A Guest Editorial. The Politics and Realities

of Bilingual Education

Herman Badillo

FOR too many years students who spoke lan- guages other than English-in most cases Spanish-were treated as disadvantaged, handicapped or retarded. In many instances they were punished for speaking their moth- er tongue. Elsewhere ill-conceived efforts were made to force these culturally different students into a tight mold of conformity to and uniformity in the Anglo culture. Often- times Spanish-speaking students were placed in classes for the retarded as they were un- able to cope with placement tests and other standardized educational devices conducted in English. I n other cases they were placed in remedial classes or were not permitted to pursue academic courses.

As we know, language is more than simply a way of communicating-it is a link to a whole culture and many rich heritages. Thus, by stifling a student’s self-expression in his own native tongue, you are also destroy- ing his sense of identity and self-esteem. The Spanish-speaking child, for example, is of- ten kept ignorant of the many important contributions made to this country by his forebearers and, instead, is treated to the white Madison Avenue stereotype of a Chi- cano, Boricua or other Spanish-speaking group.

Fortunately, a number of far-sighted and understanding legislators came to realize the serious damage which was being done to the

Herman Badillo is a Congressman from New York State. This address was given at the Fifth An- nual Meeting of ACTFL, in Chicago, 26 November 1971.

Spanish-speaking, Chinese-speaking, Indian- speaking student and others by poorly con- sidered policies, archaic attitudes and dis- criminatory treatment. They recognized the urgent need for comprehensive programs to strengthen the education oE bilingual chil- dren, especially those from low-income fam- ilies, and to cuitivate cultural awareness and pride. In 1967 a group of dedicated men such as Senators Ralph Yarborough and Joseph Montoya in the Senate and Congressmen Edward Roybal and James Scheuer in the House introduced various bills-commonly reierred to as the Biiingual Education Act- to provide aid to local educational agencies to establish and upgrade bilingual education programs and to provide other assistance in promoting such programs. This legislation -subsequently incorporated into the Ele- mentary and Secondary Education Act as Title V11, the Bilingual Education Program -recognized that Mexican-Americans, Puer- to Kicans, Orientals, American Indians and other foreign-language speaking children were being shortchanged and neglected by the typical American educational process.

The bilingual education programs were designed to meet the special and unique edu- cational needs of children who have limited English-speaking ability and who come from environments where the dominant language is other than English. In addition to foster- ing the development of bilingual education programs per se, Title VTI also provides for the teaching of English as a second language; the teaching of the mother tongue, such as

297

298 The Politics and Realities of Bilingual Education

Spanish, as the native language; programs intended to provide Spanish-speaking stu- dents with a basic knowledge of and pride in their culture and heritage; and to attract and retain qualified teaching personnel. Ti- tle VII clearly identifies the importance of the child’s mother tongue and its beneficial educational effects. Spanish, used as the me- dium of instruction while the children strengthen their command of English-such as with Puerto Kican youngsters in New York and with Chicano students in the Southwest-helps to prevent retardation in school performance. In such a bilingual en- vironment the student could participate profitably in the school’s curricula. In ad- dition, the bilingual/bicultural atmosphere helps the Spanish-speaking student overcome serious psychological problems, such as the inability to speak English preventing his ac- ceptance by his peer group. Naturally, the benefits derived from such programs were not intended to be limited to the school but were also designed to assist the Spanish- speaking student in his social and commu. nity contacts as well.

Unfortunately, the lofty goals envisioned by the sponsors of this long-overdue legisla- tion could not-and still cannot-be fully realized because of the lack of sufficient funds to effect the programs. Although $30 million was authorized for fiscal year 1969, only $7.5 million was actually appropriated. This was enough money to adequately fund pro- grams for less than one percent of the ap- proximately 3,000,000 children who were estimated to need special bilingual educa- tion.

The story in subsequent years has been just as disheartening. The Congress author- ized $40 miIIion for Title VII for FY 1970 but only appropriated $25 million. $SO mil- lion was authorized for FY 1971 but, again, $25 million was actually appropriated. The authorized figure for fiscal year 1972 was set at $100 million. However, when the Con- gress considered the Elementary and Second- ary Education Act this summer, efforts were made to gut Title VII. $25 million was originally proposed, in the House, as the

actual appropriation. This figure was totally inadequate and would not provide bilingual education for more than 3 percent of the Spanish-speaking children in this country who needed it. This only included Puerto Ricans, Mexican-Americans, Cubans and other Spanish-speaking groups and the figure becomes significantly lower when you con. sider the other language groups which are supposed to benefit from the bilingual edu- cation programs.

Even though the Senate had the foresight to raise the figure to a much higher level, the compromise reached in the House-Senate conference only provided an additional $10 million. Thus, the “munificent” sum of $35 million was approved for FY 1972.

