proposition 227 (Crawford,
1997).
In 1998, Proposition 227 gave voters the ability to decide educational policy.
Proposition 227 stated that public schools in California must teach in English only.
Theoretically, Proposition 227 had very few supporters in the research community. Of
bilingual education theorists and experts, Proposition 227 essentially contradicted years
of research that began to see the long-term benefits of well implemented bilingual pro
grams (Katz, 2000; Ramirez, Yuen, & Ramey, 1991). However, the law passed with
61% of the voters supporting it. Despite lawsuits to fight its validity, the courts main
tained its dictum, and Proposition 227 became a reality for bilingual teachers and ELLs.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Statement of the Problem
Bilingual teachers developed a set of beliefs about how ELLs should be taught
reading through their teacher preparation programs. Bilingual teachers learned very
specific theories about how to best educate ELLs and these theories advocated the im
portance of the primary language in successfully teaching them English while also
maintaining students’ content learning through the native language.
Then, in 1998, California voters supported Proposition 227 that ended bilingual
education in public schools. Inconsistent with the methodology that bilingual teachers
had been following, the new law mandated that teachers instruct ELLs in English only.
Bilingual teachers were placed in a situation where they were required to teach contrary
to the way they were taught through their teacher preparation programs. At the time of
the initial implementation of Proposition 227, researchers focused on bilingual teacher
reactions to this new law (Dixon, Green, Yeager, Baker, & Franquiz, 2000; Gandara,
2000). The research examined teachers’ psychological reaction toward implementing
the law, as well as the impact on their practices. These early studies found that many
teachers grappled with many issues such as insecurity and self-doubt. They were expe
riencing cognitive dissonance due to the conflicting stance in which they found them
selves.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to determine what bilingual teachers’ beliefs and
subsequent practices in teaching ELLs were 7 years after the implementation of a law
10
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
that contradicted their beliefs. Through the self-consistency perspective of cognitive
dissonance theory, the researcher surveyed bilingual teachers in three different schools
and asked teachers questions regarding their beliefs and practices. These schools were
located in the same local area with similar demographics. The distinguishing factor
among the three schools was the extent to which the bilingual education program cur
rently existed at the school, as determined by the number of bilingual (waiver) classes in
the schools. The study explored the consequences of placing individuals in a position
of acting in direct contradiction to how they had been educated and trained, and to their
beliefs.
The survey identified bilingual teachers who had been part of a bilingual pro
gram prior to Proposition 227. The survey asked bilingual teachers what they currently
believed about bilingual education theory 7 years after its implementation. Through a
series of questions, this study also sought to determine bilingual teachers’ current prac
tices in teaching.
The study examined, through the self-consistency perspective of cognitive dis
sonance theory, the extent to which the bilingual teachers surveyed adapted their beliefs
and/or their practices to the policy. These teachers were placed in a state of dissonance
and had had 7 years to consider their beliefs and practices about bilingual education.
The research questions posed by this study were the following:
1. What are bilingual teachers’ current beliefs about bilingual education after 7
years of English immersion policy, and does a difference exist between pre-Proposition
227 bilingual teachers’ beliefs and non-pre-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers’ beliefs?
11
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
2. Do bilingual teachers believe that the current prevailing method of teaching
ELLs through English immersion will have aversive consequences?
3. How have bilingual teachers’ practices changed, and do these changes in
practice correlate with the strength of their beliefs?
Importance of the Study
Research has shown that teachers have an instrumental role in policymaking
because they interpret, decide, and practice the curriculum according to their beliefs
(Fang, 1996). This study is important for policymakers and practitioners because it
further illustrates the important role that teachers have in the policy implementation
process, particularly in interpreting and reconciling policies and presenting them in the
classroom.
Regardless of the attempts to “proof’ the teacher’s role, teachers do act inde
pendently and distinctly from mandates and controls placed on them by administrators
and standards. This study should illustrate the teacher’s role and, more specifically,
how teachers’ beliefs play an instrumental part in that policy implementation process.
The study investigated whether teachers changed or did not change their beliefs and
whether or not they modified their practices as a result of the new legislation.
For policymakers, the study emphasizes what has already been found in research
on policy implementation—namely, that in order to successfully implement a policy, it
is imperative to consider teachers’ input and their beliefs prior to creating the policy.
Without the input of the teacher, a policy can be interpreted and implemented in a
12
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
myriad of ways and will not be fully implemented according to its intent. This study
investigated how one specific policy has been implemented and the extent to which it
has affirmed its intent.
This study has important research implications in the area of beliefs. Beliefs
have long been an area of study by researchers to determine their impact on practices.
This study focused on specific beliefs about a teaching practice and examined what
happened to those beliefs after individuals were required to act contrary to those beliefs
—specifically whether change occurred and whether it continued to occur after a sub
stantial period of time.
Limitations
The following items were beyond the control of the researcher: (a) the accuracy
of the responses to the survey’s questions, (b) the number of individuals who responded
to the survey, and (c) the type of bilingual program that existed at the school site.
Delimitations
The study was narrowed in focus through these delimitations:
1. The study focused primarily on bilingual teachers who taught in a bilingual
classroom prior to the passage of Proposition 227.
2. The study focused on the beliefs and practices that bilingual teachers held
regarding their teaching of ELLs in the language arts.
3. The study look at the staff at only three different schools with similar popu
lations and in a similar geographic area.
13
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
4. The study focused on urban area schools and populations.
5. The study focused on Latino, Spanish-speaking students.
6. The study took place in California.
Definition of Terms
Bilingual Teachers
Teachers in California who hold a California certified bilingual credential
(among those identified credentials are BCC and BCLAD); also referred to as bilingual
education teachers and bilingual educators (CCTC, 2001).
Developmental Bilingual Education
Teaching ELLs using their primary language in K-6 grade, with the primary goal
of achieving academic proficiency in both English and the primary language (Crawford,
2004).
English Immersion
Teaching ELLs primarily in English. An attempt is made to adjust the English
level so that subject matter is comprehensible (also known as structured English immer
sion or structured immersion (Crawford, 2004).
ELD
Refers to the acquisition of English as a non-native language. Also refers to
students who might actually be learning English as a third or fourth language. Also
refers to English as a Second Language (ESL; Peregoy & Boyle, 2001).
14
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
ELLs
Refers to individuals who are in the process of learning English as a new lan
guage; also known as English learners (Peregoy & Boyle, 2001).
Limited English Proficient (LEP)
A term used in federal legislation and other official documents that refers to
individuals who are beginners to intermediates in English (Peregoy & Boyle, 2001).
SDAIE
Instruction in a subject matter in English specifically designed to give English
Learners access to the curriculum. Also known as “Sheltered Instruction.” (CCTC,
2001).
Transitional Bilingual Education
Teaching ELLs using their primary language with the goal of quickly transi
tioning students to English usually within 1-3 years (Crawford, 2004).
Waivers
Refer to the process in the English Language Education for Immigrant Children
Act of 1998 (Proposition 227 legislation) where parents submit a written request that
their children be transferred to a class that uses bilingual education methodology as
opposed to English immersion.
15
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
This chapter reviews the different theoretical frameworks that shape this study
of bilingual teachers. The themes discussed will be teacher beliefs and practices theory,
the self-consistency revision of cognitive dissonance theory, bilingual education theory
and history, and California bilingual education history and theory. How these theories
shape and structure the problem of bilingual teachers acting under cognitive dissonance
and opposite of their beliefs will be examined.
Teacher Beliefs
Teacher beliefs encompass a complex set of beliefs and personal experiences
that teachers have from their own lives in schools, their view of children and the role of
schools in caring for them, and their own philosophies of education. Richardson (1996)
summarized teacher beliefs as originating from many life experiences that create strong
and enduring cognitions that are challenging to change. In their review of belief studies,
Munby, Russell, and Martin (2001) also found that beliefs—particularly descriptive
beliefs based on personal observations—are central in shaping teachers’ images.
In his review of beliefs and knowledge research, Calderhead (1996) also found
that the distinction between knowledge and beliefs is that beliefs are suppositions,
commitments, and ideologies that individuals hold true, whereas knowledge is factual
understanding that informs skillful practice. Calderhead defined beliefs as perceptions
that individuals hold about a subject, teaching, the self and learner. Nesper (1987, as
16
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
cited in Ramos, 2001) linked knowledge as objective facts with theory and beliefs as
personal evaluations and judgments with practice.
Since preservice teachers have first-hand knowledge of the education world
derived from personal experiences as a student, from observing teachers, and from
learning itself, they enter teacher education programs with very clear and formidable
beliefs about education. The next section looks at research that explores the impact of
teacher education on teacher beliefs.
Teacher Beliefs and Teacher Education
Studies on teacher education and its impact on teacher beliefs have been incon
clusive (Richardson, 1996; Tatto, 1998). Richardson found that in some cases, some
students in a program changed while others did not, or they changed in different ways.
Richardson cited two examples where the changes occurred differently. In one exam
ple, Richardson looked at students practicing models of teaching. She found a distinc
tion between graduate and undergraduate students and their perception of the goals of a
lesson; undergraduate students looked back at the lesson they had taught, while the
graduate students looked to future possibilities. A second example dealt with differ
ences in traditional and nontraditional students and found that the students’ orientation
toward the class work differed, whether or not they were traditional or nontraditional
students. In this case, when looking at a reflective video, Richardson found that the
traditional students focused on students while the nontraditional students focused on the
teachers.
17
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
In his survey of bilingual education teachers and their beliefs about bilingual
education, Ramos (2001) found that teachers perceived that preparation courses did not
impact their beliefs. He found in his analysis that there seemed to be other factors im
pacting teachers’ opinions about the bilingual education, and it was not clearly their
preparation knowledge. He suggested that teachers were influenced more by their per
sonal beliefs.
Belief changes also depended on the type of program. Tatto (1998) studied the
extent to which teacher education students’ views changed in the direction of faculty’s
views as they participated in a teacher education program. Tatto used a questionnaire
with students from nine education programs—five preservice, one induction, one alter
nate route, and two inservice—to determine whether students’ views changed. Tatto
found that programs that were directed to certified teachers with a jointly defined
philosophy, small size, highly coherent norms, context-relevant opportunities to learn,
and so on were successful. She concluded that across-program coherence and internal
program coherence seemed to play an important role in the teacher education program
with respect to the teachers’ beliefs.
However, Richardson (1996) found that in a number of studies, type of program
did not significantly impact teacher beliefs. Richardson found that in a study where
students used classroom vignettes before and after a reflective student teaching experi
ence, the students’ perspectives actually solidified. Furthermore, Richardson also cited
a case study of two preservice teachers who did not change their beliefs during the
18
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
course of their teacher education program because the students were not encouraged to
confront and examine the beliefs and tended to hold on to them.
Teacher Beliefs and Practice
The research, hence, is not conclusive in terms of the influence of teacher edu
cation on teacher beliefs. This next section looks at research on teacher beliefs and
practice. Richardson (1996) found that research suggests that the context of schooling
and classroom experience does exert influence on teachers’ beliefs. Richardson found
that inservice programs did have some impact in changing teachers’ beliefs. When
teachers were able to test practices and knowledge in the classroom, the practical
knowledge helped tie or untie the beliefs they held regarding the classroom.
Research also suggested that teachers’ beliefs have been a major factor in how
educators shape their curriculum choices and how they practice in the classroom
(Calderhead, 1996; Levitt, 2002). In a review of research on teacher beliefs and prac
tices, Fang (1996) found a consistency between the theoretical beliefs held by teachers
and the instructional practices that they chose to use. Fang found this occurred in
reading research, specifically citing an example where teachers taught reading accord
ing to the reading method in which they believed (i.e., the subskills of reading or read
ing through a literary structuralist approach).
Teacher beliefs also help in everyday classroom practice. Calderhead (1996)
found in his review of the literature that beliefs are tied to a larger belief system with
strong feelings, especially in what children should learn. The larger belief system is
19
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
linked to events, situations, and knowledge systems. Fang (1996) showed how teachers
are “dilemma managers,” working around a myriad of choices about curriculum, man
agement and pedagogy, student abilities, and so forth that, more often than not, contra
dicted themselves.
Teachers’ beliefs helped in dealing with these complex and ill-defined situations
in the classroom and helped the teacher to interpret, simplify, and work through these
dilemmas. Teacher beliefs also help in terms of creating a shared philosophy where
teachers can seek out colleagues with similar belief systems as supports through dilem
mas (Fang, 1996).
However, Calderhead (1996) also found at the same time that the literature was
not conclusive in showing a direct relationship between beliefs and practice. He found
studies that highlighted large discrepancies between beliefs and observed classroom
practice and studies that found links between teachers’ beliefs and classroom situations.
He suggested that because beliefs are generalized and abstract, teachers can have con
flicting beliefs that can be difficult for them to justify in thinking about practice, espe
cially contradictory practice.
The research in terms of beliefs and practice suggests, therefore, that although
teacher education does not have a definitive impact on teacher beliefs, once the teacher
is in the classroom, beliefs have an intricate, although not causal, relationship with
practice, where practice impacts beliefs and beliefs impact practice. This concept leads
to a discussion on policy. In a review of teacher beliefs and policy, Eisenhart, Cuthbert,
Shrum, and Harding (1988) found that teachers and their beliefs are essential since
20
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
teachers ultimately decide, implement, and practice policy according to their beliefs.
They found evidence that suggests that when educational policies are incompatible with
teacher beliefs, the policies are not implemented as intended. Eisenhart et al. cited an
example where a district attempted to implement a new planning, programming, and
budgeting system. When teachers determined that the system took time and energy
away from the instructional tasks that they believed were more important, they com
plained. When their complaints went unheeded, they resisted the new system.
Teacher Beliefs, Bilingual Education,
and ELLs
As the previous section suggests, beliefs impact practice and policy. The pur
pose of this study was to look at the impact of a policy, Proposition 227, on bilingual
education teachers’ beliefs and practices. This next section examines studies that
explored bilingual education teachers’ beliefs about bilingual education and teaching
ELLs.
In a survey of California teachers regarding their attitudes toward the principles
of bilingual education and toward student participation in bilingual programs, Shin and
Krashen (1996) found support for the underlying theory but found less support for
actual participation by students in bilingual programs. Teachers expressed strong ac
ceptance for the rationale underlying bilingual education, agreeing that developing lit
eracy in the first language facilitates the development of reading and writing in English
and that learning the subject matter in the first language helps the child learn the subject
21
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
matter better in English. The researchers also found in contrast, however, that less than
a majority supported ELLs developing literacy and subject matter in the first language
in school, and 40% were opposed to continuing first-language development for children
who were already bilingual.
Significantly, Shin and Krashen (1996) also found that teachers who had supple
mentary training showed stronger support for bilingual education. Those with more
English learner students and who were more fluent in a second language tended to
support bilingual education more. The authors posited some reasons for the discrep
ancy between support for the principles and support for the actual program, suggesting
that teachers might agree with some components of the program but not all. They
further suggested that practical considerations might influence their beliefs, such as
concerns about job security. This specific discrepancy was explored in the present
study.
Ramos (2001) studied teachers’ opinions about the theoretical and practical
aspect of the use of the native language instruction for language-minority students and
found similar conclusions to Shin and Krashen’s (1996) study. Ramos found that there
was strong support for the underlying theory but less support for its practical implemen
tation. Ramos also found that although teachers did not support the practical implemen
tation of bilingual education, the participants were not strongly opposed to it. This
result was especially significant because Ramos conducted the study nearly a year after
Proposition 227 was implemented.
22
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
In another study on bilingual education teachers’ beliefs, Flores (2001) found
that bilingual teachers recognized the importance of language and culture in the acquisi
tion of knowledge and used this belief in their interactions with their students. Also,
experiences as bilingual learners led bilingual teachers to intuitively recognize the needs
of their bilingual learners.
Bilingual teachers, therefore, have a defined set of beliefs about bilingual educa
tion theory, but are bilingual education teachers’ beliefs the same? Shin and Krashen
(1996) found that bilingual education teachers with more training, who had experience
with ELLs, and were bilingual themselves supported bilingual education more. Hence,
the degree of the belief that bilingual education teachers hold may not be consistent
across the population.
The research further suggested that bilingual education teachers do not clearly
support the practice of bilingual education, yet if the degree of the belief is not consis
tent, it might also follow that the belief in the practice would also be different. The
beliefs research has suggested that beliefs impact practice and policy. The next section
looks at cognitive dissonance theory and the impact of self-concept, or the degree of
belief in a theory and its possible implications for practice.
Cognitive Dissonance and Self-Consistency Theories
Cognitive dissonance theory is a pivotal theory in social psychology and has
long examined what happens when people are placed in this personal battle. Festinger
in his seminal 1957 study identified cognitive dissonance theory as the situation when
23
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
individuals confront a contradiction of their beliefs and they will naturally act to create
consonance. Consonance is defined as a balance between an individual’s beliefs and
his/her actions and/or the choice that he/she made to carry out the contradictory action.
According to this theory, the dissonant individual will have no choice but to act to
reduce the dissonance; furthermore, the greater the dissonance, the greater the pressure
to reduce the dissonance.
Early research in cognitive dissonance examined what occurred after individuals
make a discrepant decision. Harmon-Jones and Mills (1999) reviewed this early re
search, which they summarized as looking at consequences, effects, and what actually
occurred when individuals found themselves in cognitive dissonance. The authors
noted that the early research in dissonance generally concluded that cognitive changes
occur and are motivated in nature. Furthermore, they found that researchers also agreed
that the source of the motivation is a form of psychological discomfort.
In conclusion, misattribution exists when individuals can attribute their contra
dictory behavior to a factor that they deem outside of their control and desire to misat-
tribute due to their state of cognitive dissonance. In the case of this study, high self-
concept teachers experiencing dissonance will look for factors outside of their control to
justify their contradictory behavior. If they cannot find factors to justify their behavior,
then they will change their actions to meet their beliefs. Low self-concept teachers do
not need to misattribute because they experience a lower degree of cognitive dissonance
and have no need to justify their behavior because they do not see it as contradictory.
They experience a low level of cognitive dissonance.
24
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Current research in dissonance, on the other hand, looks at the motivations
