case study, the aftermath of a community struggle for
TRANSCRIPT
University of Massachusetts Amherst University of Massachusetts Amherst
ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst
Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014
1-1-1988
Case study, the aftermath of a community struggle for bilingual Case study, the aftermath of a community struggle for bilingual
education in a selected school district in Massachusetts. education in a selected school district in Massachusetts.
Juan González-Gómez University of Massachusetts Amherst
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1
Recommended Citation Recommended Citation González-Gómez, Juan, "Case study, the aftermath of a community struggle for bilingual education in a selected school district in Massachusetts." (1988). Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014. 4351. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1/4351
This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014 by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected].
CASE STUDY: THE AFTERMATH OF A COIMJNITY STRUGGLE FOR BILINGUAL EDUCATION IN A SELECTED
SCHOOL DISTRICT IN MASSACHUSETTS
A Dissertation Presented
by
Juan Gonzalez-Gomez
Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
February 1988
EDUCATION
CASE STUDYTHE AFTERMATH OF A COMMUNITY STRUGGLE FOR BILINGUAL EDUCATION IN A SELECTED
SCHOOL DISTRICT IN MASSACHUSETTS
A Dissertation Presented
by
Juan Gonzalez-Gomez
Approved as to style and content by:
Gloria de Guevara, Chairperson
Luis Fuentes, Member
C^Zamora, Member
■hf. e, OJL rge 4frch, Acting Georg<
School of Education Dean
Juan Gonzalez-Gomez
All Rights R.eserved 1988
111
DEDICATION
En memoria de mi virtuosa madre
Tomasa, quien sabiamente guib^ mis
primeros pasos en el proceso
infinite de la educacion.
IV
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
In the course of developing this study, I discovered
that it involved not only a vast amount of my time and con¬
centration but also that of other people who were willing
to help me. Among the persons to be acknowledged are my
professors whose cooperation made this study possible.
Each of my committee members displayed enthusiasm for me
and my endeavors in different ways and at different times.
My sincere thanks are expressed to Dr. Gloria de Guevara
» whose kindness, support, and integrity provided
true leadership, gratitute is extended for being my chair¬
person and for her direction in conceptualizing and com¬
pleting the study. Thanks are due also to my advisor
Dr. Luis Fuentes, who continuously provided thoughtful and
constructive criticism on all aspects of the research. A
special thanks to Dr. Juan Zamora for his concern over ray
work and suggestions which proved to be extremely helpful.
Thanks are due also to my friend and graduate student
Manuela Pacheco for her basic ideas to improve the quality
of my study. I am also indebted to Dr. Juan Caban and
Dr. Sonia Nieto who read various parts of the manuscript
for their valuable comments and contributions.
V
My thanks to the Hispanic parents and students, and
to the school administrators of the Worcester Public School
System whose cooperation made this study possible, to all
of the people interviewed who so generously gave of their
time. They had to set aside some of their responsibilities
and pressures for my own demanding questions.
Other persons to whom I am grateful for their help are:
Luis G. P^rez, Idalia Vazquez, Sonia Fernandez, Jose L.
Perez, Re3nialdo Rodriguez, Eleazer Perez and to my typists
Shirley Kelley and Grace Kwaramba.
Finally, I wish to thank my wife Elga and my daughters
Evelyn, Raquel and Elena for their constant support and
cooperation in completing this useful task.
VI
ABSTRACT
Case Study: The Aftermath of a Community Struggle for Bilingual Education in a Selected
School District in Massachusetts
February 1988
Juan Gonzalez-Gomez, B.A., Antillian College, Mayaguez, Puerto Rico
M.A., Herbert H. Lehman College, Bronx, N.Y.
Ed.D., University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Directed by: Professor Gloria M. Figueroa de Guevara
The Transitional Bilingual Education Program in
Worcester, Massachusetts, operates under the conditions
of a 1983 consent decree that stemmed from a suit filed
in May 24, 1978 by Latin Association for Progress and
Action (A.L.P.A.)» the Hispanic Parents Advisory Com¬
mittee and eight school children who represented 2,000
Hispanic students in Worcester and all their parents. The
suit charged that Hispanic students did not have equal
educational opportunities.
This study explores the perceptions and opinions of
individuals who were directly involved in the events
prompting lav/ suit A.L.P.A. V. DURKIN, United States
District Court, Civil Action No. 78-1150 K.
Vll
The purpose of this study is to trace the historical
development of the bilingual education program in Worcester
from 1970 to 1985, and to make an evaluation as to whether
the City of Worcester has complied with the demands of the
Hispanic parents (and other organizations in the City of
Worcester). These demands can be found in the federal
court order directives to improve the Bilingual Education
Program and the Worcester Public Schools Lau Plan.
Tne research analysis in this study indicates that the
school system is in compliance with most of the solutions
recommended in the proposed agreement between the community
and the school system designed to improve bilingual educa¬
tion in Worcester. The research further shows that the 1983
Consent Decree (A.L.P.A. V. DURKIN, court case) and the
Worcester Voluntary Lau Plan that is part of the agreements
negotiated by the Hispanic parents, are probably the most
effective change catalysts for promoting equal education
opportunities for the Hispanic language minority children
and other ethnic groups of the City of Worcester.
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COPYRIGHT.iii
DEDICATION.iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. v
ABSTRACT.vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS.ix
LIST OF TABLES.
LIST OF QUESTIONNAIRES.
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION.- 1
Background of the Problem. 1 Statement of the Problem . 8 Organization of the Study.10
II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
III.
IV.
A Brief Historical Development of “ Bilingual Education Programs
in the United States. Reasons for Having Bilingual Education . . Bilingual Education in Massachusetts . . . Parent Participation in Education. Parental Involvement and Bilingual
Education . Footnotes.'.
METHODOLOGY.
Site of the Study. Target Population of the Study . Instrumentation of the Study .
FINDINGS OF THE STUDY.
Educational Change: An Historical Analysis of Parental Involvement in the Bilingual Education Program in Worcester, Massachusetts 1972-1983 .
11 17 23 29
31 34
35
35 35 36
51
51
ix
The 1979 Bilingual Education Program Audit 60
indings on I.D. Placement and Transfer . . 68
Undings Regarding a Lack of
Instructional Materials. 72
1979 The Bilingual Education Program Audit Findings. 73
Findings in the Area of Curriculum.74
Some Problems with the Greek Bilingual Program.
Greek Parental Involvement.75
Findings Regarding the Hispanic Parental Involvement. 73
Information about the English as a Second Language Program.79
Educational Change: The Aftermath of a
Community Struggle for Bilingual Education..
The Major Achievements for the Students and Their Parents.84
Parents' Responses to the Questionnaires. . 98 Materials and Schools Facilities.99
Learning English and the English as a
Second Language (ESL) Teacher.100
Learning Spanish and the Bilingual Teacher.101
Bilingual Counselor and the Bilingual
Coordinator Services . 102
School Location and the School Bus
Service.103
Child's Cultural Activities . 104
Visiting the Child's School and Talking
with the Staff Members in Spanish. . . . 106
Receiving Notices Written in English and
Spanish.107
Receiving Notices from School to
Participate in Workshops, Programs
for Adults, and Parent Advisory Council
(PAC) Meetings.107
Receiving the Home Language Survey Form . . 109
Parent Advisory Council (PAC) Meetings
and Parental Involvement . 109
Understanding the Notices Written Only
in English.Ill
Invitations to Attend the Meetings of the
Hispanic Advisory Council (HPAC) and
the School Committee of Worcester. . . . 112
Principals' Responses to the Questionnaires 113
X
V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Conclusions. 227
Recommendations.! ' 132
Recommendations for Further Research. . ! ! 133
APPENDIX. 235
BIBLIOGRAPHY .
XI
LIST OF TABLES
1. Participants .
2. Objectives .
3. Curriculum and Materials .
4. Testing Procedures . . . .
5. Bilingual Program Staff. .
6. Community Involvement. .
115
118
119
124
125
126
Xll
LIST OF QUESTIONNAIRES
1. Questionnaire for Principals . 42
2. Questionnaire for Parents (English Version). ... 48
3. Questionnaire for Parents (Spanish Version). . . . 137
Xlll
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Problem
Like the other ethnic groups which came to Worcester,
tiassachusetts, the Hispanic community had to face diffi¬
culties and struggles to achieve better education, employ¬
ment, housing, health and other benefits that were denied.
Progress in such sensitive yet essential areas is not
achieved overnight.
The number of Hispanic residents of VJorcester, Massachu¬
setts, a city of almost 200,000 about 40 miles west of
Boston, has expanded rapidly during the past 15 years from
approximately 1,674 Hispanic residents in 1970 (Federal
census) to over 10,000 in 1935. Based on the number of
Hispanics in Worcester’s schools it is estimated that His-
panics will make up 15 to 20 percent of the city's public
schools population during the 90’s. Demographic data show
that currently there is a smattering of Mexicans, Dominicans,
Cubans and others from various Central American nations, but
85 percent of Hispanic residents in Worcester are Puerto
Ricans.
In November of 1970, the city of Worcester began offer¬
ing services in Spanish and Greek to a small number (90) of
limited English speaking students with four teachers. A
1
2
product of the civil rights movement in the 1960's,
Worcester's Transitional Bilingual Education program has
grown from those 90 students in 1970 to 748 and 38 teachers
in 1985. Of the 748 students, 655 were Hispanics (the
majority from Puerto Rico), 55 Vietnameses and 38 Greeks.
The Latino enrollment has grown continuously. From a total
of 19,603 students in 1986, the Latino enrollment was 2,478
(12.6%).
In 1972 the Puerto Rican community took the initiative
to organize an advisory council of Spanish-speaking parents
of school children in Worcester because they were very con¬
cerned with various educational problems and inequalities
in the Worcester Public Schools System. One of the most
significant concerns of the Puerto Rican parents was that
many Spanish-speaking students dropped out of school by the
eighth grade.
In June 1972, the parents met in a closed session with
School Superintendent John J. Connor, Jr. for more than an
hour. The discussion centered on the following requests
submitted by the parents:
More Latino, Puerto Rican and Black teachers.
More Latin American history and other ethnic studies.
Stronger bridges between the community and the School,
such as a Spanish parent's council.
3
Spanish-speaking counselors, coordinators, and
counseling aides.
More flexibility to allow students to transfer to
schools where they feel they could learn best.
Begin an expanded bilingual program immediately.
A spokesman for the parents said he didn't know of
any bilingual program at the Junior High School lev¬
el.
Have a "sympathetic and knowledgeable bilingual
person" at the central administration office to get
and keep records and transcripts.
Recruit a bilingual assistant principal, "or other
official of some status and authority."
Explain to all schools that students transferring
into the system should not be dropped below their
previous grade because of "Language problems alone"
and, in any case (putting a student in a lower grade)
should be considered a serious decision possibly
disastrous to the child's future; special tutoring
must be available.
Seek a way for the community and the school to ex¬
change information on persons being considered for
various bilingual positions (Parents Ask Schools for
Bilingual Plans, The Evening Gazette, Saturday,
June 10, 1972, front page).
4
After the meeting, School Superintendent John J.
Connor agreed to meet with the parents to respond to the
lists of concerns.
An assembly for all Spanish-speaking students and
parents was convened at the North High School. The assem¬
bly was a forum for students to discuss their experiences
and prepare specific recommendations. The assembly was
coordinated by the Latin Association for Progress and
Action (A.L.P.A.). Joseph A. Keefe, assistant superinten¬
dent for education arranged bus transportation from other
secondary schools. He also attended as observer for the
school department. About 100 Spanish-speaking students
from the city's junior high schools discussed various
educational problems. At the meeting an A.L.P.A. advisor
read a list of suggestions for improving the quality of
education for Spanish-speaking students in the Worcester
Public Schools. The list also included requests for a
Spanish-speaking advisory council, more Latin American
studies. Black and Puerto Rican teachers, bilingual coun¬
selors, coordinators, counseling aides, bilingual persons
at the central administration, a bilingual teaching program
for the junior high school and other bilingual positions.
In the historical meetings of June 1972, the Hispanic
parents convinced the school administrators of the Worcester
Public Schools, of the need to organize the Parents Advisory
5
Council. In October 1972, with the coordination of A.L.P.A..
the parents organized the first Spanish-speaking Parents
Advisory Council (PAC). The Council was a fairly organized
group of parents. They won many little battles during the
years 1972-1975 regarding more money for books and materials
or more money for teachers. In spite of winning minor bat¬
tles they still felt that there were inequalities with the
bilingual program as run by the schools.
In May 1976, they called an emergency meeting with School
Department officials to protest what they called "inequal¬
ities in the Worcester Public Schools." The council presi¬
dent charged that the substandard education provided to the
population would result in many students not being
prepared to move into higher grades. The Spanish Parents
Advisory Council also charged that the Spanish-speaking
population was the hardest hit in budget cuts to education
during that year (1976). The meeting proved to be very im¬
portant in the history of the Transitional Bilingual Educa¬
tion Program in Worcester.
Hie Parents Advisory Council tried from May, 1976 to
the summer of 1977 to correct the problems of the children
participating in the Worcester Public Schools transitional
bilingual education program. They claimed that the manner
in which it was run was ineffective, and that it did not
work. The first complaint was related to a comparison of
6
classroom size and aesthetics. The classrooms were over¬
crowded and were not as nice as the classroom where the non-
students were. There were schools where two or
three classes had to share one classroom. They had to sit
physically in the same space and they could hear what was
going on with the other group. There were other space-rela¬
ted issues; some of the English as a Second Language classes
were being held in hallways or under a stair-well or being
held by an entrance to the building that had been closed off
because of fire codes due to double doors.
The parents were convinced that all the other classroom
assignments had both good and bad classrooms but they felt
that the bilingual students were more frequently assigned
to the worst ones.
They complained that in some schools problems existed
because the fourth, fifth and sixth grades were combined and
the teacher did not have a separate curriculum. The teacher
presented materials somewhere in the middle. Students at
the upper grades would not receive the appropriate materials.
Those students at the lower grades also suffered. Parents
presented the fact that there was a lack of a systematic
curriculum which should have been used throughout the system.
Parents could not understand how multigrade levels could be
taught, since each grade level is supposed to be more advan¬
ced than the one preceeding. For example, fourth graders
7
should have been learning about frogs in their Science
classes and the fifth graders should have been learning
about molecules in their Science classes, according to the
curriculum. If the teacher is only lecturing one Science
class to all three levels, then the students are missing
out on the curriculum.
Another major problem was that there was no systematic
way of identifying who really needed a bilingual program.
There was no systematic way of testing students. If a
student was enrolled in a school where the principal was
not in favor of the bilingual program, the principal would
try to convince the parents to enroll the student in a reg¬
ular program. Even when they tested the students, there
was no systematic way of making sure that when they scored
under a certain level they were referred to a bilingual
program. The school system did not have any written mate¬
rial for the parents in order to help them make a decision
for their child.
There was a major problem with the lack of systematic
curriculum materials particularly for language arts. They
had some Spanish books from different publishers. There
was not standardization or continuity. If a student
transferred between any one of the six schools there was
no guarantee that the student would be using the same kind
of reading materials.
3
More importantly there was not any systematic way of
evaluating what the Spanish textbook taught. If a bilin¬
gual student had learned from a textbook supplied by the
program, there were no guarantees that when that student
became a part of the regular program he would be able to
perform as well as the other students did. Noone had
figured out whether the curriculum content of the text¬
books was the same as the material for the regular program.
Therefore, when a bilingual student transferred to the
English only program, he would be exposed to ma¬
terial foreign to him. Another major problem related to
misidentifying the difference between the students who were
having problems with comprehension and students with lan¬
guage problems. The Hispanic Parents Advisory Council
(HPAC) was frustrated because it never received any con¬
crete responses from the school administrators that action
was being taken to correct the inequalities and problems
in the schools system. On May 24, 1978 they proceeded to
sue the Worcester Public School System.
Statement of the Problem
In May 1973 the Hispanic Parents Advisory Council of
Worcester, tlassachusetts sued the Worcester Public Schools:
9
all-age Hispanic children of limited English language proficiency who were entitle t^ but were not receiving educational progr^s or Lr-
^bich took into account their educational ^®c®iving programs and services which
may have been inadequate,inappropriate or insuf¬ ficient to ensure their equal and effective parti- cipation in the learning process (A.L.P.A. V. DURKIN
7?-U50l!1l83?
This study will explore the perceptions and opinions
of individuals who were directly involved in the events
prompting law suit A.L.P.A. V. DURKIN, United States
District Court, Civil Action No. 78-1150K.
An analysis of the historical development and details
of the suit will be completed in this study. The results
of the struggle as determined by the opinions of the parti¬
cipants in the study as well as newspaper coverage and
analysis of records will be conducted. The impact of the
participation of parents and community members in this case
will also be assessed.
The following main research questions guided the di¬
rection of the study;
(1) What were the major complaints that Hispanic pa¬
rents had in relation to the inequalities in
schools during the decade of 1970s in Worcester?
(2) What were the objectives which the Hispanic com¬
munity desired to achieve in their struggle to
improve the Transitional Bilingual Education
Program in Worcester?
10
(3) How did the Hispanic Parent Advisory Committee
help to resolve the problems confronting the
Hispanic stuci6nts in Worc6st6r?
(4) What were the agreements reached between the
Hispanic parents and the school administrators
as per court decree in 1983?
(5) What is the present condition of the Transitional
Silirigual Education Program in Worcester as per¬
ceived by the Hispanic Community?
Organization of the Study
Chapter I has presented the introduction. It has pro¬
vided a background of the problem and the research questions
guiding the study. Chapter II will convey a review of re¬
lated literature. Chapter III will provide a presentation
and discussion of the methodology followed in the study.
Chapter IV will submit the findings of the study. Chapter
V will detail the conclusions arrived at by the study, will
suggest some recommendations as well as recommendations for
further research.
chapter II
review of literature
A Brief Historical Development of Bilingual programs in the United States-Education
A brief historical background of bilingual education
in the United States is helpful in understanding that the
bilingual-bicultural education concept is not new in this
country. The United States of America has always harbored
a large minority of non-English speaking citizens whose
presence has presented a continuous challenge to the educa¬
tional systems. During most of this nation's history, one
finds the existence of numerous schools which made exten¬
sive use of the native language as well as English in
furthering the education of non-English speaking children.
Educators and researchers like Theodore Andersson and
Mildred Boyer have divided the history of bilingual educa-
tion in the public schools into two stages. They called
the first stage Pre-World War I, According to them, in this
first period some states had dual-language schooling.
Between 1880 and 1917, for example, German was used as a medium of instruction in Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Baltimore, and New Ulm, Minnesota. Besides German, only French was used as a teaching medium in Louisiana Public Schools and Spanish was used in the New Mexico Public Schools; but Norwegian, Czech, Dutch and other immigrant languages were occasionally taught as sub¬ jects (Anderson and Boyer, 1978, p. 17).
11
12
According to Joshua Fishman, numerous private bilingual
parochial schools were founded during this period. Among
these were many bilingual parochial schools established to
serve Poles, Italians, Lithuanians and other Catholics from
Eastern and Southern European countries in their native
languages. Fishman states,
More ^erican grandparents received bilingual education at public expense _ than most of us realize. There was
public bilingual education in the U.S.A. part of the nineteenth and in the early
the twentieth century (Fishman, 1966) and only the Xenophobia of World War I days has erased that
our historical consciousness. As many as one million children attended bilingual programs in public schools during the nineteenth century and much earlier in sectarian schools (Fishman, 1976, p. 22).
