SB 1174, as amended, Lara. English language education.
(1) Existing law, as added by Proposition 227, a measure approved by the voters at the June 2, 1998, statewide primary election, requires, among other things, that all children in California public schools be taught English by being taught in English. Proposition 227 specifies that English learner pupils, as defined, be educated through sheltered English immersion, as defined, during a temporary transition period not normally intended to exceed one year. Proposition 227 further provides that its requirements relating to sheltered English immersion instruction may be waived with the prior written consent of a pupil’s parent or legal guardian, as specified. Proposition 227 also encourages family members and others to provide personal English language tutoring to English learner pupils.
begin insertThis bill would amend and repeal various provisions of Proposition 227. The bill would, among other things, delete the sheltered English immersion requirement and waiver provisions, and would instead authorize school districts and county offices of education to determine the best language instruction methods and language acquisition programs to implement by consulting experts in the field, parents, and engaging local communities. The bill would authorize parents to choose the education model that best suits their child, as provided.
end insertProposition
end deletebegin insert(2)end insertbegin insert end insertbegin insertPropositionend insert 227 also specifies that a pupil’s parent or legal guardian has standing to sue for enforcement of its provisions and, if successful, to receive normal and customary attorney’s fees and actual damages, but not punitive or consequential damages. Proposition 227 further provides that school board members, other elected officials, and public school teachers or administrators who wilfully and repeatedly refuse to implement its provisions may be held personally liable for fees and actual damages by a pupil’s parent or legal guardian.
This bill wouldbegin delete repeal Proposition 227.end deletebegin insert delete that provision.end insert
(3) Proposition 227 provides that its provisions may be amended by a statute to further its purpose passed by a 2⁄3 vote of each house of the Legislature and signed by the Governor.
end insertbegin insertThis bill would delete the requirement that the amendment further the purpose of Proposition 227, and would revise the vote threshold to a majority vote in each house of the Legislature.
end insert(2)
end deletebegin insert(4)end insert The California Constitution authorizes the Legislature to amend or repeal an initiative statute by another statute that becomes effective when approved by the electors.
This bill would provide that it would become effective only upon approval of the voters, and would require the Secretary of State to submit this measure to the voters for approval atbegin delete aend deletebegin insert the November 2016end insert statewidebegin insert generalend insert election.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: no.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 300) of
2Part 1 of Division 1 of Title 1 of the Education Code is repealed.
begin insertThis measure shall be known, and may be cited,
4as the “California Ed.G.E. Initiative” or “California Education
5for a Global Economy Initiative.”end insert
begin insertSection 300 of the end insertbegin insertEducation Codeend insertbegin insert is amended to read:end insert
The People of California find and declare as follows:
P3 1(a) Whereas, The English language is the national public
2language of the United States of America and of the State of
3California, is spoken by the vast majority of California residents,
4and is also the leading world language forbegin delete science, technology, begin insert science and
5and international business, thereby being theend delete
6technology, thereby being an importantend insert language of economic
7opportunity; and
8(b) Whereas,begin delete Immigrantend deletebegin insert
Allend insert parents are eager to have their
9childrenbegin delete acquire a good knowledge of English,end deletebegin insert master the English
10language and obtain a high-quality education,end insert therebybegin delete allowingend delete
11begin insert preparingend insert them to fully participate in the American Dream of
12economic and social advancement; and
13(c) Whereas, California is home to thousands of multinational
14businesses that must communicate daily with associates around
15the world; and
16(d) Whereas, California employers across all sectors, both
17public and private, are actively recruiting multilingual employees
18because of their ability to forge stronger bonds with customers,
19clients, and business partners; and
20(e) Whereas, Multilingual skills are necessary for our nation’s
21national security and essential to conducting diplomacy and
22international programs; and
23(f) Whereas, California has a natural reserve of the world’s
24largest languages, including English, Mandarin, and Spanish,
25which are critical to the state’s economic trade and diplomatic
26efforts; and
27(g) Whereas, California has the unique opportunity to provide
28all parents with the choice to have their children educated to high
29standards in English and one or more additional languages,
30including Native American languages, thereby increasing pupils’
31access to higher education and careers of their choice; and
32(c)
end delete
33begin insert(h)end insert Whereas, The government and the public schools of
34California have a moral obligation and a constitutional duty to
35provide all of California’s children, regardless of their ethnicity
36or nationalbegin delete origins,end deletebegin insert
origin,end insert with the skills necessary to become
37productive members of our society, and of these skills, literacy in
38the English language is among the most important; and
39(d) Whereas, The public schools of California currently do a
40poor job of educating immigrant children, wasting financial
P4 1resources on costly experimental language programs whose failure
2over the past two decades is demonstrated by the current high
3drop-out rates and low English literacy levels of many immigrant
4children; and
5(e) Whereas, Young immigrant children can easily acquire full
6fluency in a new language, such as English, if they are heavily
7exposed to that language in the classroom at an early age.