underlying dissonance. The role of the self and how that sense of self influences the
extent of dissonance that results has been an important area of examination. The new
research asks how the sense of self, or what researchers refer to as the self-concept,
impacts the dissonance that individuals feel when put in a contradictory state.
One specific revision of dissonance theory is referred to self-consistency.
According to Aronson (1999), the self-consistency revision looks at an individual’s
“mindfulness”—his/her awareness of a belief in a particular subject. Some individuals
have a high self-concept, a strong awareness of their belief and/or knowledge. Other
individuals have a low self-concept, a minimal awareness of their beliefs and knowl
edge. Most individuals fall in the middle of that continuum.
Aronson (1999) determined that individuals in dissonance will experience a
sense of hypocrisy because they are acting in contradiction to their beliefs. The disso
nant individual will be motivated to justify the hypocrisy to reduce dissonance, as
confirmed by cognitive dissonance theory. Furthermore, the self-concept determines
the magnitude of hypocrisy that an individual might feel in a state of dissonance.
Individuals who are very mindful will act strongly to lower the hypocrisy and reduce
dissonance. Those with low self-concept will act less to reduce it.
This self-consistency revision of dissonance theory was used as a theoretical
framework in the present study to examine the beliefs and actions of bilingual teachers
who have been forced to implement Proposition 227. “Mindfulness” is identified as a
bilingual teacher’s awareness of bilingual education policy and theory. It was assumed
25
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
that those teachers who were highly mindful would strongly act to reduce dissonance.
In this situation, it was hypothesized that the bilingual teachers would either modify
their prescribed curriculum or would seek alternative teaching settings that matched
their beliefs, such as the waiver classes that continued bilingual programs (Harmon-
Jones & Mills, 1999).
Another aspect of self-consistency examined by researchers was misattribution.
Aronson (1999) identified a self-consistency study that found that individuals in disso
nance were able to misattribute their dissonance to a source other than their dissonance-
arousing behavior—an element that was superfluous to the belief or the action. When
individuals are able to misattribute the dissonance arousal, then they are less likely to
reduce dissonance than individuals who cannot misattribute their dissonance.
Misattribution was placed on a continuum in the present study, ranging from a
bilingual teacher who taught in an English program but did not make modifications for
ELLs, to a bilingual teacher in a similar English program who made modifications.
Both teachers were able to misattribute their actions and justify their behavior while
retaining their beliefs. The highly mindful bilingual teacher, however, modified due to
a strong belief in bilingual education but could justify being in an English program
because he or she could misattribute his or her actions to factors such as the inability to
find a bilingual program at the school site and not being able to move, to a short supply
of bilingual classes that had already been filled by bilingual teachers, or to not being
able to change tracks if bilingual classes were on different tracks.
26
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
The low-mindful bilingual teacher, on the other hand, made no modifications
because the strength of his or her beliefs in bilingual was low. This bilingual teacher
could further justify not making modifications for ELLs because he or she could easily
misattribute the dissonance to factors such as inaccessible materials, seemingly low
interest on the part of parents to place their children in bilingual programs, or an inabil
ity for personal reasons to change programs. Moreover, because of the low mindful
ness, this bilingual teacher would be less motivated to overcome the misattribution.
The final scenario in this study was the low-mindful bilingual teacher who could
misattribute his or her action. These types of bilingual teachers do not have strong
beliefs in bilingual education and, because they are not able to misattribute their beliefs,
they are more likely to abandon bilingual education altogether.
The next section looks at the history of bilingual education policy and theory in
the United States. It illustrates major themes and events that were formed over the
years.
Bilingual Education in the United States
U.S. bilingual education theory has involved a wavering path and a lack of
focus. Brisk (1998) pointed out how the lack of communication on and the broad defi
nition of bilingual education exemplified its course. For many, the purpose of bilingual
education has been a pathway straight to English proficiency in order to achieve success
in America. For others, bilingual education has been a means to maintain the richness
of an immigrant’s native culture and to maintain ties to that culture, in addition to
27
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
having English proficiency. In any case, there has not been a uniform belief in this
country as to what bilingual education means and how English learner children should
be educated.
Not only has a uniform belief system not existed with bilingual education, but
researchers have also suggested that the irresolute foundation of bilingual education
policy and research has been heavily impacted by the political and social climate of the
times (Crawford, 1997; Ovando, 2003; Wiley & Wright, 2004). Researchers have
found that bilingual education has varied dramatically with changing societal belief
systems. At times, bilingual education grew and was accepted; at other times, however,
bilingual education was completely banished and outlawed in schools and was thought
to harm ELLs. At those times it disappeared and was nonexistent in the American
education system.
Pre-Colonial and Colonial United States
Bilingual education existed on this continent before the United States was estab
lished. Before the Europeans arrived on the North American continent, the inhabitants
of what is now the United States spoke 1,000 languages among the 30-40 million
Native American groups (Brisk, 1998). According to Brisk, Native Americans commu
nicated among one another and maintained their own linguistic identity simultaneously.
Trade and exchange were prolific, and bilingualism was a necessary and accepted part
of the Native Americans’ life.
28
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Upon the arrival of the Europeans, however, bilingualism and bilingual educa
tion became less of an accepted part of life. Some Europeans, such as the French in
Louisiana, did maintain a somewhat symbiotic relationship with the Native Americans.
The motives, however, of the majority of the first Europeans were not to simply trade
goods and allow the other culture to maintain its roots and identity. Rather, many
Europeans wanted to assimilate the Native Americans into their culture and belief
system (Brisk, 1998).
Thus, the Native Americans’ language was overpowered by the Europeans’
language. Where bilingual education was promoted and accepted, the use of the native
language was not to create a multicultural, multilingual setting. The Native American’s
language was used to ensure the assimilation and acculturation into the European’s way
of life.
The Spanish, for example, were the first to permanently settle in North America.
The Spanish dominated the region that is now known as the southwestern United States.
They imposed their way of life on the Native Americans in California, Texas, New
Mexico, and Arizona with the purpose of “Hispanicizing” the Indians to teach them
Christianity and Spanish way of life (Hanson, 2000).
Establishment o f the United States
When the United States gained its independence and the Constitution was pre
pared and established, democracy and choice were prevalent beliefs. This ideal was
evident when discussions arose regarding the establishment of an official language for
29
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
the new country. According to Crawford (1991), a proposal to create an American
language academy was rejected, suggesting that the framers of the U.S. Constitution
believed that a democracy should leave language choice to the individual. Because of
the nonestablishment of one major linguistic foundation, the people were free to speak,
read, write, and learn in whatever language they chose. This freedom allowed for flex
ibility in the use of other languages in the education of its citizens.
Individual states’ control of education further added to the inconsistency of
bilingual education theory and programs across the United States. According to the 10th
Amendment, states have direct control over issues not explicitly outlined in the Consti
tution. Education is part of those not mentioned in the Constitution. Thus, states
decided how schools should be administered and managed. States also decided what
type of curriculum its students would follow and in what language (Crawford, 2004).
This state control over bilingual education has had its benefits and negatives. A
benefit of state control is that states were and are able to address their individual needs.
Some states have citizens who actively wanted the use of the native language in their
children’s classroom and created bilingual programs that followed those needs. Other
states possessed populations that did not see the necessity of bilingual education and did
not create such programs (Brisk, 1998).
30
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
First Era o f Bilingual Education in the
United States
Bilingual education existed and grew for a long period of time in the early years
of U.S. education history. As more immigrants from non-English-speaking countries
entered the United States, the languages represented were many. Ovando (2003) called
this the “permissive period” (p. 4), from the 1700s to the 1880s, where schools across
the United States used students’ native tongues as part of their instruction in subject
matter. Bilingual education schools flourished where teachers used French, German,
Spanish, Swedish, and other languages to teach major subjects in addition to teaching
English as a second language (Crawford, 2000; Flood, Lapp, Tinajero, & Hurley, 1996/
1997).
It is important to note, however, that bilingual education was not used to pro
mote multicultural and multilingual students (Ovando, 2003). Bilingual education was
not seen as a means of creating a diverse society. On the contrary, the intent of bilingual
education was to further broaden the immigrant’s assimilation into the American
culture and was tolerated toward the end.
Restrictive Bilingual Education
Bilingual education changed at the end of the 19th century when more policies
evolved restricting the use of the native language (Crawford 1991,2000; Ovando,
2003). Crawford (2000) noted that in the late 1880s, Wisconsin and Illinois passed
English-only legislation, stemmed by anti-Catholic sentiment. By 1923 as many as 34
31
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
states had established and enacted laws mandating English as the language of instruc
tion (Flores & Murillo, 2001).
This period coincided with the influx of immigrants arriving from southern and
eastern Europe from 1880 to 1920. Brisk (1998), Crawford (1991), and Ovando (2003)
argued that the influx of immigrants created fear and antagonism among those living in
the United States. The natives feared that the United States would be overrun with
foreign ideologies and beliefs. In order to protect the American culture and way of life,
the belief was that English needed to be proliferated as a means of assimilating all to the
American way of life. No longer would the native tongue be tolerated as a means to
educate immigrant children.
Crawford (2000) also argued that there was political motivation that pushed for
a monolingual society. He stressed that U.S. capitalists feared the revolutionary poten
tial of immigrant workers, particularly in light of major revolutions occurring at the
time in Russia and China. Fear of uprisings by poorer immigrant groups increased the
push for monolingualism. Assimilating immigrant groups into the American ideal
would prevent such revolutions or activism from occurring.
There was also popular research that contended that bilingualism caused mental
retardation and failures in school (Brisk, 1998). Brisk found that some of the research
at that time blamed the use of native language at home for mental retardation. These
factors, as well as other antibilingual arguments, promoted “sink-or-swim” programs
across the United States and the altogether disappearance of bilingual education pro
grams from 1920 to 1950.
32
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Second Era o f Bilingual Education in
the United States
A turning point in bilingual education occurred again in the mid-20th century.
According to Ovando (2003), World War II identified the lack of foreign language
instruction in its citizenry. Its soldiers did not have the multilinguistic capabilities of
other countries. More importantly, however, the 1957 launching of the Soviet Union’s
Sputnik emphasized the need for improved instruction not only in the foreign languages
but also in mathematics and the sciences. Federal policies, particularly the National
Defense Education Act, promoted raising the level of foreign language education in the
United States.
The promotion of foreign language education did not reach those who already
spoke a foreign language. These policies were primarily targeted at monolingual stu
dents. Thus, although a change was occurring in the perspective of teaching foreign
languages, the attitude toward foreign languages did not approach the proliferation of
bilingual instruction that had existed in the country a century before (Ovando, 2003).
The actual rebirth of bilingual education in the United States is credited to Cuba
and the political upheaval as a result of Fidel Castro’s revolution. The Communist
revolution in Cuba forced many citizens out of Cuba. The Cubans, however, who
immigrated to the United States differed from past immigrant groups. The Cuban im
migrants who arrived in the late 1950s and early 1960s were primarily educated,
middle- to upper-class citizens who had every intent to return to Cuba (Flores &
Murillo, 2001).
33
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
These factors, as well as well trained bilingual teachers, supportive professional
parents, and a low level of racism against the light-skinned Cubans, paved the way for
the return of bilingual education in the United States (Crawford, 1991). The Cuban
community in Dade County, Florida, established a successful two-way bilingual
program that ensured that their children learned English and maintained Spanish. The
success of the Coral Way Elementary School bilingual program encouraged and moti
vated other schools in Florida and across the United States to establish a variety of
bilingual programs. Further, the programs that were established not only were in
Spanish but were developed in other languages as well.
Another factor in aiding in the rebirth of bilingual education in the United States
included the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s (Sekhon, 1999). The movement
raised awareness of unfair practices and treatment of minority citizens. This awareness
helped bring understanding and openness to different ways of education minority
students, including language minority students.
As the country edged toward tolerance of different ethnicities and multicultural-
ism, the government enacted the Bilingual Education Act of 1968, which later would
become Title VII of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. This act provided
funding for research and implementation of programs that addressed the unique educa
tional needs of language minority students (Crawford, 2004). Ovando (2003) pointed
out, however, that the act was somewhat ambiguous. Programs received funding while
also using English-only instruction. Thus, in many cases, programs that were supported
by the bilingual act were not necessarily “bilingual” with the use of the native language.
34
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
The Bilingual Education Act did not specify its purpose, whether the focus of programs
should be to maintain the native language or to transition as quickly as possible to Eng
lish. This vagueness lent fire to the bilingual education debate. To further exacerbate
the situation, federal monies were now involved, allowing schools to manipulate pro
grams to attain those funds.
Still, the act forced the reexamination of educational programs for ELLs. It led
away from the narrow, exclusionary and closed policies of sink-or-swim programs from
the 1920s to 1950s. Educators and researchers were finally able to acknowledge that in
order for ELLs to attain educational success, curriculum and programs needed to be
modified and adapted to address their specific needs.
Bilingual Education in the United States Today
It is at this juncture, however, that the present controversy of how to best address
ELLs’ needs begins. The debate over bilingual education as it is known today had its
roots here, where for some educators and researchers, the focus of educating English
learners was primarily to promote English proficiency. Other educators and research
ers, on the other hand, felt that the maintenance of the native language was crucial for
English proficiency to be achieved (Ovando, 2003).
The debate was eventually waged in the 1974 Supreme Court case of Lau v.
Nichols (as cited in Sekhon, 1999). The case involved a class action suit where 1,800
Chinese students in San Francisco argued that they were discriminated against because
they could not achieve academically since they did not understand the English-only
35
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
instruction. The justices unanimously decided, based on the 1964 Civil Rights Act, that
equal treatment of English-speaking and non-English speaking students did not con
stitute equal educational opportunity and therefore violated non-English-speaking stu
dents’ civil rights. This case legitimized bilingual education. The case, however, did
not identify a curriculum or program of instruction. More explicit direction on how to
develop programs was created by the Office for Civil Rights, which created the 1975
Lau Remedies (Mora, 2005), which created guidelines for how to structure bilingual
programs.
Bilingual education continued to exist and grow in the United States in the
1970s and 1990s. Programs flourished across the country and the evolution of bilingual
education curriculum expanded. Materials in students’ native languages were created
and developed. Bilingual education research was being conducted, and the results illu
minated the benefits of using the native language in attaining English literacy for ELLs
(Ramirez et al., 1991).
Then the political climate changed in the 1990s. Ovando (2003) identified de
creasing government support for bilingual education during the Reagan and George
Herbert Walker Bush administrations. Federal funding decreased and the Lau regula
tions were essentially dismissed. At the same time, the English Only, Official English,
and English First movements grew (Crawford, 2000). These organizations, in one form
or another, focused on policies that did not use immigrants’ native language in instruc
tion; rather, they pushed for sink-or-swim programs and the melting pot ideology
36
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
(Ovando, 2003) and were succeeding in getting their agendas moved to the forefront of
American ideology.
Theoretically, English-only supporters advocated for English immersion meth
odology for ELLs (Porter, 1999/2000; Rossell, 2000). English immersion uses English
as the dominant language in teaching English learners. Advocates argued that ELLs
were not being serviced and were actually being failed by bilingual education. English
immersion researchers argued that teaching more English to ELLs would lead to more
success in schools. They further argued that parents of ELLs preferred English immer
sion.
Then, California experienced sharp anti-immigrant sentiment through Proposi
tions 187 and 209. Proposition 187 would deny health and education services to illegal
immigrants. Proposition 209 changed affirmative action policies. Both initiatives
passed and were followed by the successful ratification of Proposition 227.
In June of 1998, California voters voted 61% in favor of Proposition 227 (Striti-
kus & Garcia, 2000). Proposition 227 essentially eliminated bilingual education by
stating that ELLs could only be instructed in English. English immersion, whereby
students are taught overwhelmingly in English, would be the method used in California
schools to teach ELLs. Similar initiatives were passed in Arizona and Massachusetts.
37
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
California Bilingual Education and Proposition 227
History o f California Policy fo r Educating ELLs
Bilingual education has existed in California with the native Californians who
spoke hundreds of distinct languages, yet traded and communicated among one another
for centuries before the entrance of Europeans on California soil (Flores & Murillo,
2001). When the Spaniards first encountered native Californians, however, language
became more than one-to-one communication. For the Spaniards, it became a tool to
acculturate, subjugate, and eventually enslave California’s native population. Accord
ing to Flores and Murillo, it was also at this time that the Spanish language became the
exclusive language in education and in communication, and the complete annihilation
of the native languages began.
The Spanish control of education continued until the 1848 signing of the Treaty
of Guadalupe Hidalgo. With the Treaty, the public saw the primary control of education
in California shift from the Spaniards to the Catholic and Protestant Churches. The
Catholic Church practiced an additive approach to educating Mexican children encour
aging the use of Spanish. The additive approach promotes cultural maintenance and
values minority participation in education (Flores & Murillo, 2001).
On the other hand, the Protestant Church practiced the subtractive approach,
which focused entirely on the elimination and the dominance of a specific language. A
Mexican child would confuse that message and begin internalizing those subtractive
38
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
beliefs (Flores & Murillo, 2001). Public schools also arose with an additive approach to
educating children of Mexican origin.
Slowly, the additive approach gave way to the subtractive approach so that in
the 1920s with the advent of World War I and the Great Depression, the nativists’ fears
against immigrants prevailed. Bilingual education in California essentially disap
peared, as it did across the nation, and did not reappear until the 1950s and 1960s
(Flores & Murillo, 2001; Ovando, 2003).
The 1950s and 1960s saw an attitude change by the American public toward
foreign language instruction. First, when the Soviet Union launched Sputnik, citizens
felt the need to promote and encourage education in science and the foreign languages
(Ovando, 2003). Second, the Civil Rights Movement brought a consciousness concern
ing the unfair treatment of minority citizens in the United States. These events
prompted the slow reemergence of learning a foreign language. It was also at this time
in 1967 that California Governor Ronald Reagan signed the SB 53 legislation that
allowed for the use of other languages in California schools, thereby overturning the
1872 English-only law (Mora, 2005).
Perhaps the essential event that affected California and U.S. bilingual education
was the flight of Cubans to Florida (Ovando, 2003). With their intent to return to Cuba,
Cuban immigrants developed maintenance bilingual programs with the intent to pro
mote literacy in both English and Spanish. As a byproduct, the success of using the
native language to attain English literacy for language-minority students occurred.
39
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
In addition, the Supreme Court decision, Lau v. Nichols, and the subsequent Lau