On April 6, 1917, the United States declared war on
Germany and the anti-German feeling of the First World War
put and end to the teaching of German and other languages
in this country. In her dissertation: English--the Road¬
block to a Higher Education, Idalia Morales states that,
Laws prohibiting the use of German were passed as anti- Gepnan feelings increased during World War I and the United States became extremely nationalistic. Although these laws were found to be unconstitutional and could not prevent the teaching of German in private and parochial schools, the practical effect of World War I and the accompanying state legislation resulted in the German Language effectively being dropped from the public high school curriculum (Morales, 1982, p. 45).
The consequences of the anti-German movement in this
country during World War I was assimilation. Perhaps, it
was feared that German immigrants would feel no loyalty or
13
obligation to fight for the United States.
The second stage of bilingual schooling, according
to Anderson and Boyer, began in 1963 with the founding of
a bilingual program in the Coral Way School in Miami,
Florida. The school's administrators and teachers decided
to initiate an effective bilingual program in grades one,
two, and three, with plans to add a grade each year in an
effort to give an adequate education to the children of
Cuban refugees who were entering the city at the rate of
some 3,000 a month. This bilingual program consisted of
teaching in the vernacular for about half of the day, and
provided reinforcement in the second language (English)
during the second half. A group of Cuban teachers taught
the Spanish basic subjects, while English as a Second
Language teachers were teaching the English basic skills.
The non-English speaking children and the monolingual
English children were together during activities such as
art, music, physical education, and supervised games.
In 1964, two bilingual projects were established in
the heavily Spanish-speaking area of South Texas. The
United Consolidated Bilingual Program was established near
Laredo. This program was initially designed for the first
three grades at Nye School, and then extended to the other
two elementary schools in the district. In the same year
the Language Research Project in San Antonio, Texas began.
14
This program differed from the Miami and United Consoli¬
dated in its limitation on the use of Spanish as a medium
of instruction. The project was expanded to include more
Spanish instruction during the school year of 1967-68.
During the decade of the 1960's, bilingual education pro-
grams flourished throughout the United States. In 1965,
bilingual programs started in Pecos, New Mexico, and
Edinburgh, Texas. In 1966, more programs were established
in the Harlandale Independent School District of San
Antonio; in Del Rio, Texas; Zapata, Texas; in Calexico,
California; Marysville, California; and Rough Rock, Arizona.
In 1967, bilingual programs began in Las Cruces, New Mexico;
Hoboken, New Jersey; Corpus Christi, Texas; Del Valle,
Texas; and St. Croix, Virgin Island (Anderson and Boyer,
1970).
On January 2, 1968, former president Lyndon B. Johnson,
signed the Federal Bilingual Education Act. Under the
provisions of the Act, seventy bilingual programs, some of
them preexisting and others newly developed, were funded
for the 1969-70 year (Bilingual Education Packet, 1978,
p. 1). This federal policy on bilingual education resulted
in a remarkable rebirth of bilingual education projects in
the 1960's and afterward by providing supplemental funding
for school districts interested in establishing programs:
15
Designed to meet special educational needq nf la
S%Se Sn^'erst^Ls'^'p^ndf Planning and developing^Mlinguaf p^ogr^^r'inclS’^
®'^'^'=3tion, early childhiod education grams P’^ograms. vocational pro-' fSlture of dealing with the history and (1968 ACT^ w Sroup being served
This Act was known as Title VII of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1968.
On November 4, 1971, a major event took place when
Governor Francis Sargent signed the first state law of
bilingual education and Massachusetts became the first
state to legislate a Transitional Bilingual Education Act.
Other states soon followed. This mandatory bilingual law
required any school district having twenty or more Limited
English Speaking Ability (LESA) pupils from the same non-
English linguistic background to provide three-year bilin¬
gual instruction to counter-balance this population's
"quality" performance in the standard educational public
system (Anderson and Boyer, 1970: Irizarry, 1978).
In 1974, a significant Supreme Court decision gave much
more visibility to bilingual education programs in the
United States (Lau V. Nichols), This court case has been
very influential in clearly defining bilingual education
since that time. In 1970, 1,800 Chinese-speaking children
enrolled in San Francisco schools, and their parents main¬
tained that the children were not receiving an adequate
16
education because of the language barrier involved. The
Lau family complained that their children:
in their phool^ ^e°LaS°famiirpresentertheif else against the San Francisco Unified School District TT^Q 2 state levels. They appealed to the’ U.S. Supreme Court, which mandated that some form of equal educational opportunity was due to these chil-
English-speaking ability" (LESA) . education term was later changed to
LEF - Limited English proficient student" in 1978 because it is a more accurate description of students needing bilingual education (Teitelbaum and Filler 1977, pp. 138-170).
The supreme Court s decision left the means by which
to provide special services up to each state or school dis-
bE’ict. A Task Force was formed by the U.S. Department
of Education and the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) which
developed what is termed the "Lau Remedies" to determine
what sort of provisions schools should make for Limited
English Proficient (LEP) students. According to attorneys
Herbert Teitelbaum and Richard Hiller the Lau v. Nichols
case "raised the nation consciousness of the need for
bilingual education", and they claim that the:
Lau V. Nichols became an underlying factor for much of the legislation enacted mandating bilingual educa¬ tion in certain states and although it did not ex¬ pressly endorse bilingual education the Lau decision legitimized and gave impetus to the movement for equal educational opportunity for students who did not speak English (Teitelbaum and Hiller, 1977, p. 136).
17
While the use of two languages as an instructional
approach in the public schools in the United States is not
a new movement the last twenty three years (1963-1986) have
brought a remarkable rebirth of bilingual education prog¬
rams in this country. Bilingual education is a world-wide
educational movement. The world has some bilingual coun¬
tries, for example. Canada and Paraguay. On the other hand,
our world has some multilingual countries, for example,
Switzerland, Soviet Union, Belgium and the Union of South
Africa. According to Joshua A. Fishman, the world has thou-
sands of bilingual schools:
The world has nearly 100,000 bilingual elementary schools and 4,000 bilingual secondary schools, lo¬ cated in over 100 countries, serving indigenous and sedentary populations (Fishman, 1976, p. 22).
Reasons for Having Bilingual Education
United States holds a significant place in history ac¬
cepting the methodology or approach of bilingual education
as an effective pedagogical vehicle for language minority
education. Two major reasons for having bilingual educa¬
tion in this country are the low achievement levels and
high dropout rates among language minority students. For
example, James S. Coleman reported in Equality of
Educational Opportunity the following scores:
By the twelfth grade the Mexican American student is 4.1 years behind the national norm in math achieve¬ ment; 3.5, in verbal ability; and 3.3, in reading.
18
Puerto Rican student is 4.8 years behind the national nora in math; 3.6. in verbal ability and
■ ’ reading. The Asian American student is 0 9 anf? the norm in math; 1.6. in vXSal lb?iLy. and 1.6, in reading (Coleman, 1966, p. 1).
In 1970, the New England Regional Council reported in
a booklet entitled Overview of the Problems Encountered by
England's Spanish Speaking Population, the following
condition of the Spanish-speaking students:
In New England, 25 percent of the Spanish-speaking student population had been retained in grade for ^ least 3 years; 50 percent, for at least 2 years. Only 12 percent were found to be in the correct grade for their age group (New England Regional Council, July 7, 1970).
The primary objective of the Transitional Bilingual
Education Act of Massachusetts is to remedy the low achieve¬
ment levels and high dropout rates among language minority
students by promoting the development of student's cogni¬
tive skills in their native language while they are in the
process of learning and mastering English as a second
language (Two Way, p. 3; The Way We Go To School, 1971,
p. 16). According to Massachusetts Board of Education, the
major reason for having bilingual education in this Common¬
wealth is the situation of the linguistic minority children
that indicate they have been two or three grades behind
their level (Two Way, 1973).
Several studies showed throughout the Nation that lan¬
guage minority students had difficulty succeeding in the
19
English standard program. According to The Mexican
American Education Study, Report 2, showed that 40 percent
of Mexican Americans who enter first grade never com¬
plete high school (The Unfinished Education Oct. 1971,
P. 11).
On January 17, 1967, Democrat Senator Ralph W.
Yarborough of Texas, showed evidences and reasons before
the Senate for having bilingual education programs in this
country. He introduced Senate Bill 428, a federal measure
about the instructional needs of Mexican American and
Puerto Rican students. In his speech to the Senate, he
stated:
Problems of Spanish-speaking children are high¬ lighted by a survey that has been made of the median number of years completed by all people of Spanish surnames in the Southwest. The 1960 census showed of all people of Spanish surnames, those in Arizona had completed an average of 7 years of schooling; in Colorado, 8.1 years of schooling; in New Mexico, 7.7 years of schooling; but in Texas, only 4.7 years of schooling. (United States Senate, 1967, p. 267).
There are socioeconomic and pedagogic goals for having
bilingual education. The major goals are the following:
improvement of academic achievement, mastery of the home
language and a second language, preservation of our cul¬
tural heritage, and the improvement of socioeconomic level
for members of language minority groups (National
Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education, What is Bilingual
20
Education?. 1978, front page).
Bilingual education will not only be useful for
language minority groups (U.S. Department of Education
has an estimate of 1.2 to 1.7 million school-aged LEP
children) but it is useful to fulfill the need of the
U.S.A. population to function in more than one language,
l'^ his thesis. Tay Lesley described vividly several
reasons why it is so important to have bilingual programs
in the public schools:
^erica's greatly expanded role in foreign affairs, involving diplomacy, trade, technical assistance, education, health, and all other aspects of inter¬ national relations called for large numbers of bilin- gual-bicultural citizens to represent us in the forums of the world (Lesley, 1971, p. 14).
Thus it is clear that bilingualism is beneficial to
many businessmen, politicians, students, educators, doc¬
tors, artists, missionaries and any person interested in
other cultures. The enormous increase in the diplomatic
relations and business interests between the U.S.A. and
other countries constantly open the opportunities to pre¬
pare and educate persons to be bilingual. In its Seventh
Annual Report (1982-1983) , the National Advisory Council
on Bilingual Education stressed:
As the economy shifts from national to international and the population shifts from geographical areas which are primarily monolingual to those which are
21
wYn ^ successful bilingual education programs ^11 become more than instructional methodologies piese programs will be recognized as having signi-
social economical, political, and educational implications (Ibid., p. 5).
Former U.S. Secretary of Education, Terrel H. Bell,
(1980-1984), has emphasized the potential of language re¬
sources available in the bilingual education programs, and
has recommended that this valuable resource be utilized
for the benefit of this country's internal economy and
international trade by joining forces with the business
sector. The bilingual community provides a potential asset
to the business world by improving the quality of language
instruction and the development of cross-cultural training
programs (Seventh Annual Report, pp. 18-27).
On the other hand, commenting on the importance of
learning other languages and cultures to strengthen our
economy. President Ronald Reagen said:
We cannot afford to be complacent about our position in the world community. Both our economy and our national security depend upon American competitive¬ ness. We must be effective not only in the develop¬ ment of high technology and telecommunications but also in our ability to communicate in our own language as well as the languages of other nations.
The study of foreign language is vitally important to the basic education of American youth and adults. I urge parents and community and business leaders alike to join educators in encouraging our youth to begin the study of this language until a significant level of proficienty has been achieved. (National Foreign Language Week Proclamation, March, 1983).
22
In a survey conducted among firms dealing with foreign
countries, it was found that more than 60,000 jobs required
a second language. In areas of tourism, for example, the
number of jobs requiring knowledge of more than one Ian-
guage is remarkable. Increasing percentages of top U.S.
corporate officials have had overseas experience and agree
that the knowledge of a foreign language is important.
_(S_ee Seventh Annual Report of the National Advisory Council
on Bilingual Education, pages 28-30). The former Director
of the Office of Bilingual Education and Minority Language
(OBEILLA), Jesse Soriano, also stressed the import-
tance of language skills in the business world and of es¬
tablishing a closer alliance between the private sector
and public education. He viewed this as, "an absolute
requirement if we are to be successful (in this endeavor)
or in the next few years." (The Language and Culture
Training Needs of U.S. Business Both Domestic and Inter¬
national . 1982) .
Consequently, the role of bilingual education and for¬
eign languages in the last part of this century should be
expanded to meet the needs of the different language groups
and the business individuals who function in a bilingual
environment. Bilingual education may prove to be a cost-
effective investment in the U.S.A.'s economic growth and
prosperity. The role of bilingual education as a potential
23
for economic development is the biggest challenge for
the 80's and beyond.
A report by the National Commission on Excellence in
Education entitled: A Nation at Risk (1983) offers
clearly the reason for having bilingual education and the
study of foreign languages in the elementary school as
the best stage for a child to learn another language.
The report said:
Achieving proficiency in a foreign language ordinarily requires from 5 to 6 years of study and should, there¬ fore, be started in the elementary grades. VJe believe it is desirable that students achieve such proficiency because study of a foreign language introduces students to non-English speaking cultures, heightens awareness and comprehension needs in commerce, diplomacy, de¬ fense, and education. (A Nation at Risk, page 26).
As analyzed, there are many reasons for having bilin¬
gual education in this country. At the present time,
bilingual education is a national issue in the United
States. According to InterAmerica Research Associates,
Inc., there are over 81 identifiable language groups in
this country. Thirty states have enacted bilingual educa¬
tion legislation and twenty-two states provide funds for
programs under their legislation or by other means. (Guide
to State Education Agencies, April 1982). This Guide in¬
cluded Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.
Bilingual Education in Massachusetts
The origin of bilingual education in the public schools
of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, as in other states
in this country, can be traced to a growing awareness in
recent years of the educational needs and problems of the
Spanish-speaking children and other members of ethnic
minorities like Italian, Chinese, and Portuguese. The
Task Force on Children Out of School in 1970 determined
that, "minimum of 4,000 and perhaps as many as 10,000
children were excluded from the Boston Public Schools.
Puerto Ricans, Cubans and other Latinos, Italian, Portu¬
guese and Chinese-speaking children are excluded because
there are no viable educational programs for them."^ On
January, 1969, three governmental agencies (Boston School
Department, State Department of Education, and State
Department of Mental Health) agreed to set up a Task Force
on Children Out of School in Boston. The well documented
report described how other members of cultural minorities
like crippled, pregnant, retarded, and emotionally dis¬
turbed children were either excluded or assigned to special
class dumping grounds "to get them out of the way". The
report also stated that, many others were erroneously
labeled mentally retarded in order to get rid of disruptive
2 discipline problems.
In 1969, the Office of Human Rights reported that as
many as 32,000 Spanish-speaking citizens lived in Boston,
with the following ethnic composition: 22,000 Puerto
Ricans, 5,000-6,000 Cubans, and 4,000-5,000 other Spanish-
25
speaking people (The Way We Go To School. 1971). Accord¬
ing to the Massachusetts State Department of Education
and the Association for the Promotion of the Constitu¬
tional Rights of Spanish Speaking (APCROSS), over 75
percent of the children were held back academically in
school. The survey of the non-English speaking children
showed the following data:
26 percent held back 1 grade (132) 25 percent held back 2 grades (128) 12 percent held back 3 grades (62)
5 percent held back 4 grades (24) 8 percent held back 5 grades
or dropped out (39) 11 percent unknown (54)
Only 13 percent of the children surveyed were in their proper grade. Clearly, from the standpoint of academic success, the program is failing (Action for Boston Community Development (ABCD), April 1969, p. 16).
Larry Brown, staff director of the Task Force on Chil-
ren Out of School, wrote the following statement about
this shocking report; "But there is another group of
children who need bilingual classes: the 2,650 or more
children who are now out of school." As discussed earlier,
they are out of school because the School Department pro¬
vides no classes for them (Brown, 1971, p. 16).
During the school year 1968-69 about 2,825 Spanish¬
speaking children were in school. The Task Force draw a
statistical picture of Spanish-speaking children in Boston,
based on the low estimate of the total Spanish-speaking
26
population of 16,500 and the high of 32,000. On the basis
of official school records and the lowest population
estimate, they could determine the number of Spanish¬
speaking children out of school. If they used the highest
estimate given (32,000), the total number of children out
of school was as high as 7,800. If they used the lowest
population estimate (16,500), the total number of Spanish¬
speaking children out of school is a minimum of 2,650.^
In his book The Way We Go To School, page 18, Larry
Brown showed the reasons for having so many Spanish-
speaking children out of school:
They suffer the handicap of not being able to communi- cate; they cannot speak the language. There are some schools, for example, where Spanish-speaking children have been beaten up by other students. This problem, plus the problem of a new and bewildering life, and the barrier of language, all work together to enforce a tendency to remain withdrawn (Brown, 1971, p. 18).
The major reason presented by committee members in the
report to answer questions why these children were out of
school is that the school system was failing to educate
Spanish-speaking children. There were no adequate educa¬
tional programs for them. In 1967, the first English as i/
a Second Language (ESL) program was established in Boston.
During the school year 1969-1970, the ESL program included
750 Spanish-speaking children taught by 20 teachers. ESL
instruction was very elementary, focusing on beginning
conversational English, rather than academic instruction.
27
The program provided less than an hour of instruction
for non-English speaking children who were incapable of
performing ordinary class work in English. The ESL pro¬
gram was rarely co-ordinated with regular classroom
instruction and it has been discontinued in Boston and
other cities because of its ineffectiveness.
Also a Transitional Bilingual Program began during
the school year 1968-1970, with 150 children. Tliis full J academic program was designated to accommodate more chil¬
dren than the prior program, and to enable children to
^®3.rn enough English quickly so that they could be moved
into the "regular" English classes. According to the
Task Force Report the children were having success in this
type of bilingual program.
On November 4, 1971, Governor Francis Sargent signed
into law the Transitional Bilingual Education Act (Chapter
7iA) ; "an act providing the establishment and implementa¬
tion of programs in Transitional Bilingual Education in
the public schools of the Commonwealth with reimbursement
by the Commonwealth to cities, towns, and school districts
4 for financing the additional cost of such programs."
This historical event occurred after four years of hard
work and struggle among community leaders, members of cul¬
tural minorities and educators who vjanted an adequate and
better education for linguistic minority children in Boston
28
and other cities throughout the Commonwealth. This
mandatory state law opened opportunity for expanding
the development of bilingual programs with more effective¬
ness in the Commonwealth. Other states followed the
example of Massachusetts.
In 1973, Illinois and Texas approved bilingual educa¬
tion legislation; in 1974, Michigan and Rhode Island; in
1974, Wisconsin, New Jersey, Colorado and Alaska; in
1976, California; and in 1977, Connecticut.
Massachusetts hold a significant place in history as
the first state to pass the Transitional Bilingual Educa-
tion Act. This mandatory bilingual education law required
that each year the school committee of each school dis¬
trict determine the number of children of limited English
speaking ability (LESA) in its district. Where there are
twenty or more limited English speaking ability (LESA) of
one language group (children in parochial schools excluded),
the school committee is required to provide a program of
Transitional Bilingual Education (Two VJay, 1978) . More
explicitly, this bilingual program consists of:
1) development of reading and writing skills in the native language;
2) development of oral comprehension, speaking, reading and writing of English. An integral com¬ ponent of the program in transitional bilingual education shall be instruction in the history and culture of the country of the student's primary language and in history and culture of the United States (Two Way, 1978, p. 3).
29
The Transitional Bilingual Education programs enable
pupils, regardless of their culture and language back¬
ground, to make normal progress in the learning of school
subjects during their formal school experience. The
bilingual methodology approach converts a child's mother
tongue into a stepping stone for further accomplishment
rather than a source of endless frustration. Citizens and
educators have a moral responsibility to insure that chil¬
dren do not experience frustration, emotional problems,
nor tendencies to drop out while participating in the pro¬
cess of education. We must always remember Robert Glasser's
words :
If a child, no matter v/hat his background, can succeed in school, he has an excellent chance for success in lifs* If he fails at any stage of his educational career; elementary school, junior high, senior high scnool, or college, his chances for success in life are greatly diminished, (Glasser, 1969, p. 5).