By failing to approve more significant in- creases in Title VII funds the Congress has clearly failed to exert its authority in en- couraging and expanding bilingual educa- tion. If the situation were not so tragic 1 would be amused by the sight of many of my colleagues who point with pride to their “support” for the bilingual education au- thorization yet fail to mention that when the appropriation is considered-when the hard financial issues are before them-they consistently permit grossly inadequate sums to be passed. I am afraid this situation re- flects a basic failure of the Congress to really understand what bilingual education is all about, that it indicates a basic misconception on the part of many Senators and Repre. sentatives that bilingual education is more than simply learning another language. It is an amazing contradiction that millions of dollars are spent to encourage students to learn a second language-with Spanish be- ing the most popular choice-and, at the same time, some educators persist in pursu- ing shopworn attitudes and policies and the Congress continues to consistently under- fund bilingual education.

It is obvious, then, that the battle for bi- lingual education has not been won and that there is no political support for these pro- grams. Although funds for bilingual pro- grams may be authorized year after year, the essential funds to carry out these pro-

HERMAN BADILLO 299

grams are not appropriated and there is a clear lack of broadbased political backing for bilingual education. We must, there fore, mobilize a nationwide effort to fight the appropriation fight and to demand positive action from the Congress. These legislators must not only be contacted but must be held accountable for their past failures to sup- port the appropriation of adequate funds to implement these urgently-needed and, in many cases, long overdue bilingual pro- grams. When you return to your communi- ties you should initiate efforts to organbe groups at the local, grassroots level to lobby in support of increased appropriationb for bilingual education.

In the past there has been a close, working relationship between the House and Senate Education Committees and the education community nationwide. This productive and deep relationship has resulted in such land- mark legislative acts as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the Higher Edu- cation Act, the Library Services and Con- struction Act and so on. However, once these programs have been enacted, the education community and the Members of Congress relax and fail to provide the essential fol- low-through to make certain that the neces- sary funds are appropriated. The House and Senate appropriations committees are controlled by rural, conservative elements of both parties who are not sensitive to or aware of the urgent educational requirements of the cities and, particularly, of minority group students. As a consequence, the programs which we take great pride in passing are con- sistently underfunded and the original in- tent of the legislation is thereby thwarted. Therefore, we must not relax our guard but must continue to pursue these programs through the entire legislative process to make certain that all necessary funds are appropriated.

Howevep, the onus must not rest solely with the U.S. Congress. I believe very strong- ly that there is a clear obligation on the part of state and municipal governments to en- courage and support the development and operation of bilingual education programs.

Educational development is a joint venture and bilingual programs are no different than others.

You must understand that bilingual edu- cation does not depend on an act of Con- gress alone and that the Federal Govern- ment is not the sole governmental level which must be concerned with it. Using the Federal legislation and programs as models, you should initiate efforts to have your state legislatures enact measures to provide for bilingual programs and the appropriation of state and local funds to effect such pro- grams.

Therefore, not only should you demand an accounting from your U.S. Representa- tives and Senators on their support-or lack of it-for bilingual education but you should also call upon your state legislators and your local boards of education for their active support and participation. I am cer- tain, for example, that the New York State Education Department and the New York City Board of Education could both take steps to provide sizable financial underwrit- ing for bilingual education. I am equally confident that similar steps can be taken throughout the country. State and munici- pal governments have just as much of an obligation as the Federal Government to make an investment in bilingual education activities and I believe that a meaningful commitment must be secured from all levels of government that prompt and positive ac- tion will be taken in this regard.

Bilingual education programs have had a particular impact upon the Spanish-speak- ing community of New York City, even though the number of projects is severely limited and inadequate. Overcoming a 1917 law which prohibits teaching in any other language except English, the New York City Board of Education took steps to cope with the problems of some 250,000 Spanish-speak- ing children-about half of whom speak no English or only halting English when they enter school-now enrolled in public schools. In 1968 a bilingual education proj- ect was initiated at Public School 25 in the Bronx. Here, children who are fluent in En-

300 The Politics and Realities of Bilingual Educatioz

glish receive part of their instruction in Spanish while other students, who are fluent in Spanish, are taught mostly in Spanish but with increasing emphasis on English. Some 85 percent of the students and about 60 percent of the faculty are Puerto Rican. A year later another project was initiated at Community School 211, also in the Bronx. In both cases instruction is given in Spanish at first, with the second language gradually increased until the sixth grade, at which time, hopefully, the students will be equally fluent in both languages.

This year the Office of Education ap- proved the project plans of six New York City Districts. While these programs will benefit an estimated 7,300 students, there is a considerable need for expanded efforts to reach the many other Spanish-speaking students who, because of their severe lan- guage handicaps, are not receiving a mean- ingful education. The dropout rate for Puer- to Rican youngsters is astronomical-an estimated 87 percent of Puerto Ricans over 25 years of age in New York City have not completed high school. The inability of these young men and women to properly function in the English language clearly pre- vents them from fully participating in the political, economic, and social life of this country. As a consequence they are being denied access to further education and to meaningful employment. In addition, they are being deprived of their cultural identity and an appreciation of their heritage.