Remedies prompted California to implement the use of the native language in the
instruction of ELLs. Although this type of policy existed up until the passage of Propo
sition 227, the full implementation of successful bilingual programs was limited due to
poor funding, staffing, and training. The exemplary Florida programs, although begin
ning to emerge in California, were still in the minority. Increased research, however,
continued to show the importance and need for native language instruction, even with
limited resources. But then, Proposition 227 passed.
Controversies and Evolution o f Proposition
227
One of the most significant controversies surrounding Proposition 227 is that
the law itself, along with the provision of placing ELLs in predominantly English-only
classrooms, did not match research findings on the best education for ELLs (Katz,
2000). Katz actually found in her review of research on the education of ELLs that the
use of the native language is the most effective means of helping ELLs achieve aca
demic success in English. Longitudinal studies on the effectiveness of bilingual pro
grams found that systematic bilingual programs aided students in achieving long-term
success. These types of studies formed the basis for California’s policy of educating
ELLs prior to the law; thus, controversy ensued as to whether the new law would effec
tively educate ELLs.
40
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
The argument for Proposition 227 that bilingual education had failed ELLs was
unfounded. Simply looking at the numbers at the time that Proposition 227 was imple
mented, only approximately 25%-29% of ELLs were in some form of bilingual educa
tion program (Gandara et al., 2000; Quezada, Wiley, & Ramirez, 1999/2000). Thus,
although the research in bilingual education theory might have had an ideal, the reality
of California programs at the school and district sites did not meet that ideal. In
essence, bilingual education had not failed, but rather its implementation.
Another controversy surrounding Proposition 227 is how the initiative was part
of an overarching political and social agenda to limit services to minority groups in the
United States whose numbers were increasing (Crawford, 1997). Proposition 227 came
after two successful California initiatives that limited services for California minority
groups, most of whom were Latino. Proposition 187 was a ballot initiative that argued
for the denial of medical and educational services for illegal immigrants. Proposition
209 argued for the elimination of preferential treatment of minority groups in education.
Both passed and sent a very strong message as to how Californians felt regarding serv
ices and the treatment of minorities in California.
In the end, only Proposition 209 was implemented; Proposition 187 was struck
down in the courts. However, the two initiatives had a significant impact on the climate
and culture in California politics and society, creating a very pro-American, yet anti
minority sentiment.
41
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Impact on Teachers and Schools
Proposition 227 was implemented in California in 1998. Since its onset, much
research has taken place with respect to examining its impact on education in Califor
nia. This section looks at the impact that the proposition has had on teachers, students,
and teacher education.
Teachers are the gatekeepers of policy and, in many ways, are the key to how
well students are educated and how well policies are implemented. As much as pro
grams would like to promote teacher-proof curricula, teachers are still individuals who
think and feel and decide what occurs once the doors close. They are the essence of
policy, curriculum, and learning.
Prior to Proposition 227, fully credentialed bilingual education teachers were
part of a strong minority of educators who were attempting to implement a program that
did not have full public support or adequate financial and resource support. However,
these educators believed that educating in the primary language was the best way to
educate language-minority students. On their own, these bilingual educators fought to
provide the materials necessary to teach their students in the best way they knew how.
From their preparation, bilingual teachers knew and believed that using the students’
native language was key not only to bringing English proficiency to their students but
also to full success in the American education system, as defined by a high school
degree and college admittance (Gandara et al., 2000).
42
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Thus, when Proposition 227 passed resoundingly and, although ardently chal
lenged in the courts, was upheld and became law, bilingual teachers were placed in an
awkward position. Were they going to be forced to teach in English when they knew
and believed that it was not the best way to teach language-minority students? Could
they do anything to teach in the way that they felt was best for their students? Two
studies conducted on bilingual teachers soon after the implementation of Proposition
227 (Arellano-Houchin, Flamenco, Merlos, & Segura, 2001; Gandara, 2000) found that
bilingual teachers were confused as to how to approach teaching their ELLs. The bi
lingual teacher did not know how much English or native language to use and did not
have the materials to implement the new English immersion program. Alamillo and
Viramontes (2000) also found that bilingual teachers felt devalued and demoralized.
To compound this dilemma, the law was drafted in a way that created the possi
bility of personal legal liability for teachers and others if they did not follow the tenets
of the law. Bilingual teachers were aware of this legal liability, and it increased their
feelings of confusion and dissonance. Gandara (2000) interviewed bilingual teachers
after the implementation of Proposition 227 and found that teachers felt vulnerable to
sanctions for not following the law.
Stritikus and Garcia (2000) found that when teachers were ideologically com
mitted to primary language instruction, there was strong resistance to the law and par
ental waivers were actually more vigorously and successfully sought. In these schools,
prior to Proposition 227, primary language instruction was an effective and successful
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
means of attaining not only English language proficiency but also academic success in
general.
However, as has been mentioned, bilingual education programs existed in small
numbers in California schools. The schools that did possess a full bilingual program
from kindergarten through fifth grade with well trained, qualified, and fully credentialed
teachers were very few. The majority of bilingual teachers were forced to either, on
their own, encourage parents to request waivers or to simply make sense of teaching
English only to their ELLs (Gandara et al., 2000).
Teachers were under an immense amount of pressure, and the ability to retain
long-held beliefs about teaching was increasingly more difficult. Thus, even if teachers
had the fortitude to maintain their beliefs, the reality of the educational program proved
to be a daily obstacle. Another problem existed where bilingual teachers many times
felt very little support or direction from administrators (Palmer & Garcia, 2000).
Palmer and Garcia found that teachers in their study felt that principals and principals’
beliefs about bilingual education were key in whether bilingual education existed at
their schools. Teachers subsequently felt powerless to promote their curriculum belief.
Some bilingual teachers actually welcomed Proposition 227. According to Stritikus
and Garcia (2000), some teachers experienced clarification by the passage of the law.
These teachers felt confirmation and relief as a result of the passage of Proposition 227,
because they felt that there would now be a push for English language instruction that
they felt had been lacking. The authors found that this sentiment paralleled the extent of
the success of the programs for ELLs that existed at the school. If the school had had
44
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
relatively little success with the bilingual program, Proposition 227 was much more
welcomed and accepted.
Impact on Teacher Attitude and Beliefs
One very important factor in determining the impact of Proposition 227 is ex
amining the law’s effect on bilingual teachers. Valdez (2001) looked at 20 bilingual
teachers during the 1s t year of the law’s implementation. She found that even though
bilingual teachers were faced with relatively little support in terms of understanding
how to teach in light of Proposition 227 and the extent to which they could use Spanish,
teachers still felt very strongly about the importance of bilingual education and creating
biliteracy in students.
The fact that bilingual teachers were able to maintain their beliefs, created
frustration for them as they were implementing the law. During the initial implementa
tion, teachers were frustrated by very unclear guidelines from administrators and the
district in how to teach and were not provided with the necessary materials to do so
(Revilla & Asato, 2002).
To compound this chaos, Dixon, Green, Yeager, and Baker (2000) found that
teachers were also feeling pressure from a number of other policy mandates. At the
same time that Proposition 227 was implemented, teachers also had to deal with the
push for state standards and frameworks in their planning and their classrooms—ac
countability in the form of standardized exams and the implementation of very scripted
reading programs that required teachers to follow a script and disregard much of what
45
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
they had learned about teaching reading, and teaching in general. Teachers watched
their professionalism disintegrate and realized that their educated judgment was not
appreciated or desired as long as they exactly followed the mandated programs.
Another study by researchers Gutierrez, Baquedano-Lopez, and Asato (2000)
found that the district they studied gave very vague and unclear instructions as to how
much of the primary language was to be used in the classroom and how much of the
primary language could be used before encountering legal problems. This lack of
clarity created further frustration in bilingual teachers, as they were further placed in a
deeper state of powerlessness.
Perhaps bilingual teachers’ biggest frustration was their innate feeling based on
their knowledge from research and the past experience of “sink or swim” program and
how children experienced very negative feelings of not understanding the language.
Teachers knew inherently that their students would suffer psychological harm
(Arellano-Houchin et al., 2001; Valdez, 2001), yet they had to implement the law. As
teachers would soon learn, students did suffer. Valdez found that in the first 30-day
mandated English-immersion instruction of Proposition 227, students were clearly
upset. Valdez quoted one teacher in an interview as stating that “children felt, for a lack
of a better word, raped because their language has been taken away” (p. 246).
Impact on Teaching Practices
As stated earlier, very unclear direction was given to teachers in the instruction
of ELLs post-Proposition 227. The law itself stated, “Children who are English learners
46
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
shall be educated through sheltered English immersion during a temporary transition
period not normally intended to exceed one year” (English Language Education for
Immigrant Children Act, 1998, section A). Many teachers were unaware as to exactly
how much of the primary language was allowed, even though the law constituted its use
in supporting instruction. Many districts were also unsure as to what the exact meaning
of the law’s language was; consequently, they were unable to provide the proper direc
tion. In addition, because the enactment and the implementation of the law was very
swift, there was relatively little time to discuss and digest the terms and meanings at the
state, district, and even site level. Ultimately, it was up to the teachers in a very tenuous
position to determine the law’s definition of the use of primary language as best they
could.
To compound the issue, teachers, as well as administrators and districts, could
be sued by parents for not providing an English language instruction option (English
Language Education for Immigrant Children Act, 1998, section B). Again, what that
meant was unclear; however, it further intensified the tenuous and unstable position for
teachers in implementing an unclear policy with seemingly serious ramifications.
As a result this instability, classrooms that were even considered alternative
bilingual programs, where ELLs could be overwhelmingly taught in the primary lan
guage, were now focused on oral English language skills, and primary language instruc
tion was limited to 50% of the day (Revilla & Asato, 2002). Even these programs
could not maintain the tenets of bilingual education theory.
47
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Although it was not stated in the law, materials in the primary language were
systematically being disposed of in classrooms because of the fear of not being in
compliance with the law, even though materials in the primary language was not men
tioned (Gutierrez et al., 2000). Hence, even bilingual classrooms were being overrun by
predominantly English immersion beliefs.
As mentioned earlier, the implementation of Proposition 227 was not in a
vacuum. The new law also came with other state and federal mandates that placed more
pressure on educators to perform well under strict scrutiny by administrators who
themselves were very well investigated. The push for the use of standards in curriculum
and lesson design (where before it did not exist), the heavy emphasis on standardized
exams and accountability, and the push for reading achievement through heavily
scripted reading programs all came with the new mandate to instruct ELLs through
English only (Gandara et al., 2000).
The new literacy practices, whereby teachers were forced to follow a time
schedule and plan and not stray from that, perhaps had the most significant impact on
bilingual teachers and their practices. Alamillo, Palmer, Viramontes, and Garcia (2005)
found that teachers felt a reduced autonomy in their classroom practices, where they
could not employ a creative and challenging curriculum. Gutierrez et al. (2000) found
that these programs stripped teachers of using their expertise and knowledge in adapting
instruction. An example of this was the very highly scripted program that teachers
could not modify. Any kind of modification was looked down upon; administrators
visited teachers to ensure that their classrooms were configured in a particular way and
48
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
that they were reading from the teacher’s guide. For bilingual teachers, these proce
dures further tied their hands and restricted them from addressing their ELLs’ needs.
They could not modify the instruction to make it work for their students.
Impact on Students
There has been a claim that English immersion and the new, scripted literacy
programs have successfully increased test scores; however, Gandara (2000) and
Gutierrez et al. (2000) cited problems with those claims. Both studies illustrated how
test scores were not reported longitudinally and how redesignation rates were presented
as having risen less than 1%, which is insignificant. Gandara pointed out that even
though there was an increase from 15% to 25% of second graders who were performing
at or above the 50th percentile on standardized tests, she questioned how such a large
percentage of allegedly LEP students were making such large gains when they would
have been also redesignated as fluent English proficient, which the percentages indicate
could not occur.
Research also found that the type of learning of ELLs significantly worsened.
Gutierrez et al. (2000) found that ELLs were able to repeat a script, yet were increas
ingly unable to comprehend and think through text. Students were able to reiterate
word-for-word prompts but were not cognitively challenged.
Observations found that classrooms were notably quiet, whereas before the
implementation of Proposition 227, students participated in interactive, lively oral
discussions (Dixon et al., 2000). Students were unsure and unwilling to take risks to
49
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
answer questions and participate in a second language. The authors noted that students
were left with limited choices in materials, knowledge, and opportunities to express
themselves.
Researchers also found that students’ attitude toward their native language
changed for the worse. Students began to resist speaking and reading Spanish. As
students gained mastery in English, they began to distinguish and distance themselves
from Spanish-speaking-only students and students who were predominantly Spanish
speakers (Revilla & Asato, 2002).
Also, children felt emotionally very anxious, sad, frustrated, and lost (Gutierrez
et al., 2000). Just like their teachers, children were unsure as to how much English or
native language they should or could use. Some children cried because teachers initially
believed that they were not allowed to speak in Spanish. As teachers learned more and
reassured their students that they would communicate with them in their native lan
guage, students felt better (Valdez, 2001).
Impact on Teacher Education
Proposition 227 did not make any provisions or mandates on teacher preparation
for teachers of ELLs. However, researchers realized that the proposition would move
the burden of responsibility of teaching ELLs from qualified bilingual teachers to non
qualified, less skilled monolingual teachers, who would now be working with language-
minority students (Mora, 2000). This prompted teacher preparation programs to reaf-
50
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
firm effective instructional practices and multicultural education for language-minority
students.
A position paper put out by the Joint Policy Committee (2001) affirmed that oral
language development in a student’s native language should be taught as a bridge to
literacy in both the native language and English. They proclaimed that it was necessary
to continue, encourage, and promote the attainment of BCLAD and CLAD certificates
in order to ensure that new educators of ELLs had the knowledge and pedagogical tools
to address the needs of the ELLS.
Conclusion
The literature on teacher beliefs suggests that teacher beliefs have some impact
on practice but is not conclusive. The research found that in some cases practice pro
vides an opportunity for teachers to test beliefs and then change them. The research
also suggested that beliefs might also be instrumental in helping teachers navigate
through their daily practice and its corresponding dilemmas; however Calderhead
(1996) found that teachers and practices in some studies did not match and sometimes
contradicted each other. This contradiction was noted particularly in research on bilin
gual education teachers’ beliefs that indicated that teachers who strongly supported
bilingual education theory did not definitely support the practice of it (Ramos, 2001;
Shin & Krashen, 1996).
What is missing from the beliefs research is the possible impact of the strength
of belief on practice. Shin and Krashen (1996) alluded to this possibility when they
51
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
found that bilingual teachers with more preparation, more experience with ELLs per
sonal experience with bilingualism, and stronger beliefs supported the practice more.
The present study explored that discrepancy in depth, specifically using a social psycho
logical model of cognitive dissonance theory to analyze the complex belief systems of
bilingual teachers in a contradictory state. The study asked teachers not only to identity
their beliefs about bilingual education theory and practice but also to rate them on a 4-
point scale.
The self-consistency revision of cognitive dissonance theory looks specifically
at the perception of self and how that impacts beliefs and actions. The self-consistency
research suggests that individuals with a high self-concept (perception) will tend to act
to preserve that belief because they cannot misattribute their contradictory actions.
Those with a lower self-concept will change their beliefs more easily because they can
misattribute their contradictory action to factors beyond their control. This dissertation
study explored the specific practices that teachers are currently engaging in their
classrooms with ELLs and whether they have made modifications linking those prac
tices with the strength of their beliefs.
Finally, the literature review looked at the complex history of bilingual educa
tion policy and theory in the United States and California, specifically, that created this
atmosphere of dissonance for teachers. The research suggested that the political and
social climate has greatly influence the bilingual education policies and theories that
have developed. A dilemma arises when those policies shift from one to another and
force teachers to change their practices abruptly. For some individuals, the change may
52
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
not be difficult; for others, it may be very difficult. The purpose of this study was to
explore how individual bilingual teachers have reacted to the switches.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
The purpose of this study was to explore the current belief system of bilingual
education teachers in bilingual education theory and their current practices with ELL
students. The study also asked whether bilingual teachers believed that the current
policy of teaching ELLs had positive or negative impacts on students’ learning. The
study further looked at whether the strength of beliefs was a factor in the type of change
in practice that a teacher would engage in. These questions were examined under the
ambit of Proposition 227 and the resulting policy of English-only instruction.
The self-consistency revision of cognitive dissonance theory was used as a the
oretical framework to design a survey on teachers’ beliefs and their practices in relation
to bilingual education theory and practice. Quantitative methods were used to answer
the research questions using the data from the survey. Responses to the survey state
ments provided important data as to the strength of the teachers’ beliefs about the
current policy and bilingual education theory in general, as well as bilingual teachers’
current practices.
The purpose of this study involved looking at correlations between variables.
The survey provided data that allowed for a correlation analysis between the variables
of strength of a bilingual teacher’s belief in bilingual education and change, modifica
tion, or no change in their teaching practice working with ELLs (Figure 1). The re
search study examined the inconsistencies between beliefs and practices of these
54
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
variables. What follows in this chapter is a review of the sample and population stud
ied, the instrumentation developed and utilized, and the processes for data collection
and data analysis.
Change in
practice
Change in
practice
No change in
beliefs
Strength of
teacher beliefs
Change in
teacher beliefs
No change
in practice
Figure 1. Conceptual model of study. The diagram illustrates the links between the
strength of teachers’ beliefs and possible impact on current beliefs and practices
through the intervening variable of Proposition 227.
According to beliefs’ literature, links between beliefs and practice exist. This
framework is used to examine whether the strength of beliefs can impact teachers’
beliefs and practices when a policy shift such as Proposition 227 occurs. Consequently,
the study asked whether, if beliefs change or do not change, a subsequent change or no
change in practice would arise. This study did not attempt to identify causal relation
ships; rather, it aimed to identify correlations between the variables, strength of belief in
bilingual education and the variables, consistency in the current belief in bilingual edu
cation, and the change in practice or no change at all.
55
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Sample and Population