8(i) Whereas, The California Legislature approved, and the
9Governor signed, a historic school funding reform that restructured
10public education funding in a more equitable manner, directs
11increased resources to improve English language acquisition, and
12provides local control to schools districts and schools on how to
13spend funding through the local control funding formula and local
14control and accountability plans; and
15(j) Whereas, Parents now have the opportunity to participate
16in building innovative new programs that will offer pupils greater
17opportunities to acquire 21st century skills, such as
18multilingualism; and
19(k) Whereas, All parents will have a choice and voice to demand
20the best education for their children, including access to language
21programs that will improve their children’s preparation for college
22and
careers, and allow them to be more competitive in a global
23economy; and
24(l) Whereas, Existing law places constraints on teachers and
25schools, which have deprived many pupils of opportunities to
26develop multilingual skills; and
27(m) Whereas, A large body of research has demonstrated the
28cognitive benefits and long-term academic benefits in language
29and in dual- and tri-immersion language programs.
30(f)
end delete
31begin insert(n)end insert Therefore, It
is resolved that:begin insert
amendments to, and the repeal
32of, certain provisions of this chapter will advance the goal of voters
33to ensure thatend insert all children in California public schools shallbegin delete be begin insert receive the
34taught English as rapidly and effectively as possible.end delete
35highest quality education, including English language instruction
36and access to high-quality, innovative, and research-based
37language programs that provide the California Ed.G.E. (California
38Education for a Global Economy).end insert
begin insertSection 305 of the end insertbegin insertEducation Codeend insertbegin insert is amended to read:end insert
Subject to the exceptions provided in Article 3
2(commencing with Section 310), all children in California public
3schools shall be taught English by being taught in English. In
4particular, this shall require that all children be placed in English
5language classrooms. Children who are English learners shall be
6educated through sheltered English immersion during a temporary
7transition period not normally intended to exceed one year. Local
8schools shall be permitted to place in the same classroom English
9learners of different ages but whose degree of English proficiency
10is similar.
begin insertSchool districts and county offices of education may
12determine the best language instruction methods and language
13acquisition programs to implement by consulting experts in the
14field, parents, and engaging local communities. end insertLocal schools
15shall be encouraged to mix together in the same classroom English
16learners from different native-language groups but with the same
17degree of Englishbegin delete fluency. Once English learners have acquired a
18good working knowledge of English, they shall be transferred to
19English language mainstream classrooms. As much as possible,end delete
20begin insert
fluency for targeted language instruction. Schools are also
21encouraged to provide opportunities for monolingual English
22speaking pupils to be instructed in another language to a degree
23sufficient to produce proficiency in that language. The non-English
24language should be at the discretion of the parents, community,
25and school, depending upon the linguistic resources of the school
26community. In accordance with the local control funding formula
27calculated pursuant to Section 42238.02, as implemented by
28Section 42238.03,end insert current supplemental funding forbegin delete English begin insert low-income pupils, English learners, and foster childrenend insert
29learnersend delete
30 shall be maintained, subject to possible modification under Article
318 (commencing with Section 335) below.
begin insertSection 306 of the end insertbegin insertEducation Codeend insertbegin insert is amended to read:end insert
The definitions of the terms used in this article and in
34Articlebegin delete 3end deletebegin insert 1end insert (commencing with Sectionbegin delete 310)end deletebegin insert 300)end insert are as follows:
35(a) “English learner” means a child who does not speak English
36or whose native language is not English and who is not currently
37able to perform ordinary classroom work in English, also known
38as a Limited English Proficiency or LEP child.
39(b) “English language classroom” means a classroom in which
40the language of instruction used by the teaching personnel is
P6 1overwhelmingly the English language, and in which such teaching
2personnel possess a good knowledge of the English language.
3(c) “English language mainstream classroom” means a
4classroom in which the pupils either are native English language
5speakers or already have acquired reasonable fluency in
English.
6(d) “Sheltered English immersion” or “structured English
7immersion” means an English language acquisition process for
8young children in which nearly all classroom instruction is in
9English but with the curriculum and presentation designed for
10children who are learning the language.