We must not lose sight of the fact that bilingual education is not simply the teach- ing of English as a second language. Bilin- gual education also implies that programs are to be designed to impart to the students a knowledge and appreciation of the history and culture associated with their languages. Too frequently educational programs fail to fully capitalize on the richness of cultural diversity’ and successful programs should provide for an interaction between not only two languages but also two cultures.

Because of the critical importance which I attach to the cultural aspects of the pro- grams, I propose that their structure be

changed to focus attention on bicultural education with bilingual education being one component. You must realize that most Spanish-speaking children in the United States are poor and, as a consequence, they do not see the totality of society and their heritage. They are unable to identify with those Puerto Rican, Chicano, Cuban and other Spanish-speaking persons who have attained certain levels of success of promi- nence in our society. The Chicano in the bar- rios of East Los Angeles or the Puerto Ri- can youngster in the steaming tenements of the South Bronx has no way of associating himself with the contributions made by pro- fessional persons, judges, civic and political leaders. Clearly the emphasis of these pro- grams must focus on the culture of a people with language serving as a vital component.

Bilingual / bicultural education not only preserves and enriches the cultural and hu- man resources of a people. It also imparts an essential sense of identity and cultural pride in the student-whether he is a Chicano in New Mexico, a Puerto Rican in New York or a Lakota Sioux in South Dakota. Fre- quently the ethnocentric nature of our edu- cational system-the poorly-conceived effort to acculturize students from diverse back- grounds-has resulted in convincing cer- tain groups that they have no heritage and has perpetuated the status of second-class citizenship for many Americans. We must never forget that the early settlers of this country were greeted by peoples who spoke Spanish and various Indian dialects. The language is a bond to the past and the cul- tural background of the student must not be ignored or suppressed.

Not only will bicultural programs enable a Spanish-speaking student to identify with his forefathers and his basic culture but they will also provide an important step toward breaking down the often artificial and harm- ful walls of cultural isolation. As former U.S. Education Commissioner Harold Howe noted several years ago: “If we could teach all our children-black, white, brown, yel- low and all the American shades in between -that diversity is not to be feared or sus-

HERMAN BADILLO 30 1

pected, but enjoyed and valued, we would be well on the way toward achieving the equality we have always proclaimed as a na- tional characteristic.” Or, as Professor Fran- cesco Cordasco of Montclair State College has aptly noted: “ . . . the school which serves the child of an open society ought to build on the cultural strengths he brings to the classroom.” Thus, bilingual / bicultural edu- cation programs have as an integral part of their overall goals the objective of cultivat- ing in the student an ancestral pride and giving him the sense of personal identifica- tion so essential to social maturation.

As some of you may know, the Office of Education intends to reorganize responsibil- ity for bilingual education. It is proposed that the bilingual education unit will be transferred from OE’s Bureau of Elemeii- tary and Secondary Education to the Office of the Deputy Commissioner for Develop- ment. The object of this consolidation is ostensibly to improve the management of bilingual programs.

Although I favor the consolidation of edu- cation programs designed to meet the needs of lower incomes groups, I am deeply con- cerned that this intended reorganization will work to the detriment of bilingual programs by siphoning off funds for other programs and by diverting the importance and atten- tion which must be given to bilinguallbi- cultural education. Reorganization or con- solidation is no panacea for improved man- agement or performance. The basic integrity of bilingual education must not be impaired and a commitment must be made by the Office of Education that the level of funding will not be lowered or otherwise adversely affected. As a Member of the House Educa-

tion and Labor Committee I intend to con- tinue to carefully monitor this situation and to insure that there is no downgrading of bilingual education.

Bilingual education represents a revolu- tionary change in school attitudes and pro- grams. It must be viewed as an asset, not a liability and should not be regarded as some type of remedial program. Meaningful, ef- fective bilingual/ bicultural education erases the unnecessary barriers of language and treats cultural diversity as a highly valued factor rather than as something which must be dismissed. It is clear that the amount of Federal funds currently available under Ti- tle VII do not meet the demands to provide bilingual education programs to all those legally entitled to such aid-even i f the au- thorized funds were fully appropriated. Not only should present Title VII funds be in- tegrated with other Federal, state and local bilingual education programs, but a new commitment must be secured from our legis- lators-Federal and state-and our local boards of education that bilingual/ bicul- tural education will be given priority. Sec- ond-class status must no longer be imposed on those persons who do not speak English and we must not prevent such persons from sharing in the rights and privileges of citi- zenship. We exist in a multilingual and mul- ticultural environment and all segments of the community must be afforded full respect and equal participation. An important be- ginning was made four years ago but much more must be done. Support for increased bilingual education must be secured from all sectors of our society-from legislators, educators, community leaders-and I urge you to join with me in working toward this goal.