The targeted population for the study was bilingual education teachers working
with ELL students who had taught prior to the passage of Proposition 227. The sample
population was teachers in three elementary schools in one large, urban school district
in southern California. According to 2004-2005 school demographic data, each of the
schools’ populations was comprised of 90% ELLs. The schools were located within the
same 5-square mile geographic area, in a majority Latino, working-class neighborhood.
School Sample
The three school sites were purposefully selected using two criteria. The first
criterion required the school to have a bilingual program in place prior to Proposition
227. The bilingual program pre-Proposition 227 was defined by the school district’s
Master Plan for bilingual education as a transitional bilingual program, whereby stu
dents were taught in their primary language first and then transitioned to English in
struction later (around third and fourth grade). It was important to find schools with a
bilingual program in place prior to Proposition 227, because some current bilingual
teachers with bilingual education certificates had never taught in a full bilingual pro
gram. Newer teachers received certificates post-Proposition 227 and had taught only in
an English-only environ. Gutierrez et al. (2000) pointed out how many schools prior to
Proposition 227 failed to implement a bilingual program due to lack of funding or staff;
therefore, some bilingual teachers pre-Proposition 227 were in schools without a full
56
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
bilingual program. Hence, it was important for this study to have teachers and schools
with first-hand experience in a full bilingual program.
The second criterion related to the extent of the bilingual program that currently
existed at the school. Schools were identified as having a high bilingual program, a
medium bilingual program, or low or no bilingual program. This was important to
provide a representative sample of the types of schools that bilingual teachers currently
teach in. Bilingual programs currently exist under Proposition 227 as waiver classes
where parents write a written request to place or keep their children in a bilingual pro
gram with instruction conducted in their primary language (English Language Educa
tion for the Immigrant Child Act of 1998). After the implementation of Proposition
227, some schools eliminated their bilingual program, while other schools supported
and encouraged its growth.
The school sites were identified as high, medium, or low, according to the fol
lowing criteria. A bilingual education school site was considered high if it had a high
number of waiver classes that were interspersed throughout the school program and the
bilingual program was growing yearly by at least one class. The second school was
considered medium because bilingual classes were placed and grouped primarily on one
track and the number of bilingual classes remained constant. The third school was
deemed low because it had no waiver classes at all.
57
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Teacher Sample
Bilingual teachers who had taught prior to Proposition 227 were purposefully
sampled based on the criterion that they had (a) taught primarily ELL students, (b) had a
bilingual education certificate (BCLAD, BCC or equivalent) and (c) taught prior to
Proposition 227. While the focus was on these specific teachers, other teachers, such as
nonbilingual teachers and bilingual teachers who had never taught prior to Proposition
227, were asked to complete the surveys, and their responses were used as comparisons.
Bilingual teachers were also purposefully sampled and placed in two different
groups based on their mindfulness in bilingual education theory. Mindfulness and
strength of their beliefs in bilingual education were the main criteria in group place
ment. The first group consisted of teachers with low mindfulness or low beliefs in bi
lingual education. These teachers had low, unsure or ambivalent, or no beliefs in
bilingual education.
The second group of teachers demonstrated high mindfulness or high beliefs in
bilingual education and low misattribution. These teachers continued to believe in
bilingual education theory and supported its practice. The survey data were analyzed to
determine the degree of mindfulness.
A total of 158 teachers were given the surveys; 58 teachers completed them, for
a return rate of 37%. Ten teachers responded from the high bilingual school; 23 re
sponded from the low bilingual school; and 25 responded from the medium bilingual
school. The frequency of bilingual versus nonbilingual credentialed teachers is
58
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
summarized in Table 1; Table 2 summarizes the frequency of pre-227 bilingual versus
non-pre-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers. Table 1 indicates that 62.1%, a majority of
respondents, had a bilingual credential. Table 2 shows that 63.9% of the bilingual
teachers were pre-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers and had taught in a bilingual
program.
The range for the survey responses was 0 to 3, with 3 indicating a very high
belief in bilingual education theory and policy. Teachers were divided into two groups,
whereby a score of 2.0 indicated high beliefs and a 1.0 indicated low beliefs. Table 3
shows mean scores for frequency of beliefs for all bilingual teachers. According to the
data, among the 36 bilingual teachers surveyed, 30 scored a 2.0 or higher, indicating a
high belief. The remaining 6 teachers scored between 1.4 and 1.93, which actually in
dicated a medium belief rather than a low belief (a low belief score would be a 1.0). In
this survey, none of the bilingual respondents scored a 1.0 or below.
Instrumentation
The purpose of this study was to identify underlying beliefs teachers had about
bilingual education and the subsequent practices they employed with their ELLs. A
survey was used to determine those beliefs and practices. The instrument was a modifi
cation of a survey previously used in a dissertation regarding teacher attitudes and
beliefs (Gonzalez, 2000). Gonzalez’s dissertation survey was a modification of another
survey developed by Shin and Krashen (1996) for a study on teacher attitudes about
bilingual education. The Gonzalez survey was divided into two main sections. The
59
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 1
Frequency o f Bilingual and Nonbilingual Credential Teachers
Credentialed Frequency %
Nonbilingual 21 36.2
Bilingual 36 62.1
Missing data 1 1.7
Totals 58 100.0
Table 2
Frequency o f Pre-Proposition Bilingual Teachers and Non-Pre-Propo
sition 227Bilingual Teachers
Bilingual teacher status Frequency %
Non-pre-Proposition 227 13 36.1
Pre-Proposition 227 23 63.9
Totals 36 100.0
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 3
Frequency o f Mean Scores for Bilingual Teachers ’ Be
liefs in Bilingual Education
Mean Frequency
1.40 1
1.43 1
1.67 1
1.73 1
1.80 1
1.93 1
2.00 2
2.07 2
2.13 1
2.20 4
2.27 2
2.33 4
2.40 1
2.47 4
2.53 2
2.60 3
2.67 3
2.80 2
Total 36
Note. Results were derived from a 4-point scale, where 0
= low beliefs in bilingual education and 3 = high beliefs
in bilingual education.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
first section of the survey looked at factors that might influence the responses regarding
beliefs and practices. These factors included experiences that teachers had with bilin
gual education and with education in general. These factors were also examined in the
present study. Background information solicited in the study was the following: (a)
number of years teaching at the school site and overall, (b) grade levels taught and the
current grade teaching, (c) type of instructional program for English learners taught
before Proposition 227, (d) type of instructional program in which teachers were cur
rently working, (e) educational degree earned or working toward, and (f) teaching cre
dentials and special certificates (e.g., bilingual certificates, national board certification,
administrative credentials, etc.).
The remaining section of the survey entailed 28 or 30 statements that teachers
needed to read. If a teacher was in a school with waiver classes, they were asked to read
the 30 statements. Otherwise, the teachers were only required to respond to 28 survey
statements (see appendix A).
The teachers then read a series of statements about their beliefs and practices
related to ELLs. In the original survey (Shin & Krashen, 1996), teachers were asked to
respond to questions with regarding their attitudes about bilingual education. Gonzalez
(2000) modified the Shin and Krashen survey to also include questions regarding be
liefs. For this particular study, attitude statements were eliminated. Because this study
examined teacher practices, statements regarding teacher practice in relation to ELLs
were developed and then incorporated into the survey.
62
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
The original survey (Shin & Krashen, 1996) also involved respondents answer
ing questions about attitudes with a yes or no. Gonzalez (2000) changed the questions
into statements and used a 4-point Likert scale to eliminate a neutral response. Likert
scales are a unidimensional scaling model that assign text statements to numbers ac
cording to a rule. A unidimensional model measures responses on a linear scale
(Trochim, 2005).
A 4-point scale was also utilized for the present study. After reading a state
ment, teachers had to decide whether they strongly agreed, agreed, disagreed, or
strongly disagreed on the 4-point Likert scale, which ranged from a score of 0 for
strongly disagree to 3 for strongly agree. Survey statements were correlated with
research questions and converted into data. Table 4 illustrates the connection of re
search questions with the corresponding survey statements (see appendix A).
Pilot Study
A pilot study was conducted with three bilingual teachers who taught at nearby
public elementary schools with waiver programs. All three teachers had taught in a
bilingual program prior to the implementation of Proposition 227. They were asked to
review the survey and comment on the clarity of the questions and the time needed to
complete the survey. They were also asked to comment on the relevance of the ques
tions to bilingual education theory and practice. The teachers commented that the
questions were clear and confirmed their relevance to bilingual education theory and
practice. It was concluded that the approximate time to complete the survey was about
63
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 4
Research Questions and Corresponding Survey Statements
Corresponding
Research question Data needed survey statement
What are bilingual teachers’ current
beliefs about bilingual education after
7 years of English immersion policy?
Teacher beliefs about
bilingual education
1,4,7, 8,11,12,
14,16,17,18,19,
20,23,25,26
Do bilingual teachers believe that the
current prevailing method of teaching
English learners through English immer
sion will have aversive consequences?
How have bilingual teachers’ practices
changed?
Beliefs about ELL
student progress
Change in classroom
practice to accommo
date ELLs
6, 9,21
3,10,13,15,22,
27
How have bilingual teachers’ practices
changed?
Teacher acceptance of 2,5,28,29
policy program (Eng
lish immersion,
waiver) in working
with ELLs
Note. ELL = English language learner.
30 minutes. The teachers for the pilot study did not deem that any major changes were
needed, and the survey was kept the same with no modifications from its original text.
Data Collection
Initial contact with the schools began with a phone call to principals to secure
permission to conduct the study at the school site. After permission was secured, a time
was established so that surveys could be presented to the staff. Each school site
64
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
conducted faculty meetings on Tuesdays at least twice a month. A time was secured to
present the surveys at one of these faculty meetings. At the meetings, teachers were
informed of their rights as participants and that participation was completely voluntary
and anonymous; teachers were then given the survey with an information sheet of their
rights as subjects as well as information about the study (see appendix B). They were
given the option to stay and complete the surveys at that time or mail them in a stamped
and addressed envelope that was provided. Otherwise, they could turn them in to a
contact person at the school site who voluntarily collected the surveys and held on to
them until the researcher picked them up.
Each school participated in a year-round calendar where one third of the stu
dents and their teachers are on vacation at any one time. The teachers and students who
are at school are considered “on track”; the remaining third is “off track” and on vaca
tion. Surveys were presented to teachers for two tracks. Surveys for the off-track
teachers were given at a different time when the teachers returned from vacation. The
contact person again collected any surveys that teachers wanted to hand in; otherwise,
teachers were able to mail the surveys in a stamped and addressed envelope.
Survey data were initially input into Microsoft Excel® and then eventually
converted to a data file through Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS)
software.
65
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Data Analysis
The purpose of this study was to determine the correlation between bilingual
teachers’ beliefs and the practices they used with their ELLs. The study involved cor
relations only and did not look for causal relationships. A correlation analysis was
employed to find associations. Related regression analyses were also conducted.
The first section of the data analysis presented in chapter 4 deals with partici
pants and the frequency of all bilingual teachers, bilingual teachers who taught prior to
Proposition 227, and bilingual teachers who taught after the passage of Proposition 227.
Descriptive statistics, including frequencies, means, and standard deviations that were
derived are shown to determine respondents’ beliefs about bilingual education, as well
as whether they employed changes in their practices with ELLs. These analyses are
presented according to the research questions, which provide a structural guide in dis
cussing the findings in chapter 4.
The first research question discussed was, What are bilingual teachers ’ current
beliefs about bilingual education after 7 years o f English immersion policy, and does a
difference exist betweenpre-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers ’ beliefs and non-pre-
Proposition 227 bilingual teachers ’ beliefs?'" Descriptive statistics were developed that
showed the means of survey results, specifically focused on the variable of beliefs about
bilingual education. Beliefs about bilingual education were disaggregated by the fol
lowing variables: pre-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers, and non-pre-Proposition 227
bilingual teachers (identified as those who taught after Proposition 227). Predictions
66
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
were made regarding their belief statements, and t tests were calculated to determine
whether the null hypothesis would be rejected.
The second research question examined was, Do bilingual teachers believe that
the current prevailing method o f teaching English learners through English immersion
will have aversive consequences? The variable of beliefs about student progress was
studied against the variables of pre-227 bilingual teachers and non-pre-227 bilingual
teachers. Predictions were made regarding their statements on student progress, and t
tests were calculated
The final research question explored was, How have their practices changed,
and do these changes in practice correlate with the strength o f their beliefs? This
question was explored by examining the variable of changes in practice and the vari
ables of pre-227 bilingual teachers and non-pre-227 bilingual teachers. Predictions
were made regarding change in practice, and t tests were calculated.
Finally, a correlation analysis was done to examine the relationship between
beliefs and practices and the variables that correlated with them. A correlation analysis
was also conducted between teachers’ acceptance of the program that they were teach
ing and the change in practice employed. Regression analyses were performed when a
significant correlation was found. The purpose of the study was to determine if the
relationship followed the construct created by the theoretical framework of this study.
Two problems arose before the data analysis of the responses. One problem
with the analysis was that the initial division of the respondents into high and low
groups was not possible because a low group did not exist. Hence, the teachers were
67
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
analyzed on a range from low beliefs to high beliefs rather than two identifiable groups
of low and high beliefs. This range of beliefs was used to determine whether higher
beliefs correlated with an increased likelihood of change in practice, as indicated by the
theoretical framework. Another problem with the analysis was the relatively low re
sponse rate for the surveys, because the low response rate would impact the reliability of
the study. Both situations are noted in the findings and conclusion of the study, which
are discussed in chapters 4 and 5.
68
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
CHAPTER4
FINDINGS
This chapter presents findings of the study on the impact of California’s Propo
sition 227 on bilingual teachers’ beliefs and subsequent practices. The purpose of this
study was to test for the existence of correlations between the strength of teachers’
beliefs and the practices that they employed in their classroom. The study involved a
survey that asked bilingual and nonbilingual education teachers to respond to state
ments regarding their beliefs about bilingual education and the education of English
learners; teachers were also asked to respond to statements regarding their current
practices with ELLs. The specific research questions for this study were the following:
1. What are bilingual teachers’ current beliefs about bilingual education after 7
years of English immersion policy, and does a difference exist between pre-Proposition
227 bilingual teachers’ beliefs and non-pre-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers’ beliefs?
2. Do bilingual teachers believe that the current prevailing method of teaching
ELLs through English immersion will have aversive consequences?
3. How have bilingual teachers’ practices changed, and do these changes in
practice correlate with the strength of their beliefs?
This chapter is divided into three general sections. The first section looks at the
participants in the survey. It shows the frequency of bilingual education teachers, bilin
gual teachers who taught prior to Proposition 227 and bilingual teachers who began
teaching after Proposition 227.
69
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
The second section begins the discussion of the findings through the framework
of the research questions. The first research question discussed is, What are bilingual
teachers ’ current beliefs about bilingual education after 7 years o f English immersion
policy, and does a difference exist between pre-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers ’
beliefs and non-pre-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers ’ beliefs? To answer this ques
tion, descriptive statistics will be presented that show the means of survey results on
specific statements that address the variable, beliefs about bilingual education. This
variable will be disaggregated by the variables of pre-227 bilingual teachers and non-
pre-227 bilingual teachers, identified as those who never taught in a pre-Proposition
227 bilingual program. Predictions were made between the two variables regarding
their belief statements. This was done to determine whether the null hypotheses would
be accepted or rejected, t tests were calculated to determine the rejection or acceptance
of the null hypothesis.
The second research question explored is, Do bilingual teachers believe that the
current prevailing method o f teaching ELLs through English immersion will have
aversive consequences? The variable aversive consequences for ELLs was analyzed
against the variables pre-227 bilingual teachers and non-pre-227 bilingual teachers.
Predictions were made between the two independent cases, and t tests were calculated
to determine any significant differences.
The final research question, How have their practices changed, and do these
changes in practice correlate with the strength o f their beliefs? was explored by looking
at the variable, changes in practice, and the variables of pre-227 bilingual teachers and
70
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
non-pre-227 bilingual teachers. As with the previous research questions, predictions
were made between the variables pre-227 bilingual teachers and non-pre- 227 bilingual
teachers, and t tests were calculated to determine the rejection or acceptance of the null
hypothesis.
A third section identifies correlation relationships that exist between variables.
Correlation analyses were calculated to examine the relationship between beliefs and
changes in practices. Another correlation was calculated to explore the relationship
between beliefs and program acceptance. The fourth and final section presents a discus
sion on the findings, looking for key patterns and themes.
Participants’ Background
The surveys were distributed at two different times at three different schools
over a 4-month period. The surveys were first given to two thirds of the teachers at each
school who were not on vacation. Schools were visited a second time to distribute
surveys to the remaining third. The total number of surveys distributed among the three
schools was 158. Fifty-eight surveys were collected, indicating a response rate of 37%.
The percentages of bilingual, nonbilingual, pre-227 bilingual teachers, and non-pre-227
bilingual teachers are shown in Tables 5 and 6, respectively.
Table 5 indicates that 63.2% of the 58 teachers participating in the study were
bilingual and 36.8% were nonbilingual. Table 6 shows that out of the total bilingual
teacher population, 36.1% were non-pre-227 bilingual teachers and 63.9% were pre-227
71
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 5
Frequency o f Bilingual and Nonbilingual Credentialed Teachers
Credential type Frequency %
Nonbilingual 21 36.2
Bilingual 36 62.1
Missing data 1 1.7
Totals 58 100.0
Table 6
Frequency of Pre-Proposition 227 Bilingual Teachers Non-Pre-
Proposition 227Bilingual Teachers
Status Frequency %
Non-pre-Proposition 227 13 36.1
Pre-Proposition 227 23 63.9
Totals 36 100.0
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
bilingual teachers who had taught in a bilingual program prior to the implementation of
Proposition 227.
Descriptive and Inferential Statistics
Research Question 1
What are bilingual teachers ’ current beliefs about bilingual education after 7
years o f English immersion policy, and does a difference exist between pre-Proposition
227 bilingual teachers ’ beliefs and non-pre-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers ’ be
liefs?
Table 7 provides a variety of information regarding bilingual teachers’ beliefs.
Table 3 summarized the means for the survey results by the two variables, pre-227
bilingual teacher and non-pre-227 bilingual teacher, and the statements related to the
variable beliefs. Table 7 also shows predictions for the two variables, pre-227 and non-
pre-227 bilingual teacher, and indicates whether one scored higher than the other and
whether the null hypothesis was rejected. Finally, it shows the f-test results and signifi
cant values.
The survey items were scaled 0,1,2 and 3, with strongly disagree, somewhat
disagree, somewhat agree, and strongly agree as survey choices. The median score was
identified as 1.5; in most cases, a mean of 2.0 or higher showed strong agreement with
the statem ent.
Regarding the values of specific items, it should be noted that in order to show a
range of beliefs, most statements were worded so that a choice of somewhat agree or
73
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 7
Predictions: Means, t Tests, and Significance for Pre-Proposition 227 Bilingual Teachers Non-Pre-Proposition 227