Parent Participation in Education
Ttie issue of parent participation in education as dis¬
cussed in the literature concerning pedagogy reveals that
historically, the education of children was the responsi¬
bility of the parents. Parental involvement in the educa¬
tional process is rooted in the past of the nation but
more recently, the states took over the tasks of designing,
implementing and evaluating educational systems. For
example, the Bureau of Transitional Bilingual Education
30
developed in cooperation with members of local parent
advisory councils the guidelines for parental involvement
in the planning, development and evaluation of bilingual
programs in I4assachusetts (Tv/o Way, 1978, p. 39).
After the states assumed responsibility, some parents
became more passive participants in the educational pro¬
cesses of their children. Such passivity does not, by
any means, imply that the parents are not interested in
the educational development of their children. Partic¬
ularly, minority children's education. This concern is
explained by the high expectations they have about their
children s schooling. Zirkel states that Puerto Rican
P3.rents, even if uneducated themselves, "aspired for
their children to at least complete four years college."^
fhe late 1960 s marked the moment for a radical turn in
this passivity.
During the 1960's, the Civil Rights movement produced
an awareness among the social groups covered under the
newly enacted Federal and State laws. For example, the
parents demanded social changes because the lov7 educa¬
tional achievement and high dropout rates of their children
Leo states.
The impact of the 1960's Civil Rights movement trig¬ gered an ethnic consciousness among Mexican Americans, Puerto Ricans, American Indians, and other ethnic groups to demand social changes which would allow ethnic min¬ orities and poor people to participate equally with other members of American society in socioeconomic, political, and educational contexts (Leo, 1985, p. 9).
31
P^_ental Involvement and Bilingual Educatinn
What does the law say about parental involvement re¬
garding bilingual education programs? This question
clearly addresses one of the critical issues that have
preoccupied many educators throughout the United States
who have been concerned with bilingual education since
the passage by the Congress of the first Bilingual Act
in 1968. Probably, inspired by the community control
movements that emerged after the Civil Rights of 1964, the
Congress, at the national level, and the local legisla¬
tures at the state level, both, defined in either less
precise or more specific terms the kind of participation
expected in the bilingual programs.
For example, the Public Law 98-211 (Dec. 8, 1983)
of chapter I states the following about parental involve¬
ment :
For the purposes of complying with the assurances given pursuant to subsection (b) (c) with respect to consultation with parents of participating children, (1) a local educational agency shall convene annually a public meeting, to which all parents of eligible students shall be invited, to explain to parents the programs and activities provided with funds made available under this chapter, and (2) if parents de¬ sire further activities, the local agency may, upon request, provide reasonable support for such activi¬ ties (Chapter I, 1983, Section 4).
A coalition of diverse citizens' and educators' organi¬
zations -the National Coalition for Parent Involvement in
32
Education (NCPIE)- was formed to ensure parental partici¬
pation. Although parents and community members are partici
pating in bilingual programs their participation can, in
most cases, be characterized as limited, since they usually
do not share correspondingly in the program's decision¬
making process."^ Nieto, reaffirms this idea in her study^
when she says that parental involvement is very limited,
particularly with regard to the decision-making process in
educational policy, curriculum development and in super¬
visory and administrative matters.
At the state level, parental involvement is also consi¬
dered. For example, in Massachusetts, Chapter 71A (Transi¬
tional Education Law, 1971) says "each school district oper
ating a Transitional Bilingual Education Program should
establish a Parent Advisory Committee (PAC)? In addition,
under the recommendations of the same law. Guidelines for
Parental Involvement in Bilingual Programs were developed.
These guidelines describe the way in which parents with
children in bilingual programs can be involved. This
Q
involvement is fundamentally based on a rationale which
concludes that the "Transitional Bilingual Education Act,
mandates the participation of parents of children of lim¬
ited English-speaking ability in the planning, development
and evaluation of Transitional Bilingual Education Pro-
mIO grams.
33
As school system recognize parents as important con¬
tributors to bilingual programs the communication as
Nieto affirms "has often been a one-way street in which
the schools informed, educated, or even attempted to
change the behavior of parents.Instead, as Nieto
continues,
^at seems to be emerging from all the research is a need for the parents, in turn, to inform educate
a?e behavior of schools if’schools ’ responsive to the individual and group
1979 p 32)^^^^^^^ children represent (Nieto!
34
FOOTNOTES
Larry Eroiai, the Task Force on beacon Press, 1971
ihe VJay We Go To School: A report Ctiiidren Out ot lichool. (Ensrnn maT
. P- front tiat and p. 16).
hi
2 Ibid., p. 21
^Ibid.
4r-, ■i-^® Massachusetts, Department of
Lducation, Two Way. Produced by the Bureau of Transi¬ tional Bilingual Education. Third Printing, 1978, p. 3.
5 - u A- 2irkel, Puerto Pvican Parents and Mailand Schools. Educational Leadership Institute, University of hartford, Connecticut, 1971, p. 12.
United States Commission on Civil Rights. A Better Chance to Learn: Bilingual-Bicultural Education. Washington, D.C. : Clearinghouse Publication May 1975, p. 101. *
^Sonia Nieto, Curriculum Decision Making: Puerto Rican Family and the^ Bilingual Child. Unpublished doc- toral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, 1979. In this study Dr. Nieto, "designs selected procedures through which the school could involve Puerto Rican parents in decision-making for bilingual curriculum for elementary school children." (p. ix).
^Ibid. Two Way, pp. 36-37.
^Ibid., p. 36.
^^Ibid.
11 Nieto, op. cit. p. 32.
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents the methodology employed in the
study. It discusses the site of the study, the target
population, the instruments used for data collection, the
process followed for field testing the instruments, the
field procedures followed for data collection, and the pro¬
cedures followed for data processing and data analysis.
Site of the Study
This study was conducted in Worcester, Massachusetts.
The number of Hispanic residents of Worcester, Mass., a
city of almost 200,000 about 40 miles west of Boston, has
expanded rapidly during the past 15 years from approxima¬
tely 1, 674 Hispanic residents in 1970 (Federal Census) to
over 10,000 in 1985. Based on the number of Hispanics in
Worcester's schools it is estimated that Hispanics will
make up 15 to 20 percent of the city's public schools pop¬
ulation during the 90's.
Target Population of the Study
The target population for this study consisted of the
community leaders and school administrators who actively
participated in the law suit filed against the Worcester
Public Schools in May of 1978 who still lived/or worked
35
36
in Worcester at the time of data collection. The study
addresses all of those so identified via analysis of
records and documents. No samples were drawn. Data was
collected and information drawn only up to July 1987.
Instrumentation of the Study
The instrumentation for this study consisted of a com¬
bination of an analysis of records, an interview schedule
and two questionnaires. One questionnaires was adminis¬
tered to school principals in all those schools offering
education in Worcester, Massachusetts. This
questionnaire consisted of a cover letter and six sections
covering general information about students, objectives,
curriculum, materials, testing procedures, program staff-
ing, and community involvement pertaining bilingual pro¬
grams in their schools. The questionnaire was field tested
by administering it to various school principals outside
the site of the study and to one at the site. Their in¬
put was taken into consideration and revisions were made
accordingly. A final version of the questionnaire is pre¬
sented at the end of this section.
Another questionnaire was administered to parents of
students participating in bilingual programs in all ele¬
mentary schools in Worcester. The items included in the
questionnaire addressed the perceptions, opinions, and
feelings about diverse aspects of the Transitional Bilingual
37
Program in that school district. It used a Likerts Five
Point Scale as a model. The response modes consisted
of "Always”, "Most of the Time", "Sometimes". "Almost
Never" and "Never" for some questions; and questions try¬
ing to identify levels of agreement using "Strongly Agree",
Agree , "Somewhat Agree", "Disagree" and "Strongly
Disagree". Spanish and English versions of the question¬
naire were designed. Both versions were field tested with
parents outside Worcester and some graduate students with
children participating in bilingual programs. Several
revisions were made incorporating the results of the field
testings. A copy of the final English version is presented
at the end of this section. A copy of the Spanish version
is included in the appendix.
The interview schedule consisted of 20 open-ended
questions asked of those directly involved in the previous¬
ly mentioned law suit. Included in the analysis were the
legal documents filed in court, minutes of meetings and
newspapers clippings covering the case (see Appendix).
8-persons were interviewed and only 5 agreed to have their
interviews taped. The questions asked during the inter¬
views were:
1. How have you served the Hispanic community in their
struggle to improve and develop a Bilingual Educa¬
tion Program in the City of Worcester?
38
2. When did the Bilingual Education Program begin in
Worcester? Why?
3. According to your observations and understanding,
which were the major complaints that Hispanic
parents had in relation to the inequalities in
schools during the decade of 1970s in Worcester?
4. How was the Parent Advisory Council (PAC) involved
in the development of the Bilingual Programs?
5. Do you think the Worcester Public School System
had specific curriculum for the children of lim¬
ited English-speaking ability during the 1970s?
6. L»o you think that at this time the Worcester Public
School System has a systematic testing procedures
for the children of limited English-speaking chil¬
dren?
7. What were the objectives which you and the Hispanic
community desired to achieve in your struggle to
improve the Transitional Bilingual Education
Program in Worcester?
8. What did the Parent Advisory Council and the Hispan¬
ic community do to help resolve the problems con¬
fronting the Hispanic students during the decade
of the 1970's?
39
9. I^at conditions existed with the Hispanic students
in the Worcester Public School System before the
Hispanic community and the Latin Association for
Progress and Action (A.L.P.A.) filed suit in the
United States District Court of Boston in May,
1978?
10. Did the Hispanic parents try to communicate their
concerns to the school officials before they filed
the suit in the federal court?
11. Wliat reactions did the school administrators have?
12. What did the Hispanic parents propose when they
were not satisfied and when they realized what
were the School Superintendent and other adminis¬
trators were doing with the implementation of the
Bilingual Education Program?
13. How was A.L.P.A. organization involved in the
development of the Bilingual Education Program?
14. Wlio decided to file a suit in the federal court
concerning the Bilingual Education in Worcester?
15. What reactions did the school administrators have
when they learned about your intentions to file
the suit?
16. Do you think that the audit performed in 1980 of
the Transitional Bilingual Education Program
helped in implementing and developing a more
effective program?
40
17. What specific court decisions did the Hispanic
parents obtain after filing the suit on behalf
of their children?
18. \Ajhat were the agreements reached between the
Hispanic parents and the school administrators
as per court decree in 1983?
19. Do you envision any major changes in the future
of the Transitional Bilingual Education Program
in Worcester? I'Jhich?
20. \>niat is the present condition of the Transitional
Bilingual Education Program in Worcester as
perceived by the Hispanic community?
41
Case Study: The Aftermath of a Community Struggle
for Bilingual Education in a Selected
School District in Massachusetts
The purpose of this questionnaire is to make an eval¬ uation as to whether the Transitional Bilingual Education Program has complied with the desires of the Hispanic parents and the organizations in the City of Worcester. These desires can be found in the federal court order to improve the bilingual education program and the VJorcester Public Schools Lau Plan. This is what I propose to do as a part of the research for my doctoral dissertation in Bilingual Education at University of Jlass. I would very much appreciate your taking the time to fill out the en¬ closed questionnaire which will give the data required.
This questionnaire consists of six parts. Section I deals with bilingual pupils information. Section II deals with items addressing your objectives in the bilingual education program of your school. Section III deals with curriculum and materials. Section IV deals with testing procedures. Section V deals with your bilingual program staff. Section VI deals with the community involvement in your bilingual education program.
Please read each item and respond to it using the ap¬ plicable scale. Answer all the questions even if you feel compelled not to. Put your answer directly on the instru- nient. All the responses are strictly confidential. The results will be fully shared with you. No names will be used.
Now, please proceed to answer the questionnaire. It should take about 30-40 minutes. Feel free to add com¬ ments wherever you might find appropriate to do so. Re¬ turn your complete questionnaire using the enclosed pre¬ addressed envelop.
Tliank you for answering this questionnaire and for your invaluable help.
Sincerely,
Juan Gonzalez-Gomez
42
guestionnaire for Principals
I. PARTICIPANTS
1. Total number of Spanish-speaking pupils in your
bilingual education curriculum.
Other language group(s) represented (if any)
and number of students in that group(s).
2. How many students are enrolled in your bilingual
program at each level? (Indicate number of pupils).
^123456788 10 11 12
3. Are native speakers of Spanish and native speakers
of English mixed in Art, Music and Gym classes?
(Indicate Yes_ or No _, and which class(es)
II. OBJECTIVES
A. Indicate the order of importance of the follovjing
objectives of your bilingual program (1 being most
important and 7 being least).
_ To enable the students to gain a functional
mastery of English.
_ To improve the academic achievement of the
students.
43
To help the students achieve maximum success
by using the mother tongue to further concept
development.
To promote the students' feelings of dignity.
To promote the students' self-worth by empha¬
sizing the value of the native language.
To enable the students to develop a bilingual
world view.
To help the students achieve maximum success
in adapting to the dominant society.
Other (Please specify)
III. CURRICULUM AND MATERIALS
1. What subjects in the program are taught entirely
in Spanish? (Indicate subject and grade level).
2. What subjects are taught entirely in English?
(Subject and grade level).
4A
3. Approximately what percentage of classroom time is
English used as the language of instruction at each
level?
^’K.123456789 10 11 12 Of
/o /o /o o/ /o % °l X X O!
/o % 7o
4. Does your school library have Spanish-English dictio¬
naries , encyclopedias, supplementary reading books
and magazines in Spanish and English? Yes No
If so, for what subject and at what levels?
5. Are you using appropriate textbooks for classes tau¬
ght in the non-English language? Yes_^No_.
45
IV. TESTING PROCEDURES
1. What kind of testing do you have to assess which
students need bilingual education?
2. Are you using the Home Language Survey Form? Yes
No_.
3. Are you using the Classroom Language Survey Form?
Yes_ No_.
4. Are you testing the Hispanic students in order to
assess students in LAU categories A through D for
native language proficiency? Yes_No_.
V. BILINGUAL PROGRAM STAFF
1. Total number of Bilingual Teachers in your school
2. Total English as a Second Language Teachers_.
3. Are Bilingual Teacher Aides being used in your pro¬
gram? If so, how many?_.
4. Total number of Bilingual Special Education Teachers
5. Total number of Spanish/English Counselors
6. Total number of School Psychologists_.
46
VI. COMMUNITY INVOLVEJIENT
1. Have any Parent Advisory Council (PAC) been formed
in your school to ensure communication between
school and community? Yes No
2. Do teachers meet with parents of non-English speak¬
ing pupils on a regular basis? Yes No
• If so, how often do such meetings take place and
approximately how many parents attend?
3. Are parents of non-English speaking children invol¬
ved in the academic program at any level? Yes
so, how many are involved and in what
capacity? _
4. Have you witnessed any increase in parental inter¬
est for furthering their own education as a result
of the Instructional Bilingual Education (IBE) pro¬
gram? Yes No
47
Case Study: An Aftermath of a Community Struggle " ®^'^‘=ation in a Selected
School District in Massachusetts
The purpose of this study is to conduct an in-Hpr.^v. ana ysis of an aftermath of a community struggle for ^
^ selected school district in Maosachusetts As one of the individuals identified as
Lttr^'we^need^ selected school district in Massachu¬ setts we need your responses in terms of your feelings perceptions and opinions. ^ J-eeiings,
This questionnaire consists of items addressing your perceptions, opinions, and feelings about diverse aspects of the current Transitional Bilingual Education Program in this selected school district.
do names will be used. Please read each item and respond to it using the applicable scale. Answer all the questions even if you feel compelled not to. Put your answer directly on the instrument. All responses are strictly confidential. The results will be full v snared with you. ^
Now, please proceed to answer the questionnaire. It should take about 25 to 30 minutes. Feel free to* add wherever you might find appropriate to do so. Re¬ turn your completed questionnaire using the enclosed pre-addressed envelope.
Thank you for your help.
Juan Gonzalez-Gomez
QU
ES
TIO
NN
AIR
E
FO
R
PA
RE
NT
S
48
)-i (U > 0) z
CO Wl O 0) B.>
.-1 0) < z
CM CM CM
m 0) E
XI 0) E o
CO
cn cn n C*1 n CO CO
0) *w B o
H Xl 0} (U
o jr S X)
m
CO 5
?-■ J (-< z u z cr cC (x
3 O X
tn
•CX4J X m -H ^ 0) u X o T^ -o
•1-1 XI CO XI >-l O CO M C CL o
O 3 CO
Li 01 U.I <U X
O CXXI XI CO
E 03 >% cn ffl (U X 1—• Li XI O 00 CO O) O
Li X O XI CU X O Li -<-l Li a
C. Cl CXI CO
01 >
•r^ 01 Cl O 01 o
UO UO
CO T3 60 . 01 c ~a 1 Li •ri r-i Li CD 01 > •ri 01 XU-I •W X X CO U-I Cl 01 Cl XI Cl O -H o
O C -i • 01 >1 -ri 01 X li 01 EC Li 3 o XI
•ri *0 CO X o CO CO
E C X •ri -ri
O 01 cox Li o Li Li XI Cl 01 CO •o X
U-l CO CO -ri XI rH O
X Cl
E
r: >
Li X a. Cl CL
CO >1 E c
CO XI
CO C X-r^ I
3 o c X
UO
o XI
o tjO O XI
CO 3 X
o o
CO CO n CO CD CO
m u^ u^ iri m in
•o 01
u Li o CO C -ri CO 60*0 OIX o •
C ri X C TO > -ri-ri C 3 01 CQ XJ bO
•c XJX O Li XJ C < 01 a -ri CO CD •o -*-1 C t-l
• 01 XI 60 c E -O XJ u CO E >1 CD C ri a> E XJ OJ
c 60 E o -ri 01 XJ O XJ 0)
0) 01 C O 3 XI C XJ O E u E -ri < 01-0 01 c CD u
C3 O XI X Li U 01 O 5 0) Cm X 01 01 E CO o o CO
01 ^ E CO
01 X >-1 Li 3 (0 CO 3
Li 01 01 X CL
o XJ o ^ 60 XJ CO CO < 01 O 3
C 01 X li O-ri C CD CD u 01 X ri o
• •ri 01 X o-ri DO 0) Q) /*\ XI X XI CO ca 0) c 0) XJ O O iJ XJ ^
CO CD < c XI 01 01 CO ^ CLOi 60 CO X X
01 c X XI XI
XI O r-
•o "o 01 CO XI T< 01 >x C XI
CO M U O
X o o o
>1 o Z CO
Li U CO 3 X 3
O t-i O
> C
01 Li
Cl 01 01 U Li C
O M o
E ■0 Li
XI XI CO
3 CO-3 O C CT3 01 60 ^ ^ XI O
01 XI Li •-< X 10 X
u •r* 3 XI 01
Li C CO C.0I
Li 01 XI CO
0)
C XI 01 ' 01 3 X
60 U 01 C Li > -ri o CO XI z
X 01 01 CXI
I-I E O
CO 01
cx O XI
•ri
XI •o CO C XI 01 -ri XI
> Xi C CO
•fH o
01 XI
> •riX 01 CO a -ri 01 C Li CO
X »-i cn
QU
ES
TIO
NN
AIR
E
FO
R
PA
RE
NT
S
49
j-i (U > --I a>
XJ w u o OJ 5 > cN cnj cm cm
<—( <u < 2
CO
(U E
<u en rn n co E o
CO
(U CW E o -w
XJ
XJ ^ -J- (0 0)
CO
>% CO tn m iTi 3 <
c 0)
• XJ QJ c •XJ E u CO
CO 1-1 0) a u c u c “1^ • 3 0 0 CO CO c: r-l
0) tz Cl) CX^ ^ Q.1-1 1-4 O
JZ c 03 E D 03 OTO o o XJ U o o (u O -HX O Cl) XJ X
CJ CO -XJ jD z: 0) 03 O Xj CJ 13 C 1^ cO CO 0) i-( 0) 03 c XJ 0) <-1 0C3 O XJ 3
CO O > CO o C XJ o CL, CO XJ C CO C E iH c 3 - CO ^ 2 CO XJ CO •o Xj 13 U C 0) )-l O C O 0) M o —4 (u o ^ M XJ XJ Xj 1-4 XJ 1-4
-o XJ X oO 1-1 0) (1) X c c •o >% 03 0) > Xj Xj CJ
>< D QJ QO C • X r-l o C C) 3 -J XJ C CO 1-1 C 0) XJ X ■XJ >,
H O JJ 1-1 CO o o Xj 3 1-4 E XJ -H > - CO c- 0) C 3
Xj 1-1X0) CO CO 3 O CO CJ C
=1 cu 3 C) CO CD a. 01 0) 1-4
O' o 1-1 C •O 1-1 X o
iJ ^ CO 0) —4 CO f-l XJ X4 • XJ 1-4 0)
CO oj Xj to CJ •w 1-) o ^ 0) 1H c Xj U o c X > o > > C 3
£ E t3 •*-> o 1-4 o CO C-XJ
3 CO XJ CO CO XJ (U X X ■XJ 03 .-4
O O C X O <D o 0 1-4 3 *-• C M i-( -XJ :::: to 03 4-4 CO 2 O
CN CM CM
m m cn
<r <r <T
tn
CO
C
03 C
03 O 3 1-4 O XJ
L-l
O CO
x,->
- CO C C •
1-4 1-4 (U 0> E i4 OO- 13 C E-O CO 13 CO 13 C Xj 1-4 c O CXJ CO 3 1-4 41) CO 1-4 OCX Xj C01-4 ■XJ CO 2
1-4 CO - XJ C X XJ C) 1-4 CO CO >1 CO O 1-4 Xj CJ CO Xj 13 X Xj CO CO 0) XJ C • >% 3 X 1-4
Xx C (3 Cl. o E 03 13 CO CO 3 3 E to 1-4 0) O 03 o O E C 1-4 D > 03 O E Xj 2 O O CC C
1-4 C c cc Xj 1-4 C CO 0) O >iXJ CJ cxj XJ X
U 1-4 E 03 o X O to 0) XJ 3 XJ E C 13 CU Xj CO oc o c Xj C 1^
0) C X O O CU CO 3 > t. > Xj
^ cr c « Gi • X 1-4 Xj 3 0) O 03 1-4
X 0) O O >% O 0) o CJ 1-4 O O Xj o 03 E cu > o CU 3 o
0) C Xj Xj Xj X Xj cox >.x O O cxj 3 O 2 O
z: 3 O C. C 4-4 CO CO 4-4 CO to I re
ceiv
e n
oti
ces
fro
m
the
school
rep.a
rdin
g
att
en
dan
ce
at
wo
rksh
op
s
for
the
bett
erm
en
t of
my
chil
d's
academ
ic
acli
iev
em
en
t.