11(e) “Bilingual education/native language instruction” means a
12language acquisition process for pupils in which much or all
13instruction, textbooks, and teaching materials are in the child’s
14native language.
15(b) “Dual- or tri-immersion program” means a program that
16teaches a portion of the day in English and
a portion of the day
17in another language.
begin insertSection 310 of the end insertbegin insertEducation Codeend insertbegin insert is amended to read:end insert
The requirements of Section 305 may be waived with the
20prior written informed consent, to be provided annually, of the
21child’s parents or legal guardian under the circumstances specified
22below and in Section 311. Such informed consent shall require
23that said parents or legal guardian personally visit the school to
24apply for the waiver and that they there be provided a full
25description of the educational materials to be used in the different
26educational program choices and all the educational opportunities
27available to the child. Under such parental waiver conditions,
28children may be transferred to classes where they are taught English
29and other subjects through bilingual education techniques or other
30generally recognized educational methodologies permitted by law.
31Individual schools
begin insertParents may choose the education model that best suits
33their child. Schools end insertin which 20 pupils or more of a given grade
34levelbegin delete receive a waiverend deletebegin insert request a specific language programend insert shall
35be required to offer such a class; otherwise, they must allow the
36pupils to transfer to a public school in which such a class is offered.
begin insertSection 311 of the end insertbegin insertEducation Codeend insertbegin insert is repealed.end insert
The circumstances in which a parental exception waiver
39may be granted under Section 310 are as follows:
P7 1(a) Children who already know English: the child already
2possesses good English language skills, as measured by
3standardized tests of English vocabulary comprehension, reading,
4and writing, in which the child scores at or above the state average
5for his or her grade level or at or above the 5th grade average,
6whichever is lower; or
7(b) Older children: the child is age 10 years or older, and it is
8the informed belief of the school principal and educational staff
9that an alternate course of educational study would be better suited
10to the child’s rapid acquisition of basic English language skills;
11or
12(c) Children with special needs: the child already has been
13placed for a period of not less than thirty days during that school
14year in an English language classroom and it is subsequently the
15informed belief of the school principal and educational staff that
16the child has such special physical, emotional, psychological, or
17educational needs that an alternate course of educational study
18would be better suited to the child’s overall educational
19development. A written description of these special needs must
20be provided and any such decision is to be made subject to the
21examination and approval of the local school superintendent, under
22guidelines established by and subject to the review of the local
23Board of Education and ultimately the State Board of Education.
24The existence of such special needs shall not compel issuance of
25a waiver, and the parents shall be fully informed of their right to
26refuse to agree to a waiver.
begin insertSection 320 of the end insertbegin insertEducation Codeend insertbegin insert is amended to read:end insert
As detailed inbegin insert Section 5 of Article 9 of the California
29Constitution, andend insert Article 2 (commencing with Section 305) and
30Article 3 (commencing with Section 310),begin insert respectively,end insert all
31California school children have the right to be provided withbegin insert a
32free public education andend insert an English language public education.
33begin delete If a California school child has been denied the option of an English
34language instructional curriculum in public school, the child’s
35parent or legal guardian shall have legal standing to sue for
36enforcement of the provisions of this statute, and if successful shall
37be awarded normal and customary attorney’s fees and actual
38damages, but not punitive or consequential damages. Any school
39board member or other elected official or public school teacher or
40administrator who willfully and repeatedly refuses to implement
P8 1the terms of this statute by providing such an English language
2educational option at an available public school to a California
3school child may be held personally liable for fees and actual
4damages by the child’s parents or legal guardian.end delete
begin insertSection 335 of the end insertbegin insertEducation Codeend insertbegin insert is amended to read:end insert
The provisions of this act may be amended by a statute
7that becomes effective upon approval by the electorate or by a
8statutebegin delete to further the act’s purposeend delete passed by abegin delete two-thirdsend deletebegin insert majorityend insert
9 vote of each house of the Legislature and signed by the Governor.
Section 1
begin insertSections 2 to 8, inclusive,end insert of this actbegin delete repealsend deletebegin insert amend or
12repeal provisions ofend insert Proposition 227, an initiative statute that was
13approved by the voters at the June 2, 1998, statewide primary
14election, and shall become effective only when submitted to, and
15approved by, the voters. The Secretary of State shall submitbegin delete Section begin insert
Sections 1 to 8, inclusive,end insert of this act for approval by the voters
161end delete
17atbegin delete aend deletebegin insert the November 2016end insert statewidebegin insert generalend insert election in accordance
18with Section 9040 of the Elections Code.
O
98