Bilingual Teachers ’ Beliefs About Bilingual Education
Survey statement Prediction3 Mean lb Mean 2° t p
1. ELL students be in bilingual classroom pre>non 2.09 1.92 0.43 0.67
4. Proficient in Spanish and English and enrolled in bilingual pre>non 1.74 1.92 -0.33 0.75
classroom.
7. English-speaking ELLs should be in English-only class.d pre>non 2.09 1.62 0.93 0.36
8. Non-BCLAD/CLAD cannot teach a non-English-speaking pre>non 1.87 1.92 1.06 0.30
student.
11. Require pre- and in-training to meet needs of linguistic minori- pre > non 2.83 2.62 0.83 0.42
ties.
12. Teacher proficient in primary language to transition to English. pre > non 2.09 1.85 0.72 0.48
< i
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 7 {continued)
Survey statement
14. High levels of bilingualism result in high development of
knowledge skills.
16. Reading program best meets needs of ELL student.d
17. Primary language literacy will help ELL learn academic Eng
lish faster.
18. Student must learn English fast even with loss of native lan
guage.*1
19. Student not proficient in English should learn subjects in pri
mary language.
20. English language supercedes learning subjects in primary
language.
< i
U \
Prediction3 Mean lb Mean 2° t p
pre > non
pre > non
pre > non
pre = non
pre > non
pre > non
2.91
2.26
2.59
2.39
2.26
1.78
2.69
2.62
2.92
2.69
2.00
1.46
1.51
-1.45
-1.78
-1.25
0.85
1.19
0.15
0.16
0.09
0.22
0.40
0.29
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 7 (continued)
Survey statement Prediction3 Mean lb Mean 2C t
P
23. ELLs in an English-only class will learn English more effi
ciently.'1
pre = non 1.96 1.77 0.65 0.52
25. Native language instruction develops biculturalism. pre > non 2.91 2.92 -0.10 0.92
26. Good for students to maintain native culture. pre > non 2.91 2.85 0.60 0.55
Note. ELL = English language learner. BCLAD = Bilingual Cross-Cultural, Language and Academic Development
certificate; CLAD = Cross-Cultural, Language, and Academic Development certificate.
a Pre > non: mean score of pre-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers will be greater than mean score of non-Proposition 227
bilingual teachers. Pre = non: mean score of pre-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers will be equal to score of non-
Proposition 227 bilingual teachers. b Pre-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers. c Non-pre-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers.
d A score of 2 or higher indicated disagreement with the statement and high belief in bilingual education.
- j
Os
strongly agree would indicate a stronger belief in bilingual education. Some statements
were deliberately reworded, however, so that respondents would not always choose
somewhat agree or strongly agree to a survey item if they believed in bilingual educa
tion. Survey items 7,16,18,20, and 23, therefore, were worded so that a choice of
somewhat disagree or strongly disagree would indicate a positive tendency toward bi
lingual education; scores of 2.0 or higher would indicate general disagreement with the
statement but a stronger belief in bilingual education.
The second column in Table 7 shows predictions for pre-227 bilingual teachers
and non-pre-227 bilingual teachers for the various statements regarding beliefs. State
ments 1,4,7, 8,12,14,16,17,19,20 and 25 show a prediction that pre-227 teachers
would have a greater mean score than non pre-227 bilingual teachers. The prediction
that one score would be higher than the other would reject the null hypothesis that the
two groups would have equal scores. All predictions indicated that pre-227 bilingual
teachers would have stronger scores for that particular statement regarding bilingual
education.
The rationale for these predictions resulted from belief studies that indicated that
practical knowledge helps tie beliefs to the classroom (Richardson, 1996). Bilingual
teachers who have worked in a bilingual classroom have had the opportunity to person
ally experience and observe the effects of using the primary language as instruction.
Most post-227 bilingual teachers have only had the opportunity to read about bilingual
education curriculum or, perhaps, observe it. Some might be currently working in the
77
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
few programs that exist. Hence, it was predicted that pre-227 bilingual teachers would
have higher scores than non-pre-227 bilingual teachers for these specific statements.
The remaining statements dealt more with teacher training and general beliefs about
bilingual education. Rather than specifically focusing on ELLs, these statements related
more to the general theories about bilingual education and its policies. These state
ments, therefore, were predicted to have an equal mean score between the two groups.
The following discussion presents the mean scores and the results of the t tests.
For the descriptive statistics for the variables pre-227 bilingual teachers and non-pre-
227 bilingual teachers and the variable, beliefs in bilingual education, there were note
worthy observations. In Table 7, for statement 16, whether the reading program best
met the needs of the ELL student, pre-227 bilingual teachers scored a 2.26 and non-
pre-227 bilingual teachers scored a 2.62, which indicated strong disagreement with the
statement. An analysis of statement 18 showed that pre-227 bilingual teachers scored a
2.39 and non-pre-227 bilingual teachers scored a 2.69, both of which indicated a ten
dency toward strong disagreement with the statement that students must learn English
fast, even with the loss of the native language.
The survey data in Table 7 also indicate strong agreement with statement 11, the
requirement of pre- and in-training for teachers for ELLs (pre-227,2.83; non-pre- 227,
2.62); statement 25, that native language instruction develops biculturalism (pre-227,
2.91; non pre-227,2.92); and statement 26, indicating that it is good for students to
maintain native culture (pre-227,2.91; non pre-227,2.85). In general, the computed
78
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
means for the statements regarding beliefs for pre-227 and non-pre-227 bilingual
teachers tended toward a strong belief in bilingual education.
t tests and their relation to predictions are also shown in Table 7. According to
statement 7, a limited English speaker who can speak and understand English should be
instructed in English only. It was predicted that pre-227 bilingual teachers would have
a higher mean score than non-pre-227 bilingual teachers. The t tests supported this
prediction, and the score was found to be significant. The null hypothesis was rejected.
Statement 14’s prediction was also confirmed, according to the t tests. Pre-227 bilin
gual teachers were predicted to have a stronger belief than non-pre-227 teachers regard
ing the issue that high levels of bilingualism could result in higher development of
knowledge and mental skills. The /-test score was significant and confirmed the predic
tion.
Two more predictions were confirmed. The first prediction was that pre-227
bilingual teachers would have a higher mean score than non-pre-227 for statement 19
that a student who is not proficient in English should be in a classroom learning subject
matter in his/her first language. The t test was found to be significant and confirmed the
prediction.
Another confirmation was for statement 20. Again, pre-227 bilingual teachers
were predicted to score higher than non-pre-227 bilingual teachers with respect to the
statement that at school, the learning of English language by non-English-proficient or
LEP children should take precedence over learning subject matter. The t tests were
found to be significant and confirmed the prediction; however, the scores did not show
79
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
strong disagreement with the statement, which would have indicated strong beliefs in
bilingual education and its theory and basic tenets. Instead, the scores of 1.78 for pre-
227 teachers and 1.46 for non-pre-227 teachers indicated moderate disagreement.
Three predictions were not confirmed. Pre-227 bilingual teachers were pre
dicted to have higher scores than non-pre-227 bilingual teachers for statement 16 that
the current reading program best meets the needs of the ELL student. The significant
/-test score showed that non-pre-227 bilingual teachers had a higher score than pre-227
bilingual teachers. Another prediction that was not confirmed concerned statement
17—that a child who reads and write in his/her first language will be able to learn aca
demic English faster than a child who is not literate in his/her first language. The
prediction was that pre-227 bilingual teachers would have a higher score. The t test
actually showed the opposite—namely, that non-pre-227 bilingual teachers had the
higher score.
One more prediction that was not confirmed was for statement 18—that pre-227
and non-pre-227 bilingual teachers were predicted to have equal score. The t test,
however, was found to be significant; the null hypothesis was rejected, and non-pre-227
bilingual teachers had higher scores.
Research Question 2
Do bilingual teachers believe that the current prevailing method o f teaching
ELLs through English immersion will have aversive consequences?
80
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Descriptive statistics and t tests were conducted to examine research question 2,
which asks whether the current program had aversive consequences for participants’
ELL students. Questions 9 and 21 asked participants to state whether they agreed that
primary language instruction was beneficial for their ELL students. Question 6 asked
subjects to determine whether they felt that English immersion would have aversive
consequences for their ELL students.
According to Table 8 and the mean response to questions 9 and 21, both pre-227
and non-pre-227 bilingual teachers believed strongly that primary language instruction
was beneficial for their students. The scores for all statements ranged from 2 to 2.85.
When asked whether English instruction would have negative effects for their ELL
students, both pre-227 and non-pre-227 bilingual teachers responded affirmatively,
scoring at 2.0 and higher.
Table 8 also shows the predictions between the two variables and which variable
would show higher mean scores. For all three statements, pre-227 bilingual teachers
were predicted to score higher than non-pre-227 bilingual teachers with respect to the
belief that English immersion would have aversive consequences for ELL students.
The rationale for this prediction comes from research suggesting that bilingual teachers
will have more training, more experience with ELLs, were bilingual themselves, and
supported bilingual education more (Flores, 2001; Shin & Krashen, 1996). Bilingual
teachers who had taught in a bilingual program were predicted to believe more strongly
than bilingual teachers who have never taught a bilingual classroom that the English
immersion program would have aversive consequences for ELLs.
81
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 8
Predictions, Mean Scores, t Tests, and Significance for Pre-Proposition 227 Bilin
gual Teachers and Non-Pre-Proposition 227 Bilingual Teachers for Aversive Conse
quences for English Language Learners (ELLs) in an English Immersion Program
Survey statement Prediction* Mean lb Mean 2C t
P
6. Early transition to English
negatively affects aca
demic achievement in
English.
pre > non 2.22 2 0.69 0.49
9. First-language literacy
will help English reading
and writing.
pre > non 2.83 2.85 -0.1 0.92
21. ELL will do better in
school learning to read
and write in home lan
guage.
pre > non 2.57 2.17 1.33 0.19
a Pre > non: mean score of pre-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers will be greater than
mean score of non-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers. Pre = non: mean score of pre-
Proposition 227 bilingual teachers will be equal to score of non-Proposition 227
bilingual teachers. b Pre-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers. °Non-pre-Proposition
227 bilingual teachers.
82
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
The t test for statement 6 was found to be significant and to reject the null hy
pothesis that the two variables would have equal scores. The t test confirmed that pre-
227 bilingual teachers did have significantly higher mean scores than non-pre-227
bilingual teachers. Another t test also confirmed the prediction for statement 21—that
ELLs would do better in school by learning to reading and write in their home language.
The t test was found to be significant, rejecting the null hypothesis and confirming that
pre-227 bilingual teachers scored higher than non-pre-227 bilingual teachers.
Research Question 3
How have bilingual teachers 'practices changed, and do these changes in
practice correlate with the strength of their beliefs?
Descriptive statistics and t tests were computed for the variable, change in
practices, and the two variables, non pre-227 bilingual teachers and pre-227 bilingual
teachers (see Table 9). The means for all but two statements showed positive agreement
with the statements relating to change in practice, where there was a mean score of 2.0
or higher for both variables, pre-227 bilingual teachers and non -pre-227 bilingual
teacher. Table 9 shows that non-pre-227 bilingual teachers scored a mean of 1.62 in
regard to the statement 10, “Provide primary language books to the student.” The score
was around the median.
Table 9 shows predictions between pre-227 bilingual teachers and non-pre-227
bilingual teachers. Richardson (1996) suggested that the context of schooling and
classroom experience exerts influence on teacher beliefs. Hence, bilingual teachers
83
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 9
Predictions: Means, t Tests, and Significance for Pre-Proposition 227 Bilingual
Teachers Non-Pre-Proposition 227 Bilingual Teachers Regarding Change in Prac
tice
S u rv ey statem ent Prediction® M ean l b M ea n 2 C t
P
3. M odify lesson/add materials
that ensure value o f native
culture.
pre > non 2.57 2.62 -0.22 0.83
10. Provide primary language
books to student.
pre > non 2.09 1.62 1.43 0.16
13. A llow ELLs to use primary
language in writing lessons.
pre > non 2.3 1.92 1.14 0.26
15. U se primary language for
instruction once per day.
pre > non 2.43 2 1.57 0.13
22. U se primary language to
support ELL with difficul
ties.
pre = non 2.86 2.46 1.55 0.14
27. M odify reading program for
ELLs.
pre = non 2.68 2.85 -0.71 0.48
Note. ELL = English language learner.
a Pre > non: m ean score o f pre-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers w ill be greater than mean
score o f non-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers. Pre = non: mean score o f pre-Proposition
227 bilingual teachers w ill be equal to score o f non-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers. '’Pre-
Proposition 227 bilingual teachers. °Non-pre-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers.
84
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
who had worked in a bilingual classroom would have strong beliefs in bilingual educa
tion theory and practice. It is this rationale that led to the predictions for statements 3,
10,13,15, and 22 that pre-227 bilingual teachers would have higher scores than non-
pre-227 bilingual teachers in relation to change in practice. The prediction that one
score would be higher than the other would reject the null hypothesis that the scores
would be equal. Statements 22 and 27 were predicted to have equal scores.
t tests confirmed the predictions for statements 10,13, and 15 that pre-227
bilingual teachers would score higher than non-pre-227 bilingual teachers; the null
hypothesis was rejected. Pre-227 bilingual teachers scored a higher mean in providing
primary language books for the ELLs, in allowing ELLs to use primary language in
writing lessons, and in using their primary language for instruction at least once a day.
Statement 22, whether or not a teacher would use the primary language when an ELL
was having difficulties, was predicted to have an equal score for the two groups (i.e,
null hypothesis accepted). The t test, however, significantly found that pre-227 bilin
gual teachers had a higher mean score than non-pre-227 bilingual teachers.
Correlations
Correlation Between the Variables Belief
and Change in Practice
The next section looks at correlation analyses for the variables beliefs and
change in practice to determine whether a relationship existed. Correlation analysis,
85
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
scatterplots, and regression analysis were used to explore variances and degree of vari
ance.
A correlation analysis was calculated for the two variables bilingual teachers’
beliefs and change in practice. Table 10 and Figure 2 show the results of the correlation
and the scatterplot, respectively. Table 10 shows that a statistical correlation existed
between the variables bilingual teachers beliefs and change in practice. A Pearson cor
relation of .394 was found to be significant at the .05 level.
A regression analysis was then conducted to find the strength of the correlation.
Table 11 shows the results of the regression with an/?2 of .155. This R2 suggests a weak
relationship between the two variables. The regression is also presented in Figure 3
which shows the scatterplot and the regression line.
Correlation Between the Variables Belief
in Bilingual Education and Program
Acceptance
The next section looks at the correlations between beliefs and program accep
tance. In this section, the higher score for beliefs indicates stronger belief in bilingual
education. The higher score for program indicates unhappiness with the program the
teacher is currently instructing.
A correlation analysis was computed between the variables bilingual teachers’
beliefs and program acceptance. Table 12 indicates a significant correlation between
the two variables. A Pearson correlation score of .601 was found to be significant at the
.01 level.
86
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 10
Correlation Between Beliefs in Bilingual Education and Change in
Practice for Pre-Proposition 227 and Non-Pre-227 Bilingual Teachers
Subscale Change Beliefs
Change
Pearson correlation 1 .394*
Significance (two-tailed) .021
Beliefs
Pearson correlation .394* 1
Significance (two-tailed) .021
Note. n = 34.
*Correlation significant at the .05 level (two-tailed).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
3 -
2 .5 -
2-
1 .5 -
a
£
.9
60
9
43 0.5-H
o
0-
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
B elief in Bilingual Education
Figure 2. Fit line showing regression between beliefs in bilingual
education and change in practice for bilingual teachers. R2 linear =
0.155.
Table 11
Summary ofRegression Analysis for the Variables Change in Program and Belief in
Bilingual Education
M odel R R2 Adjusted R1 SE o f estim ate
1 .394“ .155 .129 .587
“ Predictors (constant): English language learner students should be in bilingual classroom .
88
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
2.5-
2 -
1.5-
1-
£ 0 .5 -
R Sq Linear = 0.362
o-
2.5 2 3 1 1.5 0 0.5
Belief in Bilingual Education
Figure 3. Fit line showing regression between belief in bilin
gual education and program acceptance by bilingual teachers.
R2 linear = 0.362.
89
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 12
Correlation Between Beliefs in Bilingual Education and Program Ac
ceptance for Pre-Proposition 227 and Non-Pre-Proposition 227 Bilin
gual Teachers
Subscale Beliefs
Program ac
ceptance
Beliefs
Pearson correlation 1 .601*
Significance (two-tailed) .000
Program acceptance
Pearson correlation .601** 1
Significance (two-tailed) .000
Note, n - 36.
*Correlation significant at the .01 level (two-tailed).
A regression analysis was further conducted to determine the strength of the
relationship. Table 13 shows the results of the regression analysis. According to the
regression analysis, ani?2 of .362 suggests a moderate to weak relationship between the
two variables. The scatterplot in Figure 3 visually represents the relationship between
the two variables, where the increase in beliefs in bilingual education correlates with
increased unhappiness felt by bilingual teachers of the program that they were currently
teaching.
90
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 13
Summary ofRegression Analysis for the Variables Change in Program and Belief in
Bilingual Education
Model R R2 Adjusted R2 SE of estimate
1 .601a .362 .343 .855
^Predictors (constant): English language learner students should be in bilingual class
room.
Summary of Findings
This section summarizes the findings from the statistical analyses. Each re
search question will be reviewed and discussed.
Research Question 1
What are bilingual teachers ’ current beliefs about bilingual education after 7
years of English immersion policy, and does a difference exist between pre-Proposition
227 bilingual teachers ’ beliefs and non-pre-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers ’ be
liefs?
In a broad overview of the mean scores for all statements regarding bilingual
teachers’ beliefs about bilingual education, the findings showed that all bilingual teach
ers surveyed had maintained moderate to strong beliefs in bilingual education 7 years
after the implementation of Proposition 227 and English immersion instruction.
91
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
No bilingual teachers scored in the low beliefs range, yet pre-227 bilingual
teachers scored the lowest for statement 4—that a student proficient in Spanish and
English should be enrolled in a classroom where the first language is part of the curricu
lum. The score still showed a high belief in bilingual education.
Non pre-227 bilingual teachers scored the lowest for statement 20—that at
school the learning of the English language by non-English-proficient or LEP children
should take precedence over learning subject matter. The score for this statement was
in the medium beliefs range.
It was predicted that pre-227 bilingual teachers would score significantly higher
for most of the beliefs statements, because pre-227 bilingual teachers had more practical
experience in a bilingual program, t tests were conducted to determine whether this
would occur. Pre-227 bilingual teachers, however, only scored significantly higher for
4 of the 15 statements.
Pre-227 bilingual teachers scored higher for the statement that English-speaking
ELLs should be in an English-only classroom, disagreeing more strongly than non-pre-
227 teachers. Pre-227 bilingual teachers also scored higher in believing that high levels
of bilingualism result in high development of knowledge skills. Pre-227 bilingual
teachers scored higher with the statements that a student not proficient in English
should learn subjects in the primary language and that English language learning
supercedes learning of subject matter. In each of these four cases, the null hypothesis
was rejected.
92
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Three statements, however, found that non-pre-227 bilingual teachers had
stronger beliefs. In regard to the statement that the current reading program is very
English-immersion structured, non-pre-227 bilingual teachers believed more strongly
that the program did not best meet the needs of their ELLs. Non-pre-227 bilingual
teachers also believed more strongly that primary language literacy would help ELLs
learn academic English faster.
Further, non-pre-227 bilingual teachers also disagreed more strongly with the
statement that students must learn English fast, even with the result of the loss of the
native language. In each of these cases, the null hypothesis was rejected and non-pre-
227 bilingual teachers scored higher. For the remaining statements, null hypothesis was
accepted in that both groups had equal scores for the different statements.
Research Question 2
Do bilingual teachers believe that the current prevailing method o f teaching
ELLs through English immersion will have aversive consequences?
Aversive consequences were analyzed by asking teachers if they believed that
the best way to teach ELLs was through their primary language. The results showed
that bilingual teachers, regardless of whether or not they taught in a pre-227 bilingual
classroom, strongly believed that primary language instruction would help students
achieve academically. Further, all bilingual teachers believed that the current English