QU
ES
TIO
NN
AIR
E
FO
R
PA
RE
NT
S
50
>s (U
UD t-i
C bC
O U m
-r-l
U-: a
(U
(U
Wl tij c3 (0
Csl CM tM <M CM CM CM CM
OJ ^ OJ bO u C bO
O cc CO
iJ -T^
CO Q
CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO
(U (U J-i
bO
<
bO
C <U O 0) Vj U JJ CiC CO <
m LO in m m m LO LO in
u: - > CO < H
X O fcJ >■ H
C O H a CO
H O z z
lO U3 ce: o <
J c t.
z aj z
Z H
3 H O *-1
CO - CO --I CO z re Vi 3
t-l re re Vi Cl AJ re re AJ AJ Cl
re re
E * Z to • t-l •
AJ r-l 1 t-l CO Ct-I O Z re re CJ o re re t-l 3 Z t-l o re re >% >
-H D. CO z u U-l re wi - 3 re CO 3 CO t-l Vi to Z re >N
o • Z Vi CO o re 3 CO re z AJ Vi z <u t-l Z
O t-l -o * O r-l i-l to CO r-
t-l re 3 "o w Z O o z >.
o >1 ZJ ^ CO
n u CJ
CO Vj
(U 0) i;-)
bO
C
c
rt OJ
CO
10 Vj
q; r“
o re
re
CO u
CO re z
CO CJ re re
re
cn CO E re V
'O re Vi 3 z o c u AJ O tu to AJ
q; o CO AJ <u t-l re 4J c • re
**.
XJ • O o to 3 XJ r—i
CO c t-l (i)
XJ u o t^ z o •o T-l
>N CO E ->-i
t-H AJ bO re c Z bJ AJ
AJ
re c > re re
•H O r—*
re cA-i
^ U-l
t-l OT
re Vi z o AJ AJ
re AJ re re CAj
Z CO AJ t-l
AJ
z re C m
t-l
lAJ re Vi
i-j re
>%
re re Vi z bCO
re AJ
re VI
re z
re c re
CO c z
CO V
E bO CO Z re - E E 3 t-i re re •D o
t-l Z lAJ re E • bOW O
3 fcJ E 0) V u
O Vi
O O Z O re o CO
CJ re v-i
>^13 Vi
E o re C'vi
3 re 3 CO z re AJ bO re 0 0 re 3 *A-i Z Z Z 3 0 z re CO 0 0 Z t-l z
Z Z tH 0 0 z Z bC Z Z 3
—3 re re 3 re 0 3 C CO CO re t-l Z t-l
-t-l 0 Z re z
iz re re re CO z CJ re
re z z re 0 re M to re HZ M t-l CO
re re re z 3 --I AJ CJ) re
C Vi AJ t-l
re --I re
Z t-l z AJ CQ AJ
re re re
Vi > re CO o 5 re Vi
re z E
> o Vi O CLAJ
3 CJ >^'Vl AJ cv
t-l 9—t £3
3 re 3 Z CAJ E O E <a o z CO re z
c re z re re c re c re
Vi -1 —core o AJ c o re o
,3 3 . CJ t-l AJ
to z re Vi O
re c 3 z o *0
AJ re re
re o AJ t-l
re CO 3 re bC
O tJ
o cz
o re CO
IVI
10 o
Z CO
re t-i re
Z t-l re >
V: >> c;
X CO
CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS OF THE STUDY
This chapter is divided into two major sections. The
first section presents an historical analysis of parental
involvement in the bilingual education program in Worcester
Massachusetts from 1972 to 1983.
Reporting the results of the parents' and school admin
istrators' questionnaires, the second section of the chap¬
ter discusses relevant statistical information concerning
the perceptions, feelings and opinions of those involved
with the Worcester Bilingual Education Program during the
school year 1986-1987, four years after the consent decree
order was signed.
Educational Change: An Historical Analysis of Parental
Involvement in the Bilingual Education Program in
Worcester, Massachusetts 1972-1983
Serving as a pioneer in the training and involvement
of parents of limited English proficiency students in the
education of their children, the Hispanic community in
Worcester, Massachusetts has struggled for many years to
improve its bilingual education program. This community
constitutes an organized group that recognizes the value
of education. Active for years in issues of education.
51
the members of Latin Association for Progress and Action
(A.L.P.A.) local community organization, also participated
on the governing body of the local bilingual program of
the Hispanic Parents Advisory Council (HPAC). This coun¬
cil supported parents' attendance at school committee
meetings, discussed school budgets, and helped organize
school committee meetings when money was needed for
teacher hiring. Organized politically, the HPAC used
their influence in many ways, including the obtaining
of more money for textbooks and to hire teachers, and
the voicing of opinions on the school systems' policies.
But despite the winning of small differences, the par¬
ents still were concerned with the problems of the bilin¬
gual education program (Vander-Linden, 1985).
According to the leaders of the current (1987) Hispan¬
ic Parent Advisory Council of Worcester, the resolution
that the Latino students urgently needed a Parents Council
that would represent them occurred only after numerous
meetings of the Hispanic community with the Worcester
Public Schools System. During the 1971-72 school year,
meetings were held to seek solutions to the numerous prob¬
lems encountered by the Spanish-speaking children in
Worcester. Attending one of these meetings, held in June
1972 at North High School and coordinated by the Latin
53
Association for Progress and Action, were one hundred
Spanish-speaking students from the city's junior and
senior high schools. After a series of student confron¬
tations, these students had come together to discuss
educational problems. Mr. Joseph A. Keefe, Assistant
Superintendent for Education, attended this meeting as an
official from the school department ("Spanish-Speaking
Pupils Meet, "THE EVENING GAZETTE, June 16, 1972).
During the meeting, the students presented ten peti¬
tions necessary to improve specific situations at the
schools as well to enhance the education for Hispanic
students in general. Included on this ten point list
was a request for a Spanish-speaking parents' advisory
council.
On October 20, 1972, the first Hispanic Parent Ad¬
visory Council meeting took place at the Spanish Center,
with the first president Severino Rodriguez, presiding.
The next few informative meetings were followed by a
parents' intensive training course. The HPAC continued
their struggle to improve the bilingual education program
with the following responsibilities in mind:
1. To become familiar with the bilingual program,
its functions in the community, and how it should
be affecting the children in the home.
54
2. To serve as an advisory body to the school in all
phases of the bilingual program.
3. To review, make recommendations, and submit a
final decision in writing (over a minimum time¬
table of thirty days) on the validity of the plan
for the bilingual program. This was to be submit¬
ted annually by the school committee through the
superintendent to the Bureau of Bilingual Education.
4. To participate in the interviewing process of can¬
didates for all bilingual positions in the program.
(Any PAC member employed in the program is automat¬
ically excluded from this function.)
5. To disseminate information on bilingual education
throughout the country.
6. To identify newly-arrived families of the various
linguistic groups and extend the services of the
bilingual program to the children.
7. To organize interest groups that will stimulate
parent participation in school activities.
8. To reinforce cultural awareness.
9. To serve as a pressure group for the total imple¬
mentation of the bilingual law in the programs in
the area or the linguistic group represented by
each PAC.
55
10. J.O participate in all appeals processes regard-
ing controversial issues between the students in
the bilingual program and the School System.
11. To contribute in anyway possible to the improve¬
ment and the enrichment of the bilingual program
designed by law to benefit their children (GUIDE¬
LINES FOR PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT, Bureau of Transi¬
tional Bilingual Education, 1972).
By April 1973, the Hispanic parents were prepared to
hold a meeting with the Superintendent of the Worcester
Public Schools System requesting the following improvements.
1. More Bilingual Teachers
2. Bilingual Counselors
3. Bilingual Teacher Aides
4. Curriculum Materials
5. Meaningful Parents and Community Participation
6. A Bilingual Assistant Coordinator
(MINUTES, April 1973).
Since all of the above-mentioned petitions were granted
during the last years, it is evident that the HP AC has
worked very hard to improve the bilingual education pro¬
gram, and has indeed made great contributions to the educa¬
tion of Latino students. The School Department as well as
the School Committee began to recognize the HPAC as a dedi¬
cated group of parents working together with the school
56
system to insure a brighter future for the city's youth.
Progress continued into the 1974-75 school year when
the School Committee approved a Parents Budget which in¬
cluded a full-time parent coordinator. The area of parent
participation continued to progress effectively in behalf
of Latino students in the elementary and high schools.
Though great progress had been achieved in many areas,
much more remained to be done, and the Hispanic parents
continued their struggled with the following goals in mind
1. Represent and defend the rights of the Hispanic
students and parents in the area of education.
2. Provide information and orientation to parents
and students regarding their rights, responsi¬
bilities, and educational opportunities.
3. Promote parents' involvement in the schools and
education in general.
4. Promote and insure the total implementation of
the Transitional Bilingual Act.
5. Serve as an advisory group in all the phases of
the Bilingual Education Program.
6. Reinforce cultural awareness.
7. Promote changes that would improve and enrich the
Bilingual Program, and the education of all
Latinos in Worcester (MINUTES, April 1973).
57
In May 1976, the HPAC called an emergency meeting
with School Department officials to protest what they
called "inequalities in the Worcester School System."
Mrs. Idalia Vazquez, council President, charged that the
substandard education provided to the minority population
would result in many students not being prepared to enter
the higher grades. According to Mrs. Vazquez, the educa¬
tion in the Worcester School System was moving backwards
for minority students: "We have equal rights, but we're
given the leftovers." Included among the major issues
she cited were:
1. Discrimination: "They put the Hispanic students
out of their classrooms into the hallways and under
the stairs because they don't know the English."
2. Lack of understanding about the Puerto Rican
culture.
3. Constant fights between the English-speaking stu¬
dents and the Latino students.
4. Lack of curriculum materials such as textbooks and
papers (Vazquez, 1983).
In 1976, one of the major issues in the School Commit¬
tee was a $90,000 budget cut in the $107,000 sought to
expand the bilingual program in the city. According to
Luis G. Perez, a member of the parents council, "the School
Committee (was) insensitive to the problems of the Hispanic
58
coimnunity." He said that while the English-speaking pop¬
ulation was decreasing, the Spanish-speaking population
had risen, thus making the cutting of funds for expansion
a great loss (Perez, 1983).
By early November 1977, the HPAC prepared and submitted
to the School Superintendent a ten item list designating
the areas where the school system violated the legal re¬
quirements in regard to minority students. The list includ¬
ed :
1. Need for an integrated curriculum.
2. Need for classrooms for the bilingual classes and
English as a Second Language classes.
3. Need for a systematic curriculum.
4. Need for textbooks for each student.
5. Need for more Bilingual Counselors.
6. Need that the notices to parents be written in
Spanish.
7. Need to identify every student who needed bilingual
education.
8. Need of a systematic way of testing the students.
9. Need to notify the parents in planning, developing,
and evaluating the Bilingual Education Program, in¬
cluding the budget procedure throught the HPAC.
10. Need for Bilingual Administrative Staff (Vanden-
Linden, 1985).
59
According to one of the lawyers, who represented the
Hispanic community in a suit against the Worcester Public
School System, the School Administration basically ignored
these petitions of the parents for two and a half months.
Tnen, the school administrators decided to meet with the
parents of the HPAC and their president at the Elm Park
Community School, a meeting also attended by the Superin¬
tendent and five of his assistants (Ibid., 1985).
it clear that they needed dialogue concerning
the problems and needs of their children, the HPAC members
8^®®ted with a lecture from the school officials,
chastising them for consulting with an attorney about the
student's problems in the bilingual program. The adminis¬
trators felt that they were only acting in the students'
interests, and they were not going to accept criticism
from troublemaking parents. Though the parents had looked
toward these meetings with hopes of resolving their prob¬
lems, they were greatly disappointed by the administrators'
unwillingness to cooperate and their determination to oper¬
ate the schools as they saw fit.
After much time spent trying to convince the School
Administration to act upon the requests of the parents,
the HPAC filed suit in May 1978. Neither the HPAC or the
lawyers representing them ever received an offer expressing
a willingness to meet the parents' requests. After a five
60
year court case (1978-1983), the school system received
orders to do new testing, and was finally forced to re¬
concile with the parents.
The 1979 Bilingual Education Program Audit
By 1979, Worcester’s bilingual education program had
an enrollment of approximately 544 Spanish-speaking and
99 Greek-speaking students who had difficulty doing class-
work in English. A bilingual coordinator, assistant co¬
ordinator, 50 teachers, and 20 teacher aides worked on
a full-time basis with these students at the following
schools;
Adams Street School
Bloomingdale Street School
Chandler Community School
Clark Community School
Elm Park Community School
Saint Nicholas Avenue Community School
Woodland Community School
Burcoat Junior High School
Worcester East Middle School
North High School
South High Community School
61
According to the FINAL AUDIT REPORT ON BILINGUAL
EDUCATION: WORCESTER PUBLIC SCHOOLS, on February 13-16,
1979, a visiting team appointed by the Bureau of Transi¬
tional Bilingual Education audited the bilingual program
of the Worcester Public Schools. The purposes of the
audit were to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of
bilingual educational services in VJorcester as well as
to monitor the implementation of Chapter 71A, the Massa¬
chusetts Transitional Bilingual Education Act. The HPAC
also participated in the audit.
On January 29, 1979, the audit chairperson attended
a Hispanic council meeting held at the Elm Park Community
School. About two weeks prior to this meeting, a bureau
staff member completed a random sample of 71 bilingual
students' cumulative folders and 14 cumulative folders
belonging to students who had recently transferred from
the Bilingual Education Program. The team members sum¬
marized and reviewed questionnaires, student records, and
observations of the HPAC.
During the four days spent on-site, the team evalua¬
tors conducted numerous interviews V7ith administrators,
teachers, parents, and students; visited facilities and
classes; and evaluated the following aspects of bilingual
education services in Worcester: 1) administration;
2) identification, placement, and transfer of students;
62
3) program delivery; 4) parental involvement (FINAL AUDIT
REPORT ON BILINGUAL EDUCATION: WORCESTER PUBLIC SCHOOLS,
1979).
Several methods were used to gather information
about the bilingual program. Prior to the on-site visit,
self-evaluation questionnaires were distributed to var¬
ious individuals within the system as follows:
Questionnaires
Superintendent
School Committee Member
Bilingual Program Director
Director of Public Personnel
Bilingual Teacher
ESL Teacher
Regular Teacher
Bilingual Guidance Counselor
Regular Guidance Counselor
PAC Member
Bilingual Parent
Number Distributed
1
7
2
1
37
10
22
4
6
14
38
Number Completed
1
5
2
1
37
10
22
4
6
14
19
The following findings were among the numerous bil¬
ingual education program inadequacies in this selected
district during 1979. A review of the cumulative records
of students in the Transitional Bilingual Education Pro-
indicated that in most cases, records regarding data gram
63
i^coinplete. Examplss of this follov/:
a) results of all tests and evaluations
b) prior years of schooling in the native country
c) the length of residency in the United States
prior to placement in the Worcester Public
School System
d) a description of the student's present program
of instruction.
In some cases students in the bilingual program are
not assigned to classrooms which facilitate the integra¬
tion of T.B.E. students with regular students of compara¬
ble age and grade level. This occurs in the following
schools and classrooms;
a) Bloomingdale Street School - the bilingual class,
grade 2
b) Elm Park Community School - the two ESL classes
c) Harrington Way Junior High School - the bilingual
special education resource room.
The school system does not utilize Greek or Spanish
PAC coordinators.
Forms used in the special education program under
Chapter 766 have not been translated into Greek for lim¬
ited English-speaking Greek parents.
While in general, the translation of forms used in
the special education program under Chapter 766 for
64
informing Hispanic parents has been excellent, the
following omissions are cited:
a) The referral notice for parents has not been
updated and it omits an explanation of the
parents' rights to an independent evaluation
in an approved facility at school committee
expense.
b) The parents rights letter which accompanies
the students Individualized Education Plan (lEP)
and which explains the parents' rights in rela¬
tion to accepting or rejecting the lEP has not
been translated.
While their is considerable evidence of excellent
and pertinent information for Hispanic parents a similar
emphasis is not in evidence regarding translations of
communications sent home to Greek parents.
According to interviews with bilingual staff (TBE/ESL)
the majority indicated a great need for inservice train¬
ing for all personnel who v7ork with LEP students, includ¬
ing bilingual (TBE/ESL) and regular education staff. In
particular, aides and new teachers need more training and
orientation.
Interviews with bilingual staff (TBE/ESL) indicate
that staff meetings for TBE program personnel are needed
at the elementary through secondary levels and on a reg¬
'1 ular basis.
65
The bilingual classrooms at the Bloomingdale Street
School (bilingual special education), and the two ESL
classrooms at the Elm Park Community School are not equal
in all physical respects to those classrooms used for the
regular classroom program (Final Audit Report on Bilingual
Education. pages 6-9) .