immersion programs would have aversive consequences for their ELL students.
93
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Again, because pre-227 bilingual teachers had had more experience with ELLs
in a bilingual program, predictions were made that pre-227 bilingual teachers would
score higher with statements that English immersion programs would have aversive
consequences for ELL students, t tests were conducted to test these hypotheses and to
see whether the null hypothesis would be rejected in favor of pre-227 bilingual teachers.
The t tests confirmed that pre-227 bilingual teachers did believe more strongly than
non-pre-227 bilingual teachers that early transition to English negatively affects aca
demic achievement for ELLs and that ELLs would do better in school learning to read
and write in their home language. The remaining statement was not found to have a
significant t test, and the null hypothesis was not rejected. Thus, both pre-227 and non-
pre-227 bilingual teachers believed that first-language literacy would help English
reading and writing.
Research Question 3
How have their practices changed, and do these changes in practice correlate
with the strength o f their beliefs?
The results for research question 3 indicated that bilingual teachers had medium
to high scores in regard to change in practice. All mean scores for individual statements
for pre-227 and non-pre-227 bilingual teachers were 2.0 or higher except on statement
10, providing primary language books, and statement 13, allowing ELLs to use primary
language in their writing. Non pre-227 bilingual teachers scored a mean of 1.62, which
indicated neutrality for providing primary language books, and 1.92 for allowing ELLs
94
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
to use primary language in writing, which showed slight agreement with the statement.
Overall, however, both pre-227 and non-pre-227 bilingual teachers agreed that they
changed their practices when working with ELLs.
Pre-227 bilingual teachers scored significantly higher than non-pre-227 bilin
gual teachers for 4 of the 6 statements regarding change in practice. Based on t tests,
pre-227 bilingual teachers responded more affirmatively to statements that they pro
vided primary language books to ELLs, allowed ELLs to use the primary language in
writing lessons, used the primary language for instruction once per day, and used pri
mary language to support ELLs with difficulties.
It was predicted that pre-227 bilingual teachers would have equal scores with
non-pre-227 bilingual teachers for the statement regarding modifying the reading
program for ELLs. The t tests actually showed the opposite. The null hypothesis was
rejected, and non-pre-227 bilingual teachers scored higher than pre-227 bilingual
teachers for this statement.
Correlations
Correlation analysis was done for the two variables, bilingual teachers beliefs
and their change in practice. The analysis showed that a significant relationship did
exist between the strength of bilingual teachers’ beliefs and their tendency to change
their practice. However, when a regression analysis was conducted, the regression did
not show a very strong linear relationship. Hence, a relationship existed, albeit a weak
one, between beliefs and change in practice.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Another correlation analysis was done to determine the relationship between the
variable of bilingual teachers beliefs and the variable of program acceptance. As oc
curred in the correlation analysis between beliefs and change, a correlation was found
that showed that as bilingual teachers’ beliefs in bilingual education increased, they
were less happy with the program that they were teaching. Although a significant rela
tionship was found, the regression analysis showed a weak to moderate linear relation
ship.
Conclusion
In general, the findings indicated that all bilingual teachers surveyed continued
to believe strongly in bilingual education. The findings also showed that a stronger
belief in bilingual education would lead to an increase in change in classroom practice
to accommodate the ELLs for all bilingual teachers. These findings are significant
especially since Proposition 227 has existed for 7 years, where a decrease in beliefs in
bilingual education could have resulted from English immersion policy. This study
found the contrary. In the next chapter, which presents summaries, conclusions, and
implications, these and other significant findings from this study are discussed.
96
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS
This chapter presents the summary, conclusions, and implications for the disser
tation study on the impact of Proposition 227 on bilingual teachers’ beliefs and prac
tices. The first section presents a summary of the findings, including a review of the
problem statement. The second section presents a conclusion of the study. The final
section looks at implications for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners.
Review of Problem Statement
In 1998, California voters passed Proposition 227, which ended bilingual educa
tion in California public schools. The law required that schools teach ELLs in an
English-only environment. The law was inconsistent with the prevailing theories and
policy and placed bilingual education teachers in a state of confusion and dissonance.
Research at the time that Proposition 227 was implemented indicated that bilingual
education teachers were feeling psychological discomfort because the teachers believed
that they were not teaching ELLs through the best methods possible (Alamillo & Vira-
montes, 2000). Teachers were also unsure as to what to do since their pedagogical
training had not prepared them for English immersion (Arellano-Houchin et al., 2001;
Gandara, 2000). Furthermore, the elements of the law were not yet clearly outlined.
These bilingual teachers were in a state of cognitive dissonance.
The purpose of this study was to examine what bilingual education teachers’
current beliefs and practices in teaching were 7 years after the implementation of the
97
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
law. The study looked at bilingual education teachers’ beliefs and practices through the
self-consistency perspective of cognitive dissonance theory. According to the self-
consistency perspective of cognitive dissonance theory, individuals who have a high
self-concept—or, in the case of this study, high beliefs—will experience more disso
nance and will work harder to adjust their actions to fit their beliefs. Those individuals
with low self-concept or low beliefs will do less because they feel less dissonance. This
study examined whether bilingual education teachers with high self-concept would be
more inclined to change their practices when working with ELLs.
The following specific research questions were posed:
1. What are bilingual teachers’ current beliefs about bilingual education after 7
years of English immersion policy, and does a difference exist between pre-Proposition
227 bilingual teachers’ beliefs and non-pre-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers beliefs?
2. Do bilingual teachers believe that the current prevailing method of teaching
ELLs through English immersion will have aversive consequences?
3. How have bilingual teachers’ practices changed and do these changes in
practice correlate with the strength of their beliefs?
Summary of Findings
Research Question 1
What are bilingual teachers ’ current beliefs about bilingual education after 7
years o f English immersion policy, and does a difference exist between pre-Proposition
98
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
227 bilingual teachers ’ beliefs and non-pre-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers ’ be
liefs?
The results of this study showed that bilingual teachers, regardless of whether or
not they had taught in a bilingual classroom, continued to have strong beliefs in bilin
gual education. When asked to respond to a series of statements about the theories and
methods that best address the needs of ELLs, all bilingual teachers surveyed, regardless
of whether or not they had taught in a bilingual classroom, consistently affirmed the
benefits of bilingual education.
It was predicted that pre-227 bilingual teachers would score higher for most of
the statements regarding beliefs because pre-227 bilingual teachers had had personal
experience in a bilingual program, t tests performed found that pre-227 bilingual
teachers scored statistically higher than non-pre-227 bilingual teachers on only 4 of the
15 beliefs statements. In 3 of the statements, non-pre-227 bilingual teachers had actu
ally scored higher than pre-227 bilingual teachers. The teachers scored equally on the
remaining statements.
These findings suggest that, in the case of this study, practice did not have a
strong impact on beliefs. This study found that personal experience in an actual bilin
gual program did not affect the strength of belief in bilingual education theory. Non-
pre-227 bilingual teachers who had never taught in a bilingual program had the same
level of beliefs as pre-227 bilingual teachers in bilingual education theory and practice.
In terms of cognitive dissonance theory, both pre-227 and non-pre-227 bilingual
teachers had maintained high mindfulness of their beliefs in bilingual education theory
99
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
and practice. This, again, was significant considering that it had been 7 years since the
implementation of Proposition 227.
Research Question 2
Do bilingual teachers believe that the current prevailing method o f teaching
ELLs through English immersion will have aversive consequences?
Pre-227 and non-pre-227 bilingual teachers were asked to respond to a series of
statements that determined whether they believed that English immersion instruction
could have aversive consequences for their students. Both groups of bilingual teachers
believed that teaching ELLs in their home language would be more beneficial academi
cally for their students. They also believed that early transition to English would have
negative effects.
It was predicted that pre-227 bilingual teachers would score higher than non-
pre-227 bilingual teachers because of their direct experience with ELLs in a bilingual
program, t tests were performed to affirm or reject this hypothesis. Pre-227 bilingual
teachers did believe more strongly than non-pre-227 bilingual teachers that early transi
tion would negatively affect the academic achievement of their ELLs and that ELLs
would do better in school learning to read and write in their home language. Pre-227
and non-pre-227 bilingual teachers believed equally that first-language literacy would
help English reading and writing.
Overall, pre-227 and non-pre-227 bilingual teachers believe that English immer
sion would have aversive consequences for ELL students. The area that the next
100
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
research question examined was whether that dissonance correlated with any change in
practice.
Research Question 3
How have bilingual teachers ’practices changed, and do these changes in
practice correlate with the strength of their beliefs?
The results from this study found that bilingual teachers did modify their class
room practices to adjust to the needs of their ELL students. Bilingual teachers were
asked whether they practiced specific methods to modify the classroom environment
and lesson delivery for their ELLs. All bilingual teachers did make modifications to
their classrooms for their ELLs and did experience change in practice.
As was done for the previous two research questions, predictions were made
between the scores of pre-227 and non-pre-227 bilingual teachers. The results of the t
tests indicated that pre-227 bilingual teachers in 4 out of the 6 statements tended to
experience more change in practice than did non-pre-227 bilingual teachers. Yet, taken
together, the responses from all bilingual teachers indicated a strong change in practice
to address the needs of their ELL students.
A relationship was found in the correlation analysis between the strength of
beliefs and the change in practice. The findings from the correlation analysis showed
that the stronger the belief in bilingual education, the increased likelihood that a bilin
gual teacher would engage in change in practice for ELL students. A regression analy
sis, however, only showed a minimal strength in this relationship.
101
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
A correlation analysis was done to examine the relationship between program
acceptance and belief in bilingual education. The purpose of this analysis was to deter
mine whether the strength of the belief in bilingual education correlated with whether or
not bilingual teachers were more or less happy with the type of program that they were
teaching. The results showed that a correlation did exist. When bilingual teachers had
stronger beliefs in bilingual education, they were unhappier with the program that they
were teaching; and for the majority of bilingual teachers, that program was an English-
immersion program. The regression analysis found a moderate relationship.
Conclusions
The results of the findings suggested several conclusions. First, bilingual
teachers, regardless of whether or not they had taught in a bilingual classroom, main
tained fairly strong beliefs in bilingual education. This finding was particularly signifi
cant because of the passage of Proposition 227 and its requirement that bilingual teach
ers teach in an English-only environment. After 7 years of English-immersion policy,
the bilingual teachers surveyed continued to strongly support bilingual education theory
and practice, even though they might have been unable to practice it in the classroom.
Some bilingual teacher participants had never taught in a bilingual classroom.
These non-pre-227 bilingual teachers entered education or received their credentials
after the implementation of the English-immersion law, yet these particular teachers
maintained high beliefs in bilingual education despite having not previously taught in
102
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
that program. They actually maintained the same strength of beliefs as pre-227 bilin
gual teachers; beliefs continued despite, or in spite of, practice.
This brings the discussion to another conclusion. Pre-227 bilingual teachers
were expected to have higher beliefs than non-pre-227 bilingual teachers in bilingual
education. This rationale comes from beliefs studies that indicated how practice con
firms beliefs. In the case of the present study, pre-227 bilingual teachers only had
higher beliefs in 4 out of 15 statements. Pre-227 bilingual teachers actually scored
lower than non-pre-227 bilingual teachers in 3 of the 14 statements and were equal with
non-pre-227 teachers in the remaining 8 statements. This finding suggests, again, that
practice did not have as high an impact on beliefs as expected.
The conclusions in the previous two paragraphs regarding non-pre-227 bilingual
teachers and the maintenance of bilingual education beliefs suggest that teacher educa
tion programs have been able to effectively educate their future bilingual teachers in
support of bilingual education theory and practice. This training has impacted non-
pre-227 bilingual teachers in maintaining their beliefs despite not teaching in a bilingual
program. Teacher education programs had enough impact and influence to help teach
ers continue to believe in bilingual education in spite of the policy that has not allowed
them to practice it.
This study found that all bilingual teachers experienced change in their practice
to better address the needs of their ELL students. In a majority of statements regarding
change in practice, pre-227 and non-pre-227 bilingual teachers did affirm that they
practiced changes to address the needs of their ELLs. Bilingual teachers used the
103
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
primary language for instruction when necessary and made modifications to address
their students’ needs.
As discussed earlier, bilingual teachers had maintained high beliefs. According
to the self-consistency revision of cognitive dissonance theory, high beliefs would result
in an increase likelihood of change in practice. Individuals who have high beliefs are
less likely to misattribute their practice and would then change their practice to better
address their beliefs. This study confirmed the self-consistency revision of cognitive
dissonancy theory, finding that high-belief teachers did experience more change in their
practice.
Furthermore, strength of belief in bilingual education did correlate with the
amount of change in classroom practice in which teachers engaged. The stronger a
teacher’s belief in bilingual education, the more change in classroom practice tended to
occur. This was so with both pre-227 bilingual teachers and non-pre-227 bilingual
teachers. This correlation also affirms the self-consistency revision of cognitive disso
nance theory where high beliefs would tend to cause an increase of change in practice.
In general, the research findings suggested that bilingual teachers continued to grapple
with issues of believing in bilingual education and native language instruction while
also believing that the method they were using to teach their students had negative
effects. Bilingual teachers had maintained beliefs in bilingual education despite de
creased support of it in policy and in public, and it continued to be an issue for them.
This study also confirmed the self-consistency revision of cognitive dissonance
theory—that the strength of beliefs does increase the likelihood of change in practice.
104
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
In this study, bilingual teachers exhibited both high beliefs and strong change in prac
tice. The correlation found that a relationship did exist between beliefs and change in
practice. The high beliefs have led to bilingual teachers changing their practice to better
address their beliefs.
The conclusions found in this study, however, cannot be presented without a
special note. This was a survey-only study, dependent on the accuracy of the responses
of the participants in the study. Interviews and observations would have provided more
in-depth analysis of participants’ responses. Also, the sample size was relatively small
and limited. A larger, random sample would have been more representative of the
population.
Implications
Research Implications
Teacher beliefs research has found that a connection exists between practice and
beliefs. Some findings indicate that beliefs do lead to a change in practice, while other
research does not find that link. The present study found a correlation between bilin
gual education teachers’ beliefs and the practices in their classrooms. Even after a
policy that required many teachers to implement a practice that was contrary to the
training they had received, they still continued to believe in the tenets of bilingual
ed u cation th eory and cla im ed that th ey w ere m o d ify in g their program to fit their b e lie fs.
This strong belief existed even after 7 years of inconsistent practice with their beliefs.
105
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Hence, an area of research that could be explored is how and why beliefs are main
tained. This study found that even when policies mandated individuals to act differently
from their beliefs, those beliefs did not easily disappear. In the case of this study, 7
years had passed and bilingual teachers continued to believe in bilingual education
theory. How do such beliefs persevere? Is perseverance even important in terms of
practice?
Another research implication for this study is strength of beliefs. This study
found that the degree of strength did have a relationship with how much change oc
curred. More research on the strength of beliefs can be explored, as well as its impact in
other subject areas. The present research was conducted in bilingual education but is
applicable in other subject areas, especially where mandated policies occur. Currently
in California, literacy policies advocate one method over another. Research could be
done to determine whether or not beliefs in literacy also correlate with the type of
practice that occurs in the classroom.
Further examination should also involve whether strength can be cultivated or
whether it occurs as a result of an individual’s experiences and background knowledge.
Much research has been done in the development of beliefs, but research on the devel
opment of strength of beliefs in education can be explored, especially as it relates to
practice.
106
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Policy Implications
Further, this study found that if bilingual teachers’ beliefs were strong, they
would act to modify their practices in their classroom to ensure that their actions
matched their beliefs. These practices may confound the policy, because the policy is
not fully implemented as intended.
In the case of Proposition 227, complete English immersion was the intent.
However, this study found that all teachers surveyed their practice and English-immer
sion program to address the needs of their ELL students. Just as it has been shown in
many studies, policies are not fully implemented unless the input of the individuals
practicing those policies is taken into consideration. At the very least, an in-depth
analysis of what those beliefs are prior to proposing and/or implementing a policy is
essential. As this study has shown and as affirmed in policymaking research, teachers
can direct policy by acting in agreement or disagreement with those policies.
This study found that non-pre-Proposition 227 bilingual teachers maintained
their beliefs despite having never taught in a bilingual program. These teachers devel
oped their beliefs about bilingual education theory and practice from their teacher edu
cation programs. When Proposition 227 was implemented, teacher education programs
maintained that they would continue to advocate for bilingual education theory and
practice (Joint Policy Committee, 2001). This study shows that teacher education poli
cies can have long-lasting effects on the teachers they educate. Teacher education pro
grams can help establish beliefs that are strong enough to affect policy implementation;
107
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
hence, it is important to continue looking at the evolution and impact of teacher educa
tion programs and policies in the education of ELLs. It is also important to examine the
impact of teacher education programs and policies in other subjects where strong and,
perhaps, conflicting policies are in place, such as the language arts.
Practitioner Implications
This study shows and affirms the importance of practitioners in the implementa
tion of policy. Teachers’ beliefs are important and do determine how policies are
implemented and sustained. Beliefs do not simply disappear, even though individuals
may be forced to act differently. Those beliefs are further solidified as these individuals
seek support from others who share those beliefs under contradictory conditions.
This study has implications for practitioners in that it affirms that practitioners
are essential in the development and implementation of policy. Even when policies
may seem to force teachers to act in a structured and unwavering way, teachers continue
to act on their own accord and make professional decisions that stray from prescribed
programs. Teachers do these individual acts despite overarching and controlling poli
cies. Practitioners continue to maintain their voice, and that voice determines what
students actually learn. Many policies attempt to “teacher proof’ the classroom envi
ronment and control what teachers do, but teachers are not impervious. Policies do not
act in a vacuum, and policymakers need to be reminded of that.
108
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
REFERENCES CITED
109
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
REFERENCES CITED
Alamillo, L., Plamer, D., Viramontes, C., & Garcia, E. E. (2005). California’s Eng
lish-only policies: An analysis of initial effects. In A. Valenzuela (Ed.), Leaving
children behind: How “Texas-style ” accountability fails Latino youth (pp. 201-
224). Albany: State University of New York Press.
Alamillo, L., & Viramontes, C. (2000). Reflections from the classroom: Teacher per
spectives on the implementation of Proposition 227. Bilingual Research Journal,
24, 1-13.
Arellano-Houchlin, A., Flamenco, C., Merlos, M. M., & Segura, L. (2001). Has Califor
nia’s passage of Proposition 227 made a difference in the way we teach? Urban
Review, 33, 221-235.
Aronson, E. (1999). Dissonance, hypocrisy, and the self-concept. In E. Harmon-Jones
& J. Mills (Eds.), Cognitive dissonance: Progress on a pivotal theory in social
psychology (pp. 103-126). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Brisk, M. E. (1998). Bilingual education: From compensatory to quality schooling.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Calderhead, J. (1996). Teachers: Beliefs and knowledge. In D. C. Berliner & R. C.
Calfee (Eds.), Handbook o f educational psychology (pp.709-725). New York:
Macmillan Library Reference USA.
California Commission on Teacher Credentialing. (2001). Glossary o f credential
terms. Sacramento: Author. Retrieved June 13,2005, from http://www.ctc.ca
.gov/ glossary/glossary .html
Crawford, J. (1991). Bilingual education: History, politics, theory and practice (2n d
ed.). Los Angeles: Bilingual Educational Services.
Crawford, J. (1997). The campaign against Proposition 227: A post mortem. Bilin
gual Research Journal, 21, 1-29.
Crawford, J. (2000). At war with diversity: U.S. language policy in an age o f anxiety.
Buffalo, NY: Multilingual Matters.
Crawford, J. (2004). Educating English learners: Language diversity in the classroom
(5th ed.). Los Angeles: Bilingual Educational Services
110
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Dixon, C., Green, J., Yeager, B., & Baker, D. (2000). “I used to know that”: What
happens when reform gets through the classroom door. Bilingual Research Jour
nal, 24,113-126.
Eisenhart, M. A., Cuthbert, A. M., Shrum, J. L., & Harding, J. R. (1988). Teacher
beliefs about their work activities: Policy implications. Theory into Practice, 27,
137-144.
English Language Education for Immigrant Children Act. California Education Code,
3-300-340. (1998). Retrieved January 23,2004 from http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/
cgi-bin/calawquery?codesection=edc&codebody=&hits=20
Fang, Z. (1996). A review of research on teacher beliefs and practices. Educational
Research, 38, 47-65.
Festinger, L. (1957). Theory o f cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford Univer
sity Press.
Flood, J., Lapp, D., Tinajero, J. V., & Hurley, S. R. (1996/1997??). Literacy instruc
tion for students acquiring English: Moving beyond the immersion debate. Read
ing Teacher, 50, 356-358.
Flores, B. B. (2001). Bilingual education teachers’ beliefs and their relation to
self-reported practices. Bilingual Research Journal, 25, 275-300.
Flores, S. Y., & Murillo, Jr., E. G. (2001). Power, language and ideology: Historical
and contemporary notes on the dismantling of bilingual education. Urban Review,
33, 183-206.
Gandara, P. (2000). In the aftermath of the storm: English learners in the post-227 era.
Bilingual Research Journal, 24, 1-13.
Gandara, P., Maxwell-Jolly, J., Garcia, E., Asato, J., Gutierrez, K., Stritikus, T., et al.
(2000). The initial impact ofproposition 227 on the instruction o f English learn
ers. Davis: University of California, Linguistic Minority Research Institute.
Gibson, C. & Lennon, E. (2001). Table 1, Nativity o f the population and place o f birth
o f the native population: 1850 to 1990. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau,
Population Division. Retrieved June 19,2005, from http://www.census.gov/
population/www/documentation/twps0029/tab01 .html
111
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Gonzalez, M. (2000). Teacher beliefs, attitudes, and knowledge and its effects on in
struction for English language learners in transition. (Doctoral dissertation, Uni
versity of Southern California, 2000). Dissertation Abstracts International, 63,
02A.
Gutierrez, K. D., Baquedano-Lopez, P., & Asato, J. (2000). English for the children:
The new literacy of the old world order, language policy and educational reform.
Bilingual Research Journal, 24, 87-112.
Hanson, D. Z. (2000). Teacher motivation and retention in bilingual education: Per
spectives of Latina and Euro-American bilingual teachers before and after Proposi
tion 227. Dissertation Abstracts International, 61,4k. (UMINo.9967675)
Harmon-Jones, E., & Mills, J. (1999). An introduction to cognitive dissonance theory
and an overview of current perspectives on the theory. In E. Harmon-Jones & J.
Mills (Eds.), Cognitive dissonance: Progress on a pivotal theory in socialpsychol-
ogy (pp. 3-21). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Joint Policy Committee. (2001). Success for English language learners: Teacher
preparation policies and practices. Teacher Education Quarterly, 28, 199-208.
Katz, S. R. (2000). Promoting bilingualism in the era of Unz: Making sense of the gap
between research, policy and practice in teacher education. Multicultural Educa
tion, #(1), 2-7.
Levitt, K. E. (2002). An analysis of elementary teachers’ beliefs regarding the teaching
and learning of science. Science Education, 86(1), 1-22.
Mora, J. K. (2000). Policy shifts in language-minority education: A mismatch between
politics and pedagogy. Educational Forum, 54,204-214. Retrieved May 27,2003,
from http:://firstsearch.oclc.org/ html/
webscript.html:: sessionid=sp02sw03-3 63 05-dg88td9d-bujjp
Mora, J. K. (2005). Legal history o f bilingual education. Retrieved January 24,2005,
from http://coe.sdsu.edu/people/jmora/Pages/HistoryBE.htm
Munby, H., Russell, T., & Martin, A. K. (2001). Teachers’ knowledge and how it de
velops. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook o f research on teaching (4th ed.). Wash
ington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Ovando, C. J. (2003). Bilingual education in the United States: Historical develop
ment and current issues. Bilingual Research Journal, 27, 1-24.
112
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Palmer, D. K., & Garcia, E. E. (2000). Voices from the field: Bilingual educators
speak candidly about Proposition 227. Bilingual Research Journal, 24, 169-178.
Peregoy, S. F., & Boyle, O. F. (2001). Reading, writing and learning in E.S.L.: A
resource book for K-12 teachers (3r d ed.). New York: Longman.
Porter, R. P. (1999/2000). The benefits of English immersion. Educational Leader
ship, 57(4), 52-56.
Quezada, M. S., Wiley, T. G., & Ramirez, J. D. (1999/2000). How the reform agenda
shortchanges English learners. Educational Leadership, 57(4), 57-61. Retrieved
August 5,2003, from http://firstsearch.oclc.org/html
Ramirez, J. D., Yuen, S. D., & Ramey, D. R. (1991). Executive summary o f the final
structured English immersion strategy, early-exit and late-exit transitional bilin
gual education programs for language-minority children (Contract No. 300-87-
0156). Washington DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved July 30,1999,
from http://www.ncbe.gwu.edu/miscpubs/ramirez/longitudinal.htm
Ramos, F. (2001). Teachers’ opinions about the theoretical and practical aspects of the
use of native language instruction for language minority students: A cross-sec
tional study. Bilingual Research Journal, 25, 357-374.
Revilla, A. T., & Asato, J. (2002). The implementation of Proposition 227 in Califor
nia schools: A critical analysis of the effect on teacher beliefs and California prac
tices. Equity & Excellence in Education, 35, 108-118.
Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. InJ.
Sikula, T. J. Buttery, & E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher edu
cation (2n d ed.). New York: Macmillan Library Reference USA.
Rossell, C. H. (2000). Policy matters in teaching English language learners: New
York and California (Urban Diversity Series, Report No. UDS-117). Washington,
DC: Institute of Education Sciences. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
ED482922)
Sekhon, N. (1999). A birthright rearticulated: The politics of bilingual education.
New York University Law Review, 74, 1407-1450.
Shin, F. H., & Krashen, S. (1996). Teacher attitudes toward the principles of bilingual
education and toward students’ participation in bilingual programs: Same or dif
ferent? Bilingual Research Journal, 20, 45-53.
113
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Stritikus, T., & Garcia, E. E. (2000). Education of limited English proficient students
in California schools: An assessment of the influence of Proposition 227 on
selected teachers and classrooms. Bilingual Research Journal, 24, 75-85.
Stritikus, T., & Garcia, E. E. (2003). The role of theory and policy in the educational
treatment of language minority students: Competitive structures in California.
Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11. Retrieved September 20,2003, from
http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/vl ln26/
Tatto, M. T. (1998). The influence of teacher education on teachers’ beliefs about
purposes of education, roles and practice. Journal o f Teacher Education, 49, 66-
77.
Trochim, W. M. K. (2005, January 16). General issues in scaling. In Research Methods
Knowledge Base (measurement). Retrieved April 18,2005 from http://www
. socialresearchemtods.net/kb/scalgen.htm
U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). Census summary file 3. Washington, DC: Author.
Retrieved June 19,2005, from http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/
QTT able?_bm=y&-geo_id=04000US06&-qr_name=DEC_2000_SF3_U_DP2&-
ds_name=DEC_2000_SF3_U
Valdez, E. O. (2001). Winning the battle, losing the war: Bilingual teachers and post-
Proposition 227. Urban Review, 33, 237-253.
Wiley, T. G., & Wright, W. E. (2004). Against the undertow: Language-minority edu
cation policy and politics in the “age of accountability.” Educational Policy, 18,
142-168.
114
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
APPENDICES
115
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
APPENDIX A
SURVEY
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
SURVEY1
Employment History
School Name
Starting Date of Teaching Career / /
Starting Date of Employment At
This School / /
Grade Levels Ever Taught (check
all that apply)
□ Pre-KorK □ Grades 1-2 □ Grades 3-4 □ Grades 5-6 □ Middle School □ High School
□ Other ("please specifvt
Grade Level Currently Teaching □ Pre-K or K □ Grades 1-2 □ Grades 3-4 □ Grades 5-6
□ Other (please specify)
’Prepared by Lorenza Arengo-Yames.
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Type of Instructional Program for
English Language Learners
Please check the box that most
closely describes the instructional
nroeram vou tausrht before
Proposition 227.
(Check all that apply.)
□ Not a program for English language learners
□ Dual language or dual immersion program
□ A bilingual developmental or heritage language program to produce students who are bilingual readers,
writers, and speakers.
□ A transitional bilingual program that initially delivers instruction in the student’s home language while
adding English as a second language.
□ An English language development program (ELD).
□ An ELD program with Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English (SDAIE) with primary
language support.
□ An ELD program with SDAIE without primary language support.
□ An English phonics approach using “Open Court” or “Breaking the Code.”
□ Other type of program (very briefly describe the program in the space below):
Please check the box that most
closely describes the instructional
nroeram in which vou currentlv
work.
(Check all that apply.)
□ Not teaching in a program for English language learners.
□ Dual language or dual immersion program.
□ A bilingual developmental or heritage language program to produce students who are bilingual readers,
writers, and speakers.
□ A transitional bilingual program that initially delivers instruction in the student’s home language while
adding English as a second language.
□ An English language development program (ELD).
□ An ELD program with Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English (SDAIE) with primary
language support.
□ An ELD program with SDAIE without primary language support.
□ An English phonics approach using “Open Court” or “Breaking the Code.”
□ Other type of program (very briefly describe the program in the space below):
00
Degrees Earned or Working Toward
Type of Degree College or University Date Earned Expected Date
Community College
without degree
Associate of Arts
Bachelor’s Degree
Master’s Degree
Doctoral Degree
Other (specify)
Current Permit or Teaching Credential and Expected Teaching Credential
Type of Degree College or University Date Earned
Expected Date of
Completion
Emergency Permit
Intern Credential Multiple
Subjects
Intern Credential Single
Subject
Preliminary CLAD Multiple
Subjects
Preliminary B-CLAD Mul
tiple Subjects
Clear CLAD Multiple Sub
jects
Clear B-CLAD Multiple
Subjects
Preliminary CLAD Single
Subject
Preliminary B-CLAD Sin
gle Subject
Clear CLAD Single Subject
Clear B-CLAD Single Sub
ject
119
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Other Teaching Credential
(please specify)
Other Teaching Credential
(please specify)
Other Types of Credential/Certificates
Credential to become a
principal or assistant princi
pal
Credential to become a
teacher in special education
Credential to become a
counselor
Credential to become a
school psychologist
Single subject supplemental
credential
A B-CLAD certificate
National Board Certifica
tion
Reading Recovery Special
ist
Writing Specialist
Other (specify)
Other (specify)
120
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
On the following statements, please place an X in the box according to the strength
of your belief.
Strongly
Disagree
Somewhat
Disagree
Somewhat
Agree
Strongly
Agree
1 A student who is not proficient in English
should be in a classroom learning his/her
first language (reading and writing as part of
the school curriculum.
2 My preference would be to teach English
language learners in their primary language
3 Whenever possible, I modify or add lessons
or materials that ensure that the child’s na
tive culture is acknowledged and valued.
4 A student who is proficient (reading and
writing) in both Spanish and English should
be enrolled in a classroom where the first
language is part of the curriculum.
5 I am not in the Instructional Program for
English language learners (i.e., English im
mersion, waiver) I want to be in.
6 A student who is transitioned to English too
early will be negatively affected in his/her
ability to achieve academically in English.
7 A limited English language learner who can
speak English and understand it should be
instructed in English only.
8 It is unreasonable to expect a nonauthorized
(BCLAD/CLAD) teacher to teach a child
who does not speak English.
9 Students’ development of literacy in their
first language will facilitate the development
of reading and writing in English.
10 Other than the basal reader, I provide stu
dents with books to read in their primary
language.
1 1 Regular classroom teachers should be re
quired to receive pre-service or in-service
training to be prepared to meet the needs of
linguistic minorities.
121
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
On the following statements, please place an X in the box according to the strength
of your belief.
Strongly
Disagree
Somewhat
Disagree
Somewhat
Agree
Strongly
Agree
12 A teacher should be proficient in the stu
dents’ first language in order to effectively
teach them during the transition to the Eng
lish stage.
13 I allow English language learners the oppor
tunity to use their primary language in class
room writing lessons.
14 High levels of bilingualism can result in
higher development of knowledge or mental
skills.
15 I use the student’s primary language for in
struction at least once a day.
16 The reading program (OCR, Houghton
Mifflin) in my classroom best meets the
needs of the ELL student.
17 A child who reads and writes in his/her first
language will be able to learn academic
English faster and easier than a child who
cannot read and write in his/her first lan
guage.
18 Students must learn English as quickly as
possible, even if it means the loss of the na
tive language.
19 A student who is not proficient in English
should be in a classroom learning subject
matter (e.g., match, science, etc.) in his/her
first language.
20 At school the learning of the English lan
guage by non- or limited-English-proficient
children should take precedent over learning
subject matter.
21 A student who is not proficient in English
will do better in school if he or she learns to
read and write in his/her home language
first.
122
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
On the following statements, please place an X in the box according to the strength
of your belief.
Strongly
Disagree
Somewhat
Disagree
Somewhat
Agree
Strongly
Agree
22 I use the primary language in my English
immersion class for instruction when an
English language learner has difficulty un
derstanding a concept initially taught in
English.
23 Second language learners in an English-only
class will learn English more efficiently.
24 My classroom’s instructional program
(waiver, English immersion, dual immer
sion) for English learners appropriately ad
dresses the needs of English language learn
ers.
25 The development of the native language
helps develop a sense of biculturalism.
26 It is good for students to maintain their na
tive culture, as well as American culture.
27 I modify the reading program (adjust pace of
lesson, use a different lesson to address
goals, add or take out reading selections,
etc.) to better address the needs of the Eng
lish learners in my class.
The following questions are for teachers in a
school with a waiver program only.
On the following statements, please place an X
in the box according to the strength of your be
lief.
Strongly
Disagree
Somewhat
Disagree
Somewhat
Agree
Strongly
Agree
28 The waiver program at my school is on a
separate track/schedule that is not compati
ble with my personal schedule.
29 I was not able to teach a waiver class be
cause of my seniority at the school.
30 My school site has a well-defined and articu
lated bilingual program (waiver) for its ELD
students.
123
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
APPENDIX B
INFORMED CONSENT
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
INFORMATION SHEET FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH
The Impact of Proposition 227 on Bilingual Teacher Beliefs and Practices
You are asked to participate in a research study conducted by Lorenza Arengo, Ph.D.
candidate, and Lawrence O. Picus, Ph.D., from the Rossier School of Education at the
University of Southern California. The results of this study will contribute to Ms.
Arengo’s dissertation. You were selected as a possible participant in this study because
you are a teacher in a school identified for this research study. Your school had a bilin
gual program prior to Proposition 227 and is within the same 5-square-mile area of two
other schools with similar student demographics. A total of 180 teachers from the three
elementary schools will be asked to participate. Your participation is voluntary.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
We are asking you to take part in this research study because we are studying the impact
of mandated educational policies on teacher beliefs and practices, particularly when
those policies contradict previously-held teachers’ beliefs, knowledge, and practices. In
this case, we are specifically looking at your beliefs about bilingual education policy
and practice.
Completion and return of the questionnaire or response to the interview questions
will constitute consent to participate in this research project.
PROCEDURES
You will be asked to answer either 27 or 30 survey questions. If you are in a school
with a bilingual (waiver) program, you will be asked to answer 30 questions. The
survey will take approximately 20 to 30 minutes to complete. It is a pencil/pen-and-
paper survey. The first part of the survey asks you questions about your employment
and educational history. The second part of the survey asks you to read a statement and
decide whether you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree with that state
ment. There are no wrong answers. Two sample statements you will be asked to read
are: (1) Students’ development of literacy in their first language will facilitate the de
velopment of reading and writing in English ,and (2) I allow English language learners
the opportunity to use their primary language in classroom writing lessons.
There are three opportunities to return your completed survey: (1) you may fill the
survey out immediately and place in the investigator’s box in the staff meeting room to
be picked up 30 minutes following the study presentation; (2) you may return the com
pleted survey to the investigator’s designated box (location to be described at meeting);
125
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
or (3) mail the completed survey to the investigator in a provided self-addressed
stamped envelope.
You will not be video- or audio-taped.
POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
A potential risk is the breach of confidentiality. We have protected your confidentiality
by not asking you your name, your gender, or where you live. The only other foresee
able inconvenience will be the time that it will take you to complete the survey.
POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO SUBJECTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY
You will not benefit directly from participating in this study.
Your participation, however, will provide us with the opportunity to better understand
the teacher’s perspective in the study of policy implementation and teacher beliefs. Re
search has shown that teachers have an instrumental role in policymaking because they
interpret, decide, and practice the curriculum according to their beliefs. Your responses
to this study will enable us to reveal to policymakers, researchers, and educators what
teachers believe about and do with the policies that are handed to them. Your responses
in this study are particularly important because they will illustrate how you as a teacher
interpret and reconcile policies if/when they contradict previously-held beliefs.
PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
You will not receive any monetary compensation.
CONFIDENTIALITY
Any information that is obtained in connection with this study and that can be identified
with you will remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your permission or as
required by law. The school principal will not know who has or has not participated in
this research study. Access to any information collected from you will be restricted to
the two investigators, Lorenza Arengo and Lawrence O. Picus, unless you indicate
otherwise in writing. All data which we collect as part of this study will remain in a
secure file in the home of the co-principal investigator, Lorenza Arengo, and will be
kept indefinitely. When the results of the research are published or discussed in confer
ences, no information will be included that would reveal your identity.
PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL
You can choose whether to be in this study or not. If you volunteer to be in this study,
you may withdraw at any time without consequences of any kind. You may also refuse
to answer any questions you don’t want to answer and still remain in the study. The
investigator may withdraw you from this research if circumstances arise which warrant
doing so.
126
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
IDENTIFICATION OF INVESTIGATORS
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact
Lorenza Arengo, Ph.D. candidate, Co-Principal investigator, xxx-xxx-xxxx; Lawrence
O. Picus, Ph.D., Principal Investigator, faculty sponsor, Rossier School of Education,
WPH 904C, USC, Los Angeles, CA 90089,213-740-2175.
RIGHTS OF RESEARCH SUBJECTS
You may withdraw your consent at any time and discontinue participation without pen
alty. You are not waiving any legal claims, rights, or remedies because of your partici
pation in this research study. If you have questions regarding your rights as a research
subject, contact the University Park IRB, Office of the Vice Provost for Research, Grace
Ford Salvatori Building, Room 306, Los Angeles, CA 90089-1695, (213) 821-5272.
127
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Impact of the policy context on the evolution of DELTA (Design for Excellence: Linking Teaching and Achievement)