In the aspect of Administration the following issues
were reported:
1) Adequate program administration is not being
provided in the Worcester Public Schools System:
a) The bilingual coordinator does not carry
the authority commensurate with the legal
responsibilities of his position.
b) Inadequate administrative capacity has been
allocated to the bilingual program. The two
administrative positions in the bilingual
program are insufficient for implementing
and coordinating the program, the result of
which produces problems in the following areas:
--communication between TBE/ESL teachers
district-v7ide
--communication between TBE/ESL and bilingual
special education teachers
--communication between TBE/ESL and regular
education teachers
--orientation for new TBE/ESL teachers and
for TBE aides in general
--follow-up of students transferred from the
TBE program into the regular education
program
--clarity regarding the roles of principals,
teachers, and the bilingual coordinator in
relation to the TBE programs within the
schools
--integration of TBE students with their
English-speaking peers.
2. The administration has not established procedures
for conducting an annual in-house review of the
bilingual program.
3. There are not special education services provided
to Greek LEP students throughout the Worcester
Public Schools System. One student in the Greek
TBE program at North High School has been placed
in a special education reading class ^^7ithout an
evaluation.
4. Although enormous progress has been made in pro¬
viding special education services for Spanish¬
speaking students in the Worcester TBE program,
there are problems at three of the four bilingual
special needs classes visited.
67
a) Clark Street School; The special education
teacher who services TBE students is not
bilingual, Spanish/English.
b) Harrington Way Middle School: The TBE stu-
^®^ts enrolled in a 502,3 prototype program
are not provided with an opportunity for in¬
tegration with peers of the same age grade
level in the TBE program.
c) South High School: Students enrolled in a
502.3 prototype program are integrated only
into the ESL component of the TBE program.
5. The following bilingual classes exceed the recom¬
mended maximum student/teacher ratios established
by the TBE law:
South High School: Grammar classes in rooms 234,
235, 301, Biology in 301, and Math in 337. Wood¬
land Community School: The class in room B-6.
Worcester East Middle School: The class in room 2.
6. Pupil progress reports at the secondary level
(grades 9 thru 12) are not made available in the
student's native language for Spanish and Greek
TBE students. In addition, no progress reports are
available in Greek for grades K thru 8 (Final Au¬
dit Report on Bilingual Education, page 10-14).
68
Findings on I.D. Placement and Transfer
Although, the Worcester Schools System had a bilin¬
gual program that was operating prior to the time that
the State authorized the Transitional Bilingual Educa¬
tion Program, the school system was operating only the
dual language program, and there were many problems
interfering with the education of the students:
is not written set of procedures governing
_^e placement of LEP students into the bilingual
E^rogram. The contradictory and incomplete infor¬
mation given by TBE teachers, ESL teachers, and
administrators reveals that a need exists for
system-wide information sharing to combat the
following problems:
a) Since there are no guidelines for the iden¬
tification of these students, there are
LEP students presently attending schools
with no bilingual program or ESL teacher.
b) Again, with the absence of guidelines, there
are schools in which children are not iden¬
tified until several weeks after the begin¬
ning of the school year.
2. While the semi-annual testing of LEP students for
English language proficiency is in compliance with
69
the TBE law, the fact exists that most TBE
students have taken the same test six times over
a three year period. This situation, if allowed
to continue, may undermine the validity of the
test results.
3. The Nadler Diagnostic and Placement test, pres¬
ently utilized for testing English language pro¬
ficiency at the K-12 grade levels, is not appro¬
priate to all students in those grades. The
Nadler test has been developed for use with chil¬
dren in grades K-8 and is not a valid assessment
device for children above the 8th grade level.
^exists no system-wide procedure for con¬
ducting the annual evaluation of bilingual stu¬
dents in the TBE program. Schools with TBE pro¬
grams use a variety or combination of devices
for testing aural comprehension, speaking, read¬
ing and English language writing abilities. The
following schools provide an example:
Bloomingdale Street School #1, Chandler Street
School, Clark Street School, Elm Park Community
School, Saint Nicholas School, South High School,
Woodland Street (Annex) and Worcester East Middle
confirmed using the Nadler Test. At the
70
Bloomingdale Street School #2, evaluations
are based on the Metropolitan Test. At North
High School, evaluations rely on teacher-made
instruments, while Burncoat Junior High School
uses a combination of devises.
According to one lawyer dealing with the court case
against the school system, many problems existed in the
area of testing. As an example, some students, who had
language problems and ought to have been in the bilin¬
gual education program might have been doing well if
they had been correctly placed. Instead, due to the
fact that they were not first tested for language prob¬
lems, these students were sent to a special needs class
for English-speaking students because they were thought
to be slow or learning disabled. Therefore, when the
students were finally tested in their own language, they
were found to be without learning disabilities. Language
difficulties had, quite tragically and unnecessarily been
translated into learning disabilities. In some schools
where the teachers rather than giving the students bilin¬
gual special services would send them to a bilingual
class, the bilingual classes were being used as a dumping
ground for students who truly were having learning rather
than language problems.
71
Another problem in the area of testing was that the
school system did not have a systematic testing process
to make sure that everyone participated. This led to an
inability to distinguish between those Hispanics who
could speak English and those who needed to be placed in
the bilingual program, according to Vander-Linden one of
the lawyers in the lawsuit (Vander-Linden, 1985).
The area of I.D. placement and transfer posed another
problem. It was reported that a general lack of documen¬
tation in the Transitional Bilingual Education (TBE) pro¬
gram existed:
a) No records being kept on the numbers of students
released from the TBE program after one, two, or
three years.
b) No follow-up to estimate how former TBE students
perform academically once they are mainstreamed.
c) No formal district-wide assessment of academic
skills in the two target languages (Greek and
Spanish).
d) No written set of procedures for transferring
students from the TBE program into regular
education programs (FINAL AUDIT REPORT ON
BILINGUAL EDUCATION: WORCESTER PUBLIC SCHOOLS,
p. 17).
72
Findings Regarding a Lack of Instructional Materials
The late arrival of textbooks was also detrimental
to learning. Due to larger enrollments than expected,
lack of forethought, or mismanagement of funds, the test-
books that were needed in September often arrived in
January or February. For four months, the students
either shared their few books or the textbooks were sim¬
ply not available.
By 1977, when the Hispanic parents submitted the
case to their lawyer, the Worcester School Administration
was receiving large amounts of federal funds through
Title 4C, yet the school administrators were faced with
having to make substantial expenditures for instructional
materials such as books. One of the things that made it
politically more difficult for the school system to spend
the money it needed for the bilingual programs was the
fact that the Worcester school system was in a period of
fairly rapid decline in population. The baby boom was
over and the school enrollment was tapering down from
30,000 to about 24,000. With a decrease of approximately
6000 students, there were many textbooks in the system
that probably were not needed. But, though the declining
enrollment gave evidence for less expenditures, the bilin¬
gual education program provided different figures, for
the Latino enrollment was growing. So the fact remains
73
that during the 1970s while federal funds were being
used to buy textbooks for the bilingual education pro¬
gram, the order process to acquire these books and the
administration control over doing so was left to the
local schools (Linden-Vanden, 1985).
1979 The Bilingual Education Program Audit Findings
The Bilingual Program Audit Team of 1979 reported
the following findings about instructional materials for
the Transitional Bilingual Education program:
1. A variety of instructional materials is needed
in the TBE program to meet the linguistic needs
and ability levels of Limited English Proficiency
(LEP) students in both the native language and
English language. Consequently,
a) there is no TBE elementary reading skills
checklist;
b) there are few skills master with reading
series;
c) there is a lack of individual reading
materials.
2. Although libraries have a number of printed and
nonprinted materials, in the Adams Street,
Bloomingdale, Clark Street, Elm Park Community,
Burncoat Junior High, Worcester East Middle and
74
South High Community Schools, the materials
are disproportionate to the enrollment of
students in the TBE programs.
Carrow Test for Spanish Language Comprehension
presently used by the bilingual speech therapist
does not test for articulation or other linguistic
ic^lties; rather it tests for language com¬
prehension. This instrument is designed for use
with students under seven years of age, but is
being used to evaluate students of all ages (Final
Audit Report on Bilingual Education, pages 22-23).
This struggle for books and instructional materi¬
als lasted for several years.
Findings in the Area of Curriculum
1. The TBE program does not have a curriculum de¬
signed to ensure that students enrolled in such
programs can achieve skills in oral composition,
speaking, reading and writing of English suf¬
ficient to perform ordinary classwork in English
within the three-years transitional period.
2. The Harrington Way Middle School bilingual spe¬
cial education program does not provide its six
bilingual special education students, four of v7hom
are in 502.3 prototypes an opportunity to inte¬
grate, except for gym and lunch with students
75
from other programs. There are no other bilin¬
gual programs in the school.
3. Limited English proficiency students (LEP) en¬
rolled in the TBE programs are not consistently
i^f^grated in nonverbal subjects such as art,
music and physical education with their English-
speaking peers. This situation occurred in the
following schools:
a) Elm Park Community - art, music and physical
education;
b) Worcester East Middle - art and music;
c) Clark Street School - art and music;
d) Bloomingdale - art and music;
e) Adams Street School - art and music.
4. All limited English proficiency TBE students are
excluded from vocational courses at the high
school level because vocational education courses
are not offered in their native language.
5. The health and safety course required for high
school graduation is not offered in the native
language of TBE students (Ibid, page 25 and 27).
Some Problems with the Greek Bilingual Program
According to John V. Corcoran, the first coordinator
of the bilingual prograqi, by 1970 when the program began.
76
there were about thirty Greek students and sixty His¬
panic students in the program. Due to a large immigra¬
tion of Greeks, the bilingual program with the Greek stu¬
dents commenced. By 1977, the total enrollment was about
one hundred Greek bilingual students, but after several
years the number of Greek immigrants declined. However,
the Hispanic population continued growing as people ar¬
rived from Puerto Rico, the Dominican Republic and other
Spanish-speaking countries.
The 1979 Bilingual Education Program Audit reported
the following findings regarding the Greek bilingual
program:
1. The Greek TBE program at the Worcester East
Middle School and North High School offer no
full-time bilingual instruction in the required
academic areas, i.e., U.S. History, math and
science.
2. Limited English proficiency Greek students in the
Worcester Public Schools are not provided with
guidance counseling services in their native
language.
Greek Parental Involvement
1. Although repeated requests have been made by the
Greek parents for a Greek PAG coordinator, there
77
is no one designated for coordinating the activi¬
ties and meetings of a TBE Greek PAG.
2. Due to the nonexistence of a Greek PAG there are
no non-parent members of the Greek community nor
Greek secondary students involved in the activi¬
ties of the PAG.
3. No evidence of fiscal support for necessary sup¬
port activities of a Greek PAG exists in the 1978-
79 program plan.
4. The Greek parents have not been given the ade¬
quate and necessary orientation and training
under the general requirements for parental in¬
volvement .
5. Although there is an Hispanic sub-PAG in exis¬
tence, there is no evidence of a Greek sub-PAG.
6. There is no evidence in existence of a Master PAG
composed of Greek and Hispanic parents.
7. Due to the nonexistence of a Greek sub-PAG:
a) Greek parents do not meet at least once annu¬
ally with the school committee;
b) Greek parents do not regularly meet with
school officials;
c) Greek parents do not participate in the plan¬
ning development and evaluation of the TBE
program;
78
d) Greek parents are generally not involved in
the interview process for the hiring of the
Greek TBE program personnel;
s) Greek parents do not have an opportunity to
receive in advance the school district's
letter of intent and plan (Ibid, pages 29 and
30) .
The 1970 Bilingual Program Audit Team reported many
recommendations to improve the Transitional Bilingual
Educational program and to provide technical assistance
by utilizing the audit report as a basis for further dev¬
elopment of high quality educational programs for limited
English proficiency students. And the work is not yet
done. The audit report of 1979 is still helping Worcester
Public Schools System to meet the legislative mandates of
Chapter 71A, the Massachusetts Transitional Bilingual
Education Act.
Findings Regarding the Hispanic Parental Involvement
According to the FINAL AUDIT REPORT OF 1979 in the
Worcester Public Schools System, the following problems
in the subject area of parental involvement were reported:
1. There is no Hispanic coordinator designated for
coordinating the activities and meetings of the
TBE Hispanic PAG.
79
2. While there is an Hispanic parental advisory
committee, there is no evidence of Hispanic
parents of secondary students participating
in the PAG.
3 • The Hispanic PAG is not provided the opportunity
to participate in developing a budget for nec¬
essary PAG operating funds.
4. \>Jhile recognizing that in the past, some orienta¬
tion and training under the general requirements
for parental involvement has been provided for
Hispanic parents, this process has not been main¬
tained.
5. There is no evidence in existence of a Master PAG
composed of Greek and Hispanic parents.
6. The procedure for conducting the annual review
of the TBE program has not been disseminated to
Hispanic PAG members (Ibid, page 29 and 33).
Information about the English as a Second Language Program
During the time of this court suite case against the
school system (1978-1983), the Worcester Public Schools
did have an English as a Second Language program that was
divided into two services. One was part of the Title I
program and the other was part of the bilingual education
program. Though many of the students had reached a
80
certain level of proficiency in English, they were not
fluent enough in a regular monolingual classroom. In
fact, the English as a Second Language (ESL) services
were included in the law suit because there were problems
in terms of the classrooms used as well as the need for
a systematic curriculum.
Educational Change; The Aftermath of a Community Struggle
for Bilingual Education
Presently, the Transitional Bilingual Education pro¬
gram operates under the conditions of a 1983 consent de¬
cree that stemmed from the original suite filed on May 24,
1978 by the Latin Association for Progress and Action
(A.L.P.A.) the Hispanic Parents Advisory Committee, and the
eight school children who represented 2000 Hispanic stu¬
dents in Worcester and all their parents. The consent
decree, reached after five years (1978-1983 stipulated
the use of testing procedures to assess which students
need bilingual education, the type of bilingual education
to be offered, the personnel who must be involved in
bilingual education, and the degree of parental involve¬
ment that must be allowed.
In August 1983, the federal court ordered the improve¬
ment of the bilingual education program in the Worcester
Public Schools. The improvements proposed by this court
decree included the following:
81
1. A utilized method of comprehensive identifi¬
cation with the purpose of identifying all
students whose native language is not English.
2. The use of normalized evaluation procedures and
testing instruments to evaluate the fluency of
Hispanic children in English and Spanish.
3. The development of a comprehensive curriculum
for all classes of bilingual education, and the
provision of textbooks and materials for adequate
teaching.
"^be utilization of results from normalized tests
to determine a student's eligibility for entering
and learning the Bilingual Education Program.
5. Availability of bilingual teaching, counseling,
and aministrative personal.
6. Notification to parents in Spanish about matters
concerning bilingual education, special education,
school discipline, retentions, etc.
7. Notification to parents in planning, developing,
and evaluating the Bilingual Education Program,
including the budget procedure from the Parents'
Council.
8. Continuation of individual remedial services to
Hispanic students who previously were not provided
with appropriate services.
82
9. Renouncement of any lawsuit for monetary damages
by an Hispanic parent or student, based on the
previous deficiency of Worcester Public Schools
providing appropriate bilingual education ser¬
vices (Notice from the Proposed Agreement of
Lawsuit. August 1983).
The U.S. District Court sent a notice of the proposed
3-greement from this consent decree to the Hispanic parents
of Worcester:
If you don't object to the proposed settlement, you
don't have to take any action to respond to this
notice. Hov/ever, if you object to the proposed
settlement--which you have every right to do--then
you should pursue the following procedure.
On August 25, 1983 at 3:00 p.m. the United States
District Court for the District of Massachusetts,
United States Courthouse, Post Office Square,
Boston, Massachusetts will carry out a hearing. At
such time, you may appear either to listen to the
proposal or to object to the settlement.
If you desire to object to the proposed settlement,
you should submit your objection, in writing, to¬
gether with all the papers related to the settlement
83
to: Secretary of the United States District Court,
Boston, MA 02109. This needs to be done on or
before August 11, 1983. No member of the group that
objects to the settlement will be listened to at the
hearing on August 25, 1983, and no paper submitted
by any member of this group will be received or con¬
sidered by the court, except when the Court finds the
person's motives justified, or if the person has
already submitted her/his objections in writing as
previously specified.
If you believe the aid provided for you under the
terms of the proposed settlement are inadequate,
and consider yourself having the right to additional
or different aid, you should object to the proposed
settlement. If you don't send a letter indicating
your intention to oppose the consented decree order
on or before August 11, 1983, dated by mail, it's
presumed that you agree with the proposed settle¬
ment, and you will not be able to file any other
claim, originating from this present case, against
the City of Worcester and its Public School for its
acts or omissions to act occurring before August 25,
1983 (Ibid, pgs. 3 & 4).
84
On August 25, U.S. District Court Judge Robert K.
Keeton noted that there had been no objections registered,
according to Brenda Downs, Keeton's docket clerk. The
court case order was signed on August 25, 1983 by Judge
Keeton. This order was based on a conset decree signed
by Mayor Sara J. Robertson, who chaired the Worcester
Schools Committee; Charles E. Vander Linden, who repre¬
sented the Hispanic Parents Advisory Committee and the
^^bin Association for Progress and Action; Lawrence J.
Turner, a mediator for the U.S. Department of Justice;
Malcolm L. Burdine, an assistant city solicitor; and two
additional lawyers, Alan J. Rom and Roger L. Rice (LAW¬
SUIT ALPA V. DURKIN, 1983).
The Major Achievements for the Students and Their Parents
In looking at the agreement document which also in¬
cluded the long term WORCESTER PUBLIC SCHOOLS LAU PLAN,
describing the need for the proper identification and
placement of limited English proficient students as well
as additional pages regarding survey forms used in the
Bilingual Educational Program, this researcher has high¬
lighted the major educational achievements resulting from
the lawsuit.
The major educational achievements as a result of the
lawsuit include:
85
A. Instructional Areas
The Defendants shall ensure that all instructional
areas used for bilingual classes and ESL classes
are adequate and comparable in quality to in¬
structional areas used throughout the school sys¬
tem. No hallways or portions of hallways shall
be used for ESL or bilingual instruction. Each
bilingual class shall have a separate classroom.
In no event shall two bilingual classes simul¬
taneously share a single classroom nor shall a
bilingual and ESL class simultaneously share a
classroom (Lawsuit, pg. 30).
B Assessment
The Defendants shall carefully assess the lin-
quistic proficiency and academic achievement of
all school-age children enrolled in the Worcester
Public Schools whose primary or home language may
be Spanish (i.e. all school-age children identi¬
fied pursuant to the procedures set forth in
Section III, supra). Appropriate validated tests
shall be utilized to assess linguistic proficiency
in Spanish and English. Tests of language profi¬
ciency in Spanish and English shall include the
measurement of reading skills, reading
86
comprehension, and speaking skills. Language
Proficiency tests administered to children who
are too young to have acquired reading skills
shall measure readiness skills and speaking
skills (Ibid., pg. 6).
According to the Worcester Voluntary Lau Plan, the
Director of Transitional Bilingual Education will be re¬
sponsible to assess students in the provisional LAU
categories A through D for language dominance, using the
following testing devices:
a. Basic Inventory of Natural Language (BINL)
K-3 Spanish
K-12 all other languages
b. Bahia Oral Language Test (BOLT)
4-12 Spanish
c. CLOZE Techniques
2-12 all languages (Lau Plan, p. 6).
Also the Lau Plan, specifies the kind of tests to
be used for native language proficiency:
a. Oral language proficiency in the native language
for Hispanics to be determined by the tests selec¬
ted for language dominance/proficiency using
fluency and complexity scores from the BINL and
the levels derived from the BOLT.
87
b. Reading proficiency in the native language is
to be measured by the CLOZE Technique utilizing
appropriated age and grade tests.
0. Distribution and Placement
The Lau Plan specifies that the students will be as¬
signed to the appropriate LAU categories after an assess¬
ment of the results of their language dominance/proficiency
tests. The LAU categories will be as follows:
A - Monolingual Non-English: Students who speak
totally a language other than English.
S “ Predominantly Non-English: Students whose
ability to communicate is predominantly Non-
English but who possess some understanding and
speaking ability in English.
"C" - Bilingual: Students whose ability to communi¬
cate is comparable in English and a language
other than English.
"D" - Predominantly English: Students whose ability
to communicate is predominantly English but
possess some ability to communicate in a lang¬
uage other than English.
"E” - Monolingual English: Students whose ability
to communicate is solely in English.
The principal of each school is responsible to follow
the system-wide procedures for the appropriate
88
identification and placement of limited English proficient
students in the Worcester Public Schools System. The
Director of Worcester Transitional Bilingual Education is
responsible for organizing a LAU data profile for all
students in LAU categories A.B.C, and D profiles to be
kept by the bilingual education office.
^• Assessment of Academic Achievement
Also, the Director of Transitional Bilingual Educa¬
tion is responsible to ensure that all students in grades
1 through 12 enrolled in this bilingual education program
are tested annually for academic achievement in their
native language and English (Lau Plan, page 8).
a. Reading: The CLOZE technique will be used to
measure achievement in reading to determine stu¬
dents’ reading level.
At this writing, the CLOZE Technique is being admin¬
istered in Spanish, English, Greek and Vietnamese. Pre¬
sently, the school system has the bilingual program for
Vietnamese students.
b. The tests shall not be administered to students
in LAU Category B in those instances where a
student’s English is so limited that he or she
cannot proceed with the examination without undue
trauma and frustration. The test administrator
shall (1) make such determination; (2) terminate
89
the test administration in appropriate cases;
and (3) include explanatory notes in the ap¬
propriate record(s) indicating that the examina¬
tion could not be complete by the student (Ibid.,
page 8).
In the area of curriculum, the consent decree docu¬
ment states the following agreement:
E• Content of Transitional Bilingual Education Program
Defendants shall provide a transitional bilingual
education program to all Hispanic students who are of
limited English proficiency. A program in bilingual educa¬
tion shall mean a full-time program of instruction (1)
in all those courses or subjects offered to students in
the standard curriculum in the native language of the
children of limited English proficiency, and also courses
in the acquisition of English language skills; (2) in the
aural comprehension, speaking and writing of the native
language of the children of the program and in the aural
comprehension, speaking, reading and writing of English,
and (3) in the history and culture of the country, ter¬
ritory or geography area which is the native land of the
parents of children of limited English-speaking ability
and in the history and culture of the United States
(Lav7suit, pages 11-12) .
1. The data collected from the identification
process will be used to determine the loca¬
tion and language groups of students.
2. Students will be placed at the appropriate
age and grade level in the Standard Curriculum
Program and, in addition, receive the following
services depending on their needs;
a) English as a Second Language
Tutorial assistant in the English language
c) Tutorial assistant in the primary language
when available
d) Other educational alternatives will be con
sidered when such a student is not achiev¬
ing at her/his grade level.
F. Bilingual Secondary School Program
The following courses will be offered to the second
ary students when there are twenty students or more in
one language group:
(a) All courses required for graduations will be
offered in the primary language.
(b) All courses in the native language and native
culture.
(c) Classes in English as a Second Language at
various levels.
91
More specifically, the Lau Plan states that all
students in the Elementary Bilingual Transitional Bilin¬
gual Education Program will receive instruction in the
foUo^i^S subjects in English and their native language.
a. Twenty students or more in one language p;roup:
(a) Mathematics
(b) Reading and Language Arts
(c) Science
(d) Social Science
(e) English as a Second Language
All students in the bilingual program will be in¬
tegrated with standard curriculum students for the
following subjects: Art, Music, and Physical Educa¬
tion. Also for the following activities Field
Trips, Assemblies, Recess, Extracurriculars Activi¬
ties and any non-academic subject areas.
b. Less than twenty students in one language group:
The Lau Plan specifies that the Director of
Transitional Bilingual Education will be responsi¬
ble to provide to language groups of less than
twenty LAU category A,B, and C students, effec¬
tive programs of instructions for both levels:
elementary and secondary (Lau Plan, page 10);
92
Students will be grouped according to language
proficiencies and academic abilities and will
also be integrated in the Standard Curriculum
in the following: Art, Music, and Physical
Education, Field Trips, Extra-Curricular Activi-
bias, Assemblies, and any other non-academic
subject areas.
Any student who is entitled to participate in the
Transitional Bilingual Education Program and
whose parents request a Standard Curriculum Pro¬
gram will be provided with English as a Second
Language in addition to the Standard Curriculum
Program (Lau Plan, p. 10).
As this researcher mentioned, one major complaint of
the Hispanic parents was a lack of textbooks and materials
in the bilingual education program during the 1970s. The
consent decree specifies the following about books and
materials:
1. The Defendants (school system) shall comply with
the provisions of the Lau Plan regarding materials
(see page 13, Lau Plan).
2. The Defendants shall establish a central resource
library of Spanish books for use by teachers and
students in the bilingual program. A library of
93
books and magazines in Spanish shall be main¬
tained in each school with bilingual classes and
shall include but not be limited to dictionaries,
encyclopedias, supplementary reading books and
magazines.
3. The Defendants shall instruct all bilingual and
ESL teachers to submit requests for additional
textbooks, workbooks, or materials to the bilin¬
gual office and to the building principal, when¬
ever they determine that additional textbooks
or materials are necessary (e.g. whenever each
student cannot be provided with his/her own copy
of a textbook and workbook). The Form 104 Re¬
quest for Textbooks shall be distributed to all
bilingual and ESL teachers at the commencement
of each academic year (Lawsuit, p. 16).
According to the Lau Plan, the Director of Transi¬
tional Bilingual Education will ensure that materials pro¬
vided to students in both Bilingual and English as a
Second Language classes will be appropriate and sufficient
in number. The problem of the textbooks and other educa¬
tional materials arriving late to schools was resolved
using the following procedure:
1. By May 1st of each school year, the Director of
Transitional Bilingual Education will have
94
conducted an inventory of teaching materials
currently in use in the Bilingual Prograni. A
survey will also be taken of bilingual department
staff to determine what primary language and
English language teaching materials will be
needed. The Director of TBE will compile a list
of materials to be acquired prior to commencement
of classes. This list shall be completed by
May 1st (Lau Plan. 1980, p. 13).
2. The following materials will be provided to the
appropriate staff members by the Director of
Transitional Bilingual Education Program:
a. Basics in English
b. Basics in the native language
c. English as a Second Language materials
d. Language Arts materials in English
e. Mathematics textbooks in the native language
f. Language Arts materials in the native lan¬
guage
g. Skills checklists
h. Science textbooks in the native language
i. Social Studies textbooks in the native
language (Ibid., p. 13).
95
G. Bilingual Personnel
The consent decree also addressed the area of bilin¬
gual personnel:
The Defendants (school system) shall take all nec¬
essary steps for the effective recruitment of bilin¬
gual applicants for teaching, counseling and admin¬
istrative positions in the Worcester Public Schools
(Lawsuit ALPA v. DURKIN. 1983, p. 21).
The Defendants shall employ at least three full¬
time bilingual guidance counselors at the elementary
school levels, one full-time guidance counselor in
the magnet school program, and one full-time bilin¬
gual guidance counselor at the secondary level
(Ibid., p. 18).
The Defendants shall maintain the position of Hispan¬
ic Parent Advisory Council Coordinator to carry out
the functions previously assigned to the position,
and set forth in the existing job description (Ibid,
p. 19).
More details on other dimensions of the jobs of bilin¬
gual personnel can be found in the LAU PLAN, pages 17-20.
K. Cultural Programs
For many years, the HPAC struggled for Latin-Ameri-
ican history and culture classes for their children in
96
the secondary level, and the consent decree directly ad¬
dressed their needs:
The Defendants (school system) shall offer, subject
to a sufficient enrollment, a cultural program at
the junior and high school level with elective
courses focusing on the history and culture of Latin
American countries. One of the goals of this pro¬
gram shall be to provide course offerings which are
of iriterest to Hispanic and non Hispanic students,
thus motivating them to continue and complete their
high school education. This goal is of primary
importance in the establishment and operation of the
program because of the increasing diversity of dif¬
ferent ethnic language groups within the Worcester
Public Schools and the need for increasing cross
cultural awareness (Lawsuit, ALPA v. DURKIN, page 29).
I. Hispanic Parents Advisory Council
The participation of parents is an essential factor
in the education of our students in this democratic soci¬
ety. Knowing that bilingual education is a right that
the minority language groups living in this country must
continually defend, the Hispanic parents want to obtain
a high quality of education for their children, and, for
that reasons, they organized politically to produce edu¬
cational changes in the school system. With this in
97
mind, the consent decree complies with the Massachusetts
General Laws Chapter 71A, regarding Parental Involvement;
The Defendants (school system) shall ensure that
the Hispanic Parents Advisory Council (HPAC) is effec¬
tively involved in an advisory capacity in all aspects
of the planning, implementation, monitoring and evalua-
tion of the Transitional Bilingual Education Program,
The HPAC shall be provided with a meaningful opportunity
to participate in the monitoring of the Consent Order and
its present budget shall be maintained subject only to
annual adjustments which reflect the same percentage
increase or decrease as the general budget of the
Worcester Public Schools. The HPAC, through its officers,
shall be responsible for the expenditure of such funds
and for selection of training events and other activities
for which expenditures are made (Law-suit ALPA v, DURKIN,
page 25).
Other areas that the parents negotiated on and in¬
cluded in the decree are:
a. Bilingual Special Education Services
b. Chapter I Services
c. Vocational and Occupational Courses and Programs
d. Maintenance of Records and Compilation of Data
e. Gifted and Talented Students
f. Discipline
98
g. Location of Bilingual Programs
h. Transfer Out of Bilingual Education Classes
i. English as a Second Language (ESL) Instruction
j . Substitute Teachers
k. State and Federal Funding
l. Transportation of Bilingual Program Students
m. Timetable for Implementation
n. Waiver of Damages
o. Entitlement Students
As we can see, the 1983 Consent Decree and the
WORCESTER VOLUNTARY LAU PLAN are most effective catalysts
for promoting equal educational opportunities for the
Hispanic language minority children and other ethnic
groups in the City of Worcester.
Parents' Responses to the Questionnaires
This initial section presents the participants par¬
ents ' responses to the twenty-nine questions included in
the questionnaire. W& will discuss the participants'
responses to questions concerning their perceptions, feel¬
ings, and opinions about the Bilingual Education Program
in which their children participate, after the 1983 con¬
sent decree order.
In most instances, the presentation of data will
follow an item by item format. When deemed appropriate,
items will be consolidate.
99
Materials and School Facilities
Regarding materials such as books, pencils, papers,
, etc. in school, the data indicate that the vast
majority of the participants (84.0%) agreed that their
children have sufficient materials in school. When
asked if their children are receiving classes in an ap¬
propriate classroom most (87.2%) agreed. Furthermore,
most of the participants (80.7%) believe that the schools
which their children attend have good science facilities.
Also the overwhelming majority of the parents (95.47o)
reveal that the schools offer library services. The
breakdown of the response to these four items follows:
My child has sufficient materials such as books, pencils, papers, crayons, etc, in school_ Number Percent
Strongly disagree 6 4.17. Disagree 4 ^*^7° Somewhat disagree 13 8.97. Agree 42 28.8% Strongly agree 81 55.5%
10 Missing TOTAL 1^6 100.0%
Valid cases = 146 Missing cases= 10
100
I know that my child is receiving classes in an appropriate classroom Number
Never 7
Almost never 3
Sometimes 4
Most of the time 9
Always 35
47 TOTAL 109
Valid cases = 109 Missing cases= 47
Percent
6.47o 2.87, 3.77, 8.37,
78.97, Missing
100.07,
The school which my child attends has a good science facility
Strongly disagree Disagree Somewhat disagree Agree Strongly agree
TOTAL
Valid cases = 140 Missing cases= 16
The school which my child attends offers library services
Strongly disagree Disagree Somewhat disagree Agree Strongly agree
TOTAL
Valid cases = 151 Missing cases= 5
Number Percent
8 5.77, 8 5.7%
11 7.97, 35 25.07, 78 55.7% 16 Missing
156 100.0%
Number Percent
2 1.3% 3 2.0% 2 1.3%
27 17.37, 117 77.5%
5 Missing 156 100.07,
Learning English and the English as a Second Language (ESP Teacher
When asked if their children are leaning sufficient
English, the vast majority of the parents (86.4/,) agreed,
101
and an overwhelming majority of them (94.0%) believe that
the English as a Second Language (ESL) teachers are sat¬
isfactory. The specific responses to these two items
follow:
I believe that my child is learning sufficient English__ Number Percent
Strongly disagree 4 l.TU Disagree 4 l.TU Somewhat disagree 12 8*. 27o Agree 32 2l]87, Strongly agree 95 64*. 6%
9 Missing total 156 100.0%
Valid cases = 147 Missing cases= 9
I find that the English as a Second Language (ESL) Teachers are satisfactory Number Percent
Strongly disagree 1 1.47o Disagree 3 Somewhat disagree 5 3.3% Agree 40 26.57o Strongly agree 102 67.57o
5 Missing TOTAL 156 100.0%
Valid cases = 151 Missing cases= 5
Learning Spanish and the Bilingual Teacher
Most parents (95.27o) agreed that their children are
learning sufficient Spanish, and this coincides with the
fact that (93.2%) believe that the Bilingual Teachers are
satisfactory. The breakdown of the responses follow:
102
I believe that my child is learning sufficient Spanish_ Number
Strongly disagree 2 Disagree i Somewhat disagree 4
Agree 38
Strongly agree 100
TOTAL 155
Valid cases = 145 Missing cases= 11
Percent
1.47o .7%
2.87, 26.27o 69.07o
Missing 100.07o
I find that the Bilingual Teachers are satisfactory Number Percent
Disagree 6 4.17o Somewhat disagree 4 2.77o Agree 28 18.97o Strongly agree 110 74.3%
8 Missing TOTAL 156 100.0%
Valid cases = 148 Missing cases= 8
Bilingual Counselor and the Bilingual Coordinator Services
The children of many of the parents (88.1%) do have
the services of a Bilingual Counselor, and most parents
(82.97o) were aware of the existence of a Bilingual Coor¬
dinator whose duties included improving the relations be¬
tween the school and the community as well as being help¬
ful in the educational needs of their children. The
specific responses follow:
103
My child's school has the services of a Bilinsual Counselor_ Number
Strongly disagree 6
Disagree X Somewhat disagree 9 Agree 32
Strongly agree 87 21
TOTAL 156
Valid cases = 135 Missing cases= 21
Percent
4.47o .7%
6.77o 23.77, 64.47o
Missing 100.07,
I am aware that the school system provides a Bilingual Coordinator to improve the relations between the school and community. This coor¬ dinator can be helpful in the educa- tional needs of my child
Strongly disagree Disagree Somewhat disagree Agree Strongly agree
TOTAL
Tiber Percent
10 7.5% 5 3.77, 8 6.0%
34 25.4% 77 57.5% 22 Missing
156 100.0%
Valid cases = 134 Missing cases= 22
School Location and the School Bus service
Regarding the child's school location, the data
indicated that over half of the parents participating
(57.07o) felt that their children's schools were located
too far from their homes, with (63.2/o) of the parents
indicating that their children must use a school bus to
attend school. Specific responses follow:
104
I think that my child's school is located in another community or section too far from my home
Strongly disagree Disagree Somewhat disagree Agree Strongly agree
TOTAL
Valid cases = 135 Missing cases= 21
Number
22 19 17 30 47 21
156
Percent
16.3% 14.1% 12.6% 22.2% 34.8%
Missing 100.0%
My child uses a school bus to go to school_ Number
Never 55
Sometimes 5
Most of the time 5
Always 84 7
TOTAL 156
Valid cases = 149 Missing cases= 7
Percent
36.9% 3.4% 3.4%
56.4% Missing
100.0%
Child's Cultural Activities
Concerned over the school's participation in trans¬
mitting traditions of their ethnic group, many of the
parents (66.47o) felt that their children received assign¬
ments dealing with their country, famous persons, customs,
and traditions, and, in fact, the vast majority (80.4%)
reported that their children speak about activities cel¬
ebrating Hispanic Week or Puerto Rican Week in their
105
child’s school when they were invited to various social
activities. The following data indicates their res¬
ponses :
My child receives assignments where questions are asked concerning my country, famous persons, customs and traditions of my ethnic group Number Percent
Never Almost never Sometimes Most of the time Always
TOTAL
29 18.7% 23 14.8% 49 31.6% 20 12.9% 34 21.9%
1 Missing 156 100.0%
Valid cases = 155 Missing cases= 1
My child speaks to me about activities celebrating Hispanic Week or Puerto Rican Week in school Number Percent
Never Almost never Sometimes Most of the time Always
TOTAL
21 13.7% 9 5.9%
34 22.2% 22 14.4% 67 43.8%
3 Missing 156 100.0%
Valid cases = 153 Missing cases- 3
106
I have been invited to social activities where I noticed His¬ panic culture or Puerto Rican culture in my child’s school Number
Never 31 Almost never 8 Sometimes 29 Most of the time 19 Always 65
4 TOTAL 156
Valid cases = 152 Missing cases= 4
Percent
20.47o 5.3%
19.17o 12.57, 42.87o
Missing 100.07,
Visiting the Child's School and Talking with the Staff Members in Spanish
Eighty-nine percent (89.07o) of the parents question¬
ed visited their children's schools, with 82.27o) reveal¬
ing that they can talk with the child's teacher, princi¬
pal, or other staff member in Spanish. The data break¬
down follows:
I visit my child's school Number Percent
Never Almost never Sometimes Most of the time Always
5 3.27, 12 7.7% 65 41.9% 17 11.07o 56 36.17,
1 Missing 156 100.0% TOTAL
Valid cases= 155 Missing cases= 1
107
I can talk with his/her teacher, principal, or other staff member in Spanish
Never Almost never Sometimes Most of the time Always
TOTAL
Valid cases = 147 Missing cases- 9
Number Percent
4 2.7% 5 3.4%
17 11.6% 19 12.9%
102 69.4% 9 Missing
156 100.0%
Receiving Notices Written in English and Spanish
As illustrated in the following breakdown, the vast
majority of the participants (87.9%) reported that at
least sometimes they received notices written in English
and Spanish with regard to school rules and discipline:
I receive notices written in English and Spanish regarding school rules and discipline Number Percent
Never 10 6.8% Almost never 8 5.4% Sometimes 30 20.3% Most of the time 13 8.8% Always 87 58.8%
8 Missing
TOTAL 156 100.0%
Valid cases = 148 Missing cases = 8
Receiving Notices from Child's to Participate in Work¬ shops, Programs for Adults, and Parent Advisory Council (PAG) Meetings"
With regard to attendance at workshops for the bet¬
terment of their child's academic achievement, 76,7/o of
108
the participants reported that they sometimes received
notices from the schools informing them of these work¬
shops. A smaller percentage (63.6%) received notices
detailing the programs, offered free by the VJorcester
Public Schools, for adults and incapacitated persons.
Nearly eighty percent (78.4%) of the parents were noti-
flsh of the PAC meetings. This information is recorded
in the following breakdown:
I receive notices from the school regarding attendance at workshops for the betterment of my child's achievement_ Never Percent
Never ^ Almost never Sometimes Most of the time Always
TOTAL
25 16.7% 10 6.7% 37 24.7% 24 16.0% 54 36.0%
6 Missing 156 100.0%
Valid cases = 150 Missing cases = 6
I receive notices from my child's school to participate in other programs for adults and incapaci¬ tated persons which are offered free by the Worcester Public Schools
Never Almost never Sometimes Most of the time Always
Never Percent
26 17.8% 27 18.5% 30 20.5% 24 16.4% 39 26.7% 10 Missing
156 100.0% TOTAL
Valid cases = 146 Missing cases= 10
109
I receive notices at home concerning the PAC meetings
Never Almost never Sometimes Most of the time Always
TOTAL
Valid cases = 144 Missing cases= 12
Never Percent
20 11 32 14 67 12
156
13.97o 7.67o
22.27, 9.77o
46.57o Missing
100.07,
Receiving the Home Language Survey Form
The vast majority of the participants (64.57,) re¬
ported that they receive the Home Language Survey Form
from their children's schools, as illustrated in the fol¬
lowing breakdovm:
I receive the Home Language Survey Form from my child's school Never Percent
Never 40 27.87, Almost never 11 7.67o Sometimes 30 20.87, Most of the time 15 10.47, Always 48 33.37c
12 Missing
TOTAL 156 100.07,
Valid cases = 144 Missing cases= 12
Parent Advisory Council (PAC) Meetings and Parental Involvement
Through 80.57, of the parents were aware of the Parent
Advisory Council (PAC) meetings held at the school where
110
their children attend the Bilingual Education Program,
a large percentage (66.27o) did not participate in the
Parent Advisory Council, and an even greater percentage
(75.1/0) did not attend the meetings when new bilingual
teachers and other bilingual personnel V7ere hired.
Specific responses follow:
I know that there are PAG meetings held at the school where my child attends the Bilingual Education Program Never Percent
Never 25 16.87o Almost never 4 2.77o Sometimes 22 14.8% Most of the time 16 10.7% Always 82 55.0%
7 Missing TOTAL 156 100.0%
Valid cases = 149 Missing cases- 7
I participate in the Parent Advisory Council (PAC) Never Percent
Never 85 57.4% Almost never 13 8.8% Sometimes 14 9.5% Most of the time 9 6.1% Always 27 18.2%
8 Miss5.ng TOTAL 156 100.0%
Valid cases = 148 Missing cases= 8
I
Ill
I participate in the meetings when the new bilingual teachers and other bilingual personnel are hired
Never Almost never Sometimes Most of the time Always
TOTAL
Number Percent
96 64.4% 16 10.77o 13 8.77o
3 2.07o 21 14.17o
7 Missing 156 100.07o
Valid cases = 149 Missing cases= 7
Understanding the Notices Written Only in English
Responses to whether or not the parents understood
the notices written only in English were mixed, with
nearly half the participants (45.57o) reporting that they
never understood the notices, while fifty-five percent
(55.07o) acknowledge that sometimes they were able to have
the notices translated. However, the remaining forty-five
percent (45.07o) were never able to have the notices trans¬
lated, as the following breakdown indicates:
I am able to understand the notices written only in English Number Percent
Never Almost never Sometimes Most of the time Always
50 32.5% 20 13.0% 44 28.6% 16 10.4% 24 15.6%
2 Missing 156 100.0% TOTAL
Valid cases = 154 Missing cases= 2
112
I am receiving the notices written in English, and I have someone who can easily translate for me_ Number
Never 37 Almost never 3I Sometimes 45 Most of the time 8 Always 30
5 TOTAL 156
Valid cases = 151 Missing cases= 5
Percent
24.57„ 20.5% 29.87,
5.3% 19.9%
Missing 100.0%
Invitations to Attend the Meetings of the Hispanic Advisory Council (HPAC) and the School Committee of Worcester
A high percentage of the participants (78.47o) re¬
ceived, at least sometimes, invitations written in Spanish
to attend the meetings of the Hispanic Parent Advisory
Council (HPAC). A similar number of parents (75.1%) were
invited to attend a meeting V7ith the School Committee of
Worcester, as indicated below:
I receive invitations written in Spanish to attend the meetings of the Hispanic Parents Advisory Council (HPAC)
Never Almost never Sometimes Most of the time Always
TOTAL
Number Percent
18 12.2% 14 9.5% 22 14.1% 19 12.8% 75 50,7%
8 Missing 156 100.0%
Valid cases = 148 Missing cases= 8
♦
I
113
I have been invited to attend a
meeting with the School Committee of Worcester
Never
Almost never
Sometimes
Most of the time Always
TOTAL
Valid cases = 145
Missing cases= 11
Number
26
10 26
20 63 11
156
Percent
17.9% 6.9%
17.9% 13.8% 43.4%
Missing
100.0%
Principals Responses to the Questionnaires
While the second section of this chapter concentrates
on a student of the Bilingual Education Program for the
1986—87 school year, the purpose is descriptive rather
than evaluative. No attempt is made to access the suc¬
cess or failure of the program with regard to pupil per¬
formance. This researcher's intent was to investigate
the perceptions, feelings, and opinions of those in¬
volved in the Bilingual Education Program, focusing, in
particular, on whether or not the school district is
acting in compliance with the original demands of the com¬
munity and the court's mandate of 1983.
Designed to reveal basic information about the im¬
plementation of the Bilingual Program, the questionnaire
included questions under the following headings: 1)
Participants; 2) Objectives; 3) Curriculum and Materials
114
4) Testing Procedures; 5) Bilingual Program Staff; and
6) Community Involvement. By April 1987, seven question¬
naires and cover letters were mailed to the principals
of the schools where the students are attending the
Bilingual Education Program. All seven questionnaires
were completed and returned, indicating that information
was made available from all the school involved in this
study.
What follows are the responses to the twenty-four
questions asked about the organization of the Bilingual
Education Program. Minor editing maintains the partici¬
pants' anonymity. Responses from participants are pre¬
sented in the same order each time, so that response A,
for example, will always involve the same participant.
Participants A, B, C, D, E, F, G are principals of their
respective school. The following tables indicate the
responses:
PA
RT
ICIP
AN
TS
115
o CO m
o CN
w o m
Q O
m m
I O
u <!■ cn Oi
0) 3 c
•H 4J c o u
vO 1^ I I I
> O Cxh
<:
CO to
O O
x: o
T3 c cu 0 4.)
00-rO c c C o cu “fO
•H cd CO
^ 0 cu CO cd 3 V4 .-0 cu 'T3 (Xt-( cx cu cu CL CO Jo p 1 Pu
cd CO :3 CO *40
tO 00 w 0
c c CL Cd -rO P Jo O-r-O 0 cu
CO -H Jo jQ 00 6
C40 p
o PN •
6 C
P •H C P
CO o
0)
e
Cfl-H ^
4-) O- }-l O P P H 0.0
P o
<u c 00 ccj -O P C 00 CTJ O C cd.
C GO V4 CO
<u 4-> 4:: 0-1 cd u ‘ft x: O o
CO
Cd o
o C .H V4 o
6 o o
OS
o
Ou
P
O
«
<
d) o Jo p o CO <U
pS
cd P 00 C
cu CO
cu Cd 6 *'-• cd 'T3 ^ C o 4J ^ c o (U 6 cu (U
T-i cd Jo Jo >000
II II II 11 >000
oS
os p
u cd 4-)
C cu e cu
w II
u o
•H c cu
cn II
a POO o
<
cu
=M
id
dle
TA
BL
E
1 C
on
tin
ued
116
00 O" CM CJ>
o
O O
rH 1—1
E
F
vO vO
CSJ (T' m CM 1—1 rH 1—1 tH
c VO vO VO m n CM
O 00 CM 1—1 <}■ oo 1—i CJ CM CM CM Mf <1- m <1-
m O <1" m tn
11
.R.
PQ CM CO CM r—^ CM 1—1
pQ
CM 1—( CO m o vf m
< CM CM CM CM 1—1 1-1 CM
cMcO'Cj'iovor^ooaNO <N
ca w •u bO C C • 0) 'tH 1—I
xJ 1-^ (U 3 ••-1 > •u ja (U Vi I—1
u
o o a ca
u (U (u c
B ca :3 t3 C <u B
rH ca iH u ca o bO 4-> u o o c u H cu (X,
• cn
I
Conti
nued
TA
BL
E
1 C
on
tin
ued
117
o CO (U
>*
CO (U
CJ CO (U
PQ CO (U
>-•
< CO (U
^ 42 CO CO
•H -H C--' S CO W} ^ a c o
cn w -o
4-1 M-l c O O CO
CO CO a }-l }-l -H (U 0) CO ^ ^ :3
CO CO 2 CU (U 0-* Oi4 CO CO 4J
>-l (U CU <3 ■ >
•H >
•l-l 4-1 4J CO CO
C o* •H CO
(U C CO
(U CO CU ^3 ><! CO }-( C
<3 CO E a
118
o r-4 1-4 f-4 r-4 1-4 1-4
CM r—I CO
W !-4 r-H 1-4 CM 1-4 1-4 1-4
Q 1-4 r-4 CM 1-4 r-4 1-4
U CO UO -O’ CO CM r>-
PQ CM m CO r>. CO
< CO -ct m CO CM
CO cn w o 44 • 1 1-4
CM > o CO ca. P P CO M J2 r-4 CO CU 44 J2 P CO
W H o CO P (U o •H a bO p hJ O cn 52 J2 o C p B P o pa W O 44 o o bO CU • •r4 o < •i4 p o •t4 CU 1-4 p
pa 4-) 44 CO t3 So bO •r4 CO o O O 54 ja p ja
bO 6 52 B (U 44 p 6 •
C CO bO P 44 P J2 0 J2 bO P p So •H 5-1 52 <44 C B 44 44 P B 44
bO •H CU •H u CO 54 P 5a, •rH P o O OJ CO s X p bO O r-4 o X •f4
5-1 JO (U CO 44 C 3 r-4 P O a C > B •H 1 P P B O
o •H CU O 1-4 44 > > M U-l 1-M CO •rH CU 44 CU t-4 •i4 P P
CO TJ bO J2 > CU CU 44 -P > 44
(U 3 C O CU CU 44 CO P P P x: bO cO O CO •H p P o •H P u c 4-1 J2 bO - - 44 4p P
•H •U a CJ C CO CO P O •t4 M-l I—t 52 CO •H cO O u 44 J2 CO P e O •H CO 4-1 6 44 p P 44 44 o
ja 4J p CU CO CU P P CO -0 <44
(U 54 CU T3 44 u T3 TO 44 P 44 •H O 5-1 O TO • CO C CU p P o T3 P p O
c D Cu P J2 O CU J2 44 44 P P J2 P CO O B 4J CO CO na 44 CO CO p 44 na 44 5a
>> •H CO •iH P O p CO p CO
5-1 r-4 CU 44 B P CU r-4 44 O P O <4-1 4-1 <u bO J2 CO J2 J2 P P w 44
Q- O CO J2 C •U CU • 44 44 > J2 p bO
CO
6 o 4J W CU J2 44 4J • p
M CO 6 CU J2 44 C CU CU P [5 J2 p p
<u CU 44 > • 44 CU 44 44 J2 P P 44 •i4 r-4
<4-1 > bO r-4 O o CO bO B O o 44 •H 44 P4 o •H c ja 54 u a c ta. B B ja > a P-i
4-1 •rH cO 54 5a. c •r4 o 0 o bO P t-4 P
o <U 4J 52 CU B CU CU CO p 54 P p pa P 54
OJ <u CO <U 4J •t4 Ta J2 P CU a 0-’t4 p r4 J2 p p T3 -r-i lj n
CO CU o
CO cO O
p 44 O
> CU o O
N *r4 o
54 O O p
J2 44
o H 6 H CO H ja na H H CO H 5 H •r4 O
•1^ M-4 y-i
o ---I
c o O
•H CO 4J •H 4J W 3 C O cfl x: 5-1 4J H 'H •!« 5
ch
ild
ren
into
sta
nd
ard
pro
gra
m
CU
RR
ICU
LU
M
AN
D
MA
TE
RIA
LS
119
c •fi ij
o
>> (U t—<
QJ U 3
•i-l W XJ
C 0) (U XJ
cO • XJ o j:: -H (u tjOT3 > 3 d 0) rt M .-I XJ
(U w • x) XJ JC CO CJ CO Vj
0) f-i bO
d XI cox) d cx d
CO CO CO
o All SU 3 jec ts ] in b Oth lar IgUl ge« •
All su: t_i. 0)
-O-
ts 3Ut ESI. , A] Phy s. Edi and Mupi
All su' )jec ts are taiL ght in bot; 1 w the ve' •nac ulu n a id i n E ■^gl -sh,
(0 to 1
XJ to u 1 o o 1 tx 1 d) 1
Q DC (U o 1
O V4 1 2 o
It var: .es fro H ti iacl er to :eac her CO but mo: > t c re tau; ;ht in bot 1 Ic .ngu aget
to CO
CU 0) (U 1 b0> bC > C Cl) CO CU
(-3 d X PQ X CxO 1
cO X d r-) OJ X cO
aC < X c
X X X CO CO CO d d d M S
< tjj w X 0 •rl
0 f-
0 f
c } A
XJ XJ XJ V4 XJ Vj XJ U J-< 1-1 A. J
0 d d CU 01 0) 01 0) 01 o c ) 1 X X X X Vj X Vj X V- V r •4 1 .. o c o c o c o c j
CO T-l r™ X to « CO cr CO Cf to C 0 J X <U X 0) T- 0) T- 0) T
O < < < H C H C H c H t 0
X o CJ
CO CN r- >0 IT vC ) r > tx ) o N T~i 1
Conti
nued
120
•d
iJ i-> o X d
d bO'io d d X d CO d
•i-( U CD 4J d CO d o XJ J-l u CJ CO
CO d u
•t—)»T-(
w X "d d d
X CO M PQ < . H CM
o
w
u
X. CO
bO QJ
C > t£) (U
c •r^ o;
•O cO
t—( J-1 0) bO u
•r^ T3 ■u d C (U
CQ
Art
CO I—( o o X o
CO
, E$L. Phy s
Mathmematic
All su vertiaculai
Dep deve
Vari Mos t
or end:; lopmeTlt
bO c
'd co <u
Dd X
X CO CO W
bO C u
ec t
es sibj
bO d t3 Clj 0)
hJ CO
cow •rC
bO d w
frcm tie dots
bO d •H “d
CO 0) w
►J nco cow
-( CiO d w
bO d
"d CO 0)
ccj X CO
jn w CO
-( bO d w
bO d
d co 0) ^ X
CO Id w
CO
bO d n
d x; o cO 0)
bOH C t-l wi •d
cO 0)
X CO
bO d
s,
s and
are iti
lev o
bO d
•H •d co 0) W
w x:o can
bO d w
<u X o CO <u
bCH d
old o co 0)
bbJ o
ij d X d CO (U
cjH d bOco d-H
w onQ
CNJ CO
ical Iduc|atii)n,
Sc.ence, Social
el tBi
tav ght Eli
of e 0
acner ard tc
bO d 1-1 •d co d W
X xco cow H -( bO d w
bO d rC
•d CO d w
w X CO
CO W f-C -( bO d w
u d X o cO d
bll-l C
•d o cO d d w o X-u
CO d f-( n -I o bOco d*»-< WQ
d X
CJ cO d
bCH d
fd o cO :n d bi O tdjj
CO d H j-t
o bOcn d-H no
lis
lil i
to ughjt
teache: in be
bO d ■H r) co d W
X dco cow
bO d w
d X
CJ cO d
bOH d rC 4-( td o
CO d d
pti o
d -u CO d H J-l
CJ bO CD d n Q
m
inibot
h.
Reaping and llisil
Stuniel
h the
rei
th tlanguafles,
vD
CM
CO CT'l
Conti
nued
121
o
c o
4-» U t»o o C 3
T-( Vj
CO -U D to
C Q)
4J O CQ
E Q) O &0 O t6
3 (0 bO CO C cd cd r^ rH o <:
•o <u •
0) »<-l Ji; r-l
3 o -U 0) C >
t-( 0) CO (U XJ bO td r-t
C cd
o u C to o
0) -p td ••
CO Or-I <U CO
P bO a cu C ^ o a pv a cd o CQ x:
< • o
H CO CO
I
s ^s 6^
o o o O CM CM CM CM
o o in in
6'2 ^ o 6'- •xj* 6^
O O o O m m m m
De - )enc s o 1 d lilc ren ' S 1 aast ery of
-00-
lis 1.
•».. o O'*
o. e
CO o o o tn O O O CJ\ a\ a\ 00 vD vO vO VO
6^ ^S O o m LO CM CM CM CM
a a oJ a a cd od Pd
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
c r- CM
a Ui 1—1 CM CO in VO r>. 00 o> f—■ T—C
TJ 0) 3 C
•H -p c o u
4J Vi O tx (U
Oi
O
U Ci 2
122
o Supplementary reading and dictionaries.
ti, Supplementary reading and dictionaries, encyclopedias and magazines.
^ All subjects, levels 9-12.
Q Greek books. This school has the Greek Bilingual Program.
X >^'0 CO c
CO CO ,-1 XJ O DO C X C OJ CO • U E CO
I <D C >-( X •-I CO <u
CO Cl, D. > -t-( DuCO <U C 3 --I CO CO C D, TO CQ
CO - C CO CO CO
CO cO 0) CO T-( C CO X m) 1-1 XJ
(UNO O- CO QJ
U O GOi-) cO 1—I cO X Cl O E 3 < X CO i-( O 13 .-H C C 0)
0) cC X
•o X cO 0) o - CO CJ P O CO X 1-1 c X <U O'O
1-1 o 1-1 o d XJ CO Cl X i-< c CO o Cj C MX u P O d CD
O 1^ 1-1 1-1 •• m >^XJ TJ f-l CO
U CO M u u-i i-( (u d o X M *0 Cl U o n X
< o H CO
Recreational books and dictionaries.
All levels. Cannot be specific beyond those underlined and recreational reading.
All subjects, all levels. C
on
tin
ueci
TA
BL
E
3 C
on
tin
ued
123
Vi
O 0)
03 pE-i <U
>1
Vi u <u
>•
Q Pi 2
CO U 0)
Vi P3 <U
CO < <U
>>
Vi
o o
x: a
CO
X CO
U -H O .-I
M-l bO C
CO W
^ I o c o o
x> c iJ X (U <u X 4-) -U
(U c 4-) CO
•H 4J
U X (X bO o :3 V4 Cd (X 4J C^* CL, Q) CO CO bO
<U CO bO CO p C CO bO
•H cO C CO rH CO 2 CJf-4
m
4J >-l O (X (U
O 2
I
Pi
<U
TA
BL
E
4
TE
ST
ING
PR
OC
ED
UR
ES
CO CO CO 3 0) 04 04
o 3 >* >• >•
CO oi Qd 04
D 2 2 >* b <
•J
CO CO CO H 0) 04 04
b3 g
>• >>
►J CO CO CO Z Z 0) 04 04
Q M < >• >■ PQ hJ
CO CO CO 3 04 04 04
U 3 jH
hJ H 2 hJ 3 CO CO CO
CQ M O < 0) 04 04 CQ CQ hJ >> >•
< CO CO CO 3 H W 04 p 04
< < W Q >< hJ S H
CO ■u O
3 C E •H CO O OJ 0 P CO CO >^T) 0 CO 04 04
P C 4-1 CU CO •(-( o -u o CO CO CO V4
•t) CO •H 04 CO •H CO O 04 OJ E c^ CO c- 3 00 > tv
mj: CO 0 E I—1 E O 04 -H
C CJ o 3 U U U 04 -U JJ 4-4 U •H t-l p O O 3 CO rt p 4J tJ 0) b 0) b 4J V4 U P 04
CO IS (U 3 3 04 3 (U ■u •u 003 3 H CJ 4-) CO r-l 04 0) C V4 < 03
CO CO oo > 00 > .r4 O 3 3 3
C4-I 0) P p >-l P u 3 O
O CO 00 •H p •H 0 CO C P 3 4-^ CO C CO c/3 CO c/3 04 WH -H 3
-0 CO ‘H P P 3 3
C 0) 04 CO CO 00 04
•H O P 00 P 00 3 4J 3 P 00
^ J-) 3 0 CO 0 P o P P 0 rt >% p t^P 04 04 V4 P
CO 4J Cl) TJ oo 00 3 3 3 00 CO > CD 0) P 04 p 04 P P 3 P
o 3 CO 0) V4 P u ti 4-4 3 3 cO
o 2 3 C < 3 < 3 < CO CD < 3
x: o • • • •
CO r—< (N m -O'
TA
BL
E
5
BIL
ING
UA
L
PR
OG
RA
M
ST
AF
F
125
cn CM o o o
m cn m rH CM
CN o
CO CM CM o o
12
cn 00 fH 1-^
in •
f-H O
CM •
O
CM •
o
00 cn VO f—1
o- CO C“ co
r-l T3 T3 r-t .H !-( CO • C •H O CD QJ 3 t-i O < O 3 X X 00 0 o • 00 CJ CO
c o (U CO Vj O 3 3 •i-l • 0
•H X cn 0) CO 1-1 QJ 3 3 o iH O 0) .-I H 3 V4 X
•H CO CD ^ CJ >-l 1-1 CL O o
PQ o CO D C^* CQ 3 CQ I-l CQ
CO CD QJ O t>v O 3
l4-4 D CD 0) H >vC 4-1 -H 4-1 m 4-1
O 0 H CD O 4-1 O 3 O
X, r-l c e 3 3 U CO CD 1-1 >-i O U O QJ C 1-1 CO 3 15 QJ 3 3 O 3
^ *1-1 i-l W OOTS O X T) X X
E 00 c oj x: e u E >-1 E 3 CO C (U •H CO 3 3 3 3 C W 00 >-13“ 3 r-l 3 3 3
(1) CD •H O 3 00
1—t 3 PQ 00 CO 1—11-1 f—1 3 1-4
CD O CD 00 3 CO CJ 3 *>4 3 4J CO XJ C QJ *1-1 4-1 4J 3 4J 1-1 XJ
O Cl) O CO Vj OJ M 0 a O 'r^ O
H -U H hJ < XI H CQ H X H
• CM
• cn
•
-O’ •
in •
vD
1
Psycholo
gis
ts .
TA
BL
E
6
CO
MM
UN
ITY
INV
OL
VE
ME
NT
126
o
bi
a
O
CQ
<
I I
I
I
I
CO
O O
i s: ' o
CO
CO (1) o
z
CO CO (U 0)
>< ><
o o Z z
CO CO o 0)
CO CO (U a)
CO CO (U (1) >• >4
CO CO 0) 0)
>• >4
1—4 144 X 1 •H o c 0 l4 O ‘H 1 o o 0) CO d X d cx 0) CO 1-4 CO o ‘H 3 O 5 4J d 14 O CO JJ d bo o o. 0) U (1) (U QJ 'd G. 14
5-1 X 14 14 CO CO >id CO d Vj 0 c G CO 0) Xl CO O O 4J d 4J CO •H X d *44 CO d
•H C AJ 4J o 0 cu > 'H CO 4-1 •i4 0) >4
T3 O 1-1 5 CO 5 o CO < TO •rJ C 1-4 o CO G
0) c d JJ *14 X * AJ E d E (1) G G d H E E Odd) d 0) O E 0 E G4J 01 CO M >4-1 o u cox E CO o CO X U CO
P-. c •d 1-1 CD iH 4J 5
0) 0) d (1) iH T3 O o 14 CO X <-• C CO X
C X d O CO CO 1-4 CO c C
CO (UIdCO’Hi—1(1)
ojuoo xji*H4Jq;> ><; x: cwo-ur-( coc^ou iwococucoo "wxjto mc^EE>
• •
i-H CN
O
CO O U (U z < Cli
o o o z z z
CO O O (U z z >•
CO O O OS z >>
u o
U-) - >^ ^ d AJ
Q) C >. AJ 0--( > C(J 4J CO -H c
rH 0) -H 0) JJ CO o J-J O )-i cc 0)
^>cCcOcO >^(l)0}-ic^* CO c a C -U 0 E •r-l-HE>,C0 cOCTJcoco 1-1 cc c o -I-I 0) -H )-l
t>0 0) Vj CO no X bO CVJboE-i-J Q)f-iC->-'0 WcOO CO COC03 U
1 V-i533 coJJOOO- ccaois oc AJ OQ) X C<U)4Ci—I
C JJJ-I-HXCO T) •H 0) 'H tA CO a) ’H 0
CH rH E 4-J ^ D-X >-i bO ©•HCUCOT) 4JJ-IC x^joc od co*H
cocjc0*i-lc0 >-HbO <—i JJ o "O CO c d 'i-i d bo CO d x) X cu -H o X 0) d *1-1 0) CO l4 >1
l4 -H 0) > d CO cu cu
cO X X 1—11—1 o (U X X X G CO AJ 0) 0 )4 JJ 1-4 AJ
cu > > O Vj d 144 G d cu d 144 d d o o 1-4 CD -H 1-4 *1-1 1-4 •H 44 JJ
cn •
O’
I
No
te;
NR
=
No
Report
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Having described in detail the major findings in the
study, we will conclude with the present chapter and
attempt to:
1. Present the important results concerning the
school system ' compliance with the consent decree
order of 1983 to improve the Bilingual Education
Program.
2. Offer recommendations necessary for increasing
Hispanic parents' participation in the educa¬
tional processes of their children and making
the participation a more productive and meaning¬
ful one.
3. Propose recommendations for future research.
Conclusions
As the following summation of the findings indicates,
the school system appears to be headed with the proposed
agreement with the community to improve Bilingual Educa¬
tion Program. Clearly deriving satisfaction with the
program, most parents feel that the Bilingual teachers
as well as the ESL instructors are satisfactory, the
majority appear to be pleased with their children s
proficiency in English and Spanish.
127
123
With regard to testing, the principals' responses
to the questionnaires indicate that each school has a
systematic testing procedure to assess those students
in need of bilingual education. With the use of the LAU,
BINL, IDEA, the Metropolitan tests, the Home Language
Survey Form, and the Classroom Language Survey Form, as
indicated in Table 4, page 124, the schools are, in fact,
testing the limited English proficiency students in order
to assess those students in LAU categories A to through
D for native language proficiency.
As Table 3, page 119, outlines, most subjects are
taught in both languages, indicating a comprehensive
curriculum for all classes of bilingual education. Read¬
ing at the elementary level, in particular, is taught in
the native language and in English in the participating
schools. Appropriate textbooks and materials for ade¬
quate teaching have also been positively evaluated.
Although most parents receive notices in English
and Spanish about matters concerning bilingual education
j and about the schedule meetings of the Hispanic Parent
I Advisory Council (HPAC), few participate in the regular
I Parent Advisory Council (PAC) in each school. School
administrators might investigate other ways in which to
j involve parents in their children's educational processes,
I
I
129
and, thereby, offer services to improve the relations
between the school and the community. Since, as Table
6, page 126, reveals, most Hispanic parents of non-English
speaking children are not involved in the academic pro¬
gram of their respective schools at any level, this re-
fsels that it is the school system’s responsi-
^ility to find solutions to this problem, ways in which
parents, amny of whom are recent arrivals to this city,
could acquire the skills and av^areness necessary to work
more closely with their children's schools.
Most principals questioned gave priority to improv¬
ing the academic achievements of the limited English pro¬
ficiency students (see Table 2, page 118. Administrators
from schools labels D, E, and G in Table 2 ranked all
objectives equally, significantly pointing to their re¬
cognition that the pupils can achieve maximum success
by using their mother tongue to further concept develop¬
ment in the bilingual educational methodology. This re¬
cognition characterizes the pupose of the 1983 proposed
agreement of the lawsuit. Important also is the partici¬
pants' belief that transition into the standard program
should occur without sacrificing their pupil's cultural
traditions.
Participants are generally pleased vjith the number
of bilingual personnel to deal with limited English
130
students (Table 1, page II5. For the most part, the num¬
ber of bilingual teachers, ESL instructors, and teachers'
aids is in direct proportion to the number of non-English
speaking students, complying with the decree order (Table
j). Along these lines, it was also agreed that native
speakers of Spanish and native speakers of English were
mixed in the art, music, and gym classes, again in com¬
pliance with the decree.
Regarding instructional areas, the agreement states:
The defendant shall ensure that all instructional areas used for bilingual classes and English as a Second Language (ESL) classes are adequate and comparable in quality to instructional areas used throughout the school system (A.L.P.A. V. DURKIN, United States District Court, 1983, page 30).
Significantly, the parents expressed satisfaction
with the appropriateness of their children's classroom.
Since the proposed agreement indicates that parents
should receive notices regarding planning, developing and
evaluating the Bilingual Education Program (including the
budget procedure from the Parents Council (A.L.P.A. V.
DURKIN, 1983, p. 25), it is important to note that the
parents have been invited to attend meetings v/ith the
School Committee. Concerning the meetings held to hire
new bilingual personnel, only the members of the Hispanic
Parent Committee were invited; only twenty-one parents
expressed participation in these meetings.
131
Conmiunication between the parents and the school ad¬
ministrators, teachers, and other staff members was sat¬
isfactory, many participants felt comfortable discussing
their child's progress in Spanish. Aware that the school
system provides a Bilingual Coordinator to improve the
relations between the school and community, most parents
reported that they received notices written in English
and Spanish regarding school rules and discipline.
Having invited to social activities where they no¬
ticed Hispanic culture or Puerto Rican culture in their
child's school, most parents felt that their children's
assignments reflected an awareness of the traditions of
their ethnic group. This indicates the school system's
attempt at developing multi-cultural courses and programs
because of the increasing diversity of different language
groups. Cultural awareness programs exist at both the
elementary and secondary levels.
Addressing a major component of the Bilingual Educa¬
tion Program, the schools provide sufficient materials,
including library services and good science facilities.
The libraries, in particular, are providing materials
which reflect the language and culture of the linguistic
groups (A.L.P.A. V. DURKIN, 1983, p. 16 and LAU Plan,
p. 13).
132
Since our results indicate that half of the parents
in this study were unable to understand notices from the
school written only in English, and unable to find a
translator, it is strongly recommended that these notices
be written in the child's native language.
Overall, our results indicate the school system's
compliance with the proposed agreement between the commu¬
nity and the school system, and, importantly, the admin¬
istrators of the current bilingual education program
recognize the need to prepare puils for an eventual trans¬
fer to an all-English curriculum.
Recommendations
Having analyzed the data collected in the study, and
having completed the review of related research and liter¬
ature, the researcher has the following recommendations
to offer:
1. Efforts should be made to improve the participa¬
tion of the Hispanic parents in the Parent Advis¬
ory Committee in each school especially where
students are attending the Bilingual Education
Program.
2. An effort should be made to organize an Hispanic
Advisory Committee in each school where there
is evidence that the Hispanic parents do not
133
participate in the regular PAC meetings.
Meetings should be conducted in Spanish.
3. With knowledge of the direct relationship of
the personal growth and development of the part-
ents and tne well-being and future of their chil-
the school system should offer courses to
the Hispanic parents for personal growth that
would, in turn, improve their participation in
the PAC meetings and other school activities.
One possibility would be the creation of ESL
content oriented classes for members of PAC
(LAU Plan, p. 21).
4. To ensure effective communication, the school
system would send notices to the non-English
speaking parents in their native language
(A.L.P.A. V. DURKIN, 1983, p. 28 and LAU Plan,
p. 20).
Recommendations for Further Research
1. Devise and administer a survey to obtain sug¬
gestions from the Hispanic parents about which
courses they would prefer to take in Adult
Education programs in order to improve their
education, and which training courses would
134
equip them to become involved with their chil¬
dren's education.
2. Devise and administer a questionnaire to the
Hispanic parents to obtain their perceptions and
suggestions on how to improve their participation
and involvement in their children's academic
program.
3. Conduct a survey to examine the current text¬
books with the aid of the teachers, in order to
learn if the bilingual curriculum books are
appropriate and effective in terms of the
linguistic, cognitive, and cultural enrichment
of the students.
4. In two years repeat this study.
APPENDIX
135
136
UN RESULTADO DE LA LUCHA DE UNA COMMUNIDAD FOR LA EDUCACION BILINGUE DE UN SELECCIONADO DISTRITO ESCOLAR EN MASSACHUSETTS
y
El proposito de este estudio es conducir un ana¬ lysis profundo del resultado de la lucha de una commu— nidad por la educacion bilingue de un seleccionado distrito escolar en Massachusetts. Como usted es uno de los individuos indentificado como padre en este seleccionado distrito escolar de Massachusetts, nosotros necesitamos saber sus respuestas en teVininos de sus sen- timientos, percepciones y opiniones.
Este questionario consiste en detalles en relation a sus percepciones, opiniones y sentiraientos en rela¬ tion al Programa Transitional de Educacion Bilingue en este seleccionado distrito escolar.
Su nombre no aparecera en este cuestionario. Favor de leer cada detalle y conteste de acuerdo a la escala apropiada. Conteste todas las preguntas a un cuando se sienta obligada a no hacerlo porque este cuestionarJLo es estrictamente confidencial. Escriba Su contestacion directamente en el lugar apropiado del cuestionario. Los resultados seran completamente compartidos con usted.
Ahora, proceda a contestar el cuestionario. Le to- mar^ de 25 a 30 minutes. SiehtaseLlibre de anadir cual- quier comentario;que usted Cr^a inecesario hacerlo. De- vuelva su cuestionario' despues.de completarlo usando el sobre predirigido adjunto.
Muchas gracias por su cuestionario.
ayuda en contestar este
137
ro u c
o o r>j
w c CC 3
CM rvi c>i CM C>J CN rsj
to G C (0 3 0 cn CO.U ^ O < >
cn r> m cn cn cn
to o o o >
to ^ u o o ^
•c <r 'O' 'O' -O' •O' 'O
G O s: *3
o u< c.
c m in m m m in in m m
cn
c \ o o •o G G Q G
C T> G Q -H -i-J c G —4 G X* G JZ 3. G o' c C G 3 C
o O C o G ■rH C O G k-
3 o u G u -r4 o c O b G U G O o 3 £ X3 3. o G "H 3 C •rK O G G “O G a G • 3 c •ri G ■H c •“f G G C 3 3 G -o G U G o > o O •H U 3 0 0 G u G to •ri to (0 3 *D G C U c “3 o G G ••H ^ G G G -rt o 3
o u O o c. L. o G o c c C G • u u G G G XI •«-< O G xJ -o G G u G o G U Q •* O G C O 3 G ^
G «—( G U O G u u w -c G G -O o •H O *rH -iH 3
o 3 XJ O G •v*. G G • •H ^ CO O G ^ *«-( C G G 3
z «-• “O J-» 3 o C u G S- G 3 G G o 3 o tZ 3 .G
tl: o GOG O C s • c G -H Gt3 G G c O k.
*3 c o o G 3 f—: C •rH TO G G JC 3 00 XI U • x> O U
ii:! o G G. O G G O G U o -o G O 3 U X G
to I- G U C o < G G -H > G G > C ^ C
2: o o> GOO G •r^ G G O O- G G G O E o G <-( 3 G 3 3 G u
CiJ •s»^ ol c E o t: 3'—^ XI C G ••H 3 > -rH •r4 o *3 XI
2) u o G G u o • G •rK ^ o •-* O
(J> (D W •-< O G G U G O G G •fH G G -vH •o O G o O G O O G
CO U G G G • XJ 3 G 3 G O c G 3 O •H G ^ G ^ t3 G >s
a: E G G •f-l cr O o CO XJ u 3 U O' c G x> G •r4 u •r4 O 3 G
o G C G G G W *3 O G •o o U O C 0-«r4 G o 3 O-
' ■-X- O 0-0 •H ^G o •H 3 O G JO U o ^G O G G *0 O G XI x> G G G
21 E OO G G o > G JZ O 33 •H 3 G 3 3 C G U G X G C X
< o O u u G. O G O G U E 3 “O
r) o ~Q> 1-1 G ^ o O O G c O G G G G O G G- O 3 G G G O o 3 G G
o oc -o CL 0^0 cn 5^ >- TO CC •o >- ^ G >-0 3 — G O >- G U 3
1
CU
AN
FR
EG
UE
NjI
iMF
.NT
li:
Slc
inpre
138
C U
w C CN CN CM C3 3
CM CM CM CM
CO
CD C (0
2 a C)0 U
t-K OJ
< >
«
C/J
0) u o >
CO
Vi CO U (0 O f-i
O Q> 2: *o
cn m
<r ^
CO
<r
CO
<x
CO CO CO ro
C 'O'
m to to m m to m m
CD
c •
CD to • C QJ O.
CO 0) 3 CO CO QJ
'^o cr CD -H 3
CO • u
CO oo CO. c cu CO
CD c: xJ ' OJ o (U CO OJ
XJ -1-1 •r^ -1-1 3 u c u U D3 “D -O c 3
CD C u oo CO O E (0
o o CO f-H CO o
CO XJ CO c 10 ^ CO (l>
CD J-» CO o CO CO
DZ CO oo CO ^ 1-H CO
O XJ C CO \C
U E U OJ ^ o 0)
CJ o CO ■*-» 0) •3 3
x> ^ o E (U cr
c o o E CO >rH
O CO CO u o 0) XJ CO Q> XJ CO ”0 ll
C CO ^ a. c '— CO o O CO 0) o -o XJ
XJ O^.CQ
X3 Sd E u
CT ^ *rH > O
•o 1- ^ -H 3*
Q> O o oo u XJ Cu
3 CO q; c CD -f-l u
O. O OC -H 2: c5 O
CO 1
o o o -3 XJ 3 1
CD U -H Q) C
-3 O JD O •r^
tS 3 tr, u u
> C-i-( OJ ^ -H
3 O *3 XJ o O CO 3 -
O o u 3
CO CO *3 U CO XJ 3
c 3 C 3
CO CD 3 3 XJ 3 3
CD 3.^ CO 3 3 C.
CO o -r-t 3 w 3
3 (0 00 XJ -<-(
c ~ u 3 O 3 -3
CO u O
<0 3 CD O CL 3 3
•o U 3 3
CO 3 CD -r^ 3 u
XJ XJ i-H u o - Xi
•ri 3 U 3 E > 3 10 U 3 3
C u ~o 3 xJ
-H 3 C. 3
.3 3 O O
C •-Hie • o ^ o -o •o ‘33 u
•H 3 3"^ -«H O XJ
CO i-i O' t-< X "3 3
• JD ^ 3 3 3
0) O i- -H O 3 3-
CO 1-1 o 51 *3 C C
I
3 3 Ut
3 C 3
3 E 3 3
c E CO o 3 O CO 3 O OO
-r^ o 3\C 3 3 *3 DZ 3 U ^ *—( 3
3 CL —13 3
3 ^ 3 3 O 3 O 3 3 »“1 3 C •3 C 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
u 3 1- <J CD -O 3 3 3 .C3 3
i-H O O xJ'^ O 3 3 E U O. 3
3 3 3 3 -O 3 O -H 3
xJ -C^3 V 3 3 O *-H 3 ^ 3 X ^ ocro -H 3 O O 3 c
i m
i n
3 3 C 3 3 3 O
CX. CO O’ g: x> 3 4J
I
I
Recib