PDF

How classroom teachers react to and implement California's Beginning Teacher Support and Assessment educational reform policy

PDF

Cost -effectiveness analysis of two multiple-subject (crosscultural, language, and academic development) internship credential programs in California

PDF

Induction practices in four public school districts in northwest Washington State: Perceptions of new teachers, mentors, and principals

PDF

Instructional actions of exemplary grades 2 and 5 teachers who mediate strategic reading behavior in guided reading with low -achieving students

PDF

Does first-year treatment intensity predict outcome in young autistic children receiving Lovaas' ABA intervention?

PDF

Current teachers' compensation systems and their perceived effects on motivation

PDF

Coordinating the reading and writing competencies during the early literacy development of 5--6 year -old Spanish -English emergent bilinguals

PDF

Graduate student enrollment management: Toward a model that predicts student enrollment. A case study at Phillips Graduate Institute

PDF

A cross -cultural comparison of achievement motivation among college students in South Africa

PDF

A history of California community college governance and trustees' perceptions of the faculty role in district and college (shared) governance

PDF

A case study of social promotion and retention policies, strategies, and programs

PDF

Factors shaping the career choices of Korean American teachers and teacher candidates

PDF

Connecting districts and schools to improve teaching and learning: A case study of district efforts in the Los Coyotes High School District

PDF

Knowledge, attitudes and beliefs of Christian African university students

PDF

HIV/AIDS knowledge among Hispanics living in Nogales, Arizona

PDF

"Self" in self -worth protection: The relationship of possible selves to achievement motives and self -worth protective strategies

PDF

Implementation and levels of use of technology plans in a Southern California K--12 district and its middle school

PDF

Elementary administrators and teachers' perceptions of the teacher evaluation process in California's public schools

PDF

A comparative descriptive study of the perceptions of beginning bilingual teachers during their first year of teaching

Asset Metadata

Creator Arengo-Yarnes, Lorenza (author)

Core Title Impact of Proposition 227 on bilingual teachers' beliefs and practices

School Graduate School

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Education

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag education, bilingual and multicultural,education, educational psychology,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Picus, Lawrence O. (committee chair), Baca, Reynaldo (committee member), Lopez-Lee, David (committee member), Rueda, Robert (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c16-393418

Unique identifier UC11336549

Identifier 3196771.pdf (filename),usctheses-c16-393418 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 3196771.pdf

Dmrecord 393418

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Arengo-Yarnes, Lorenza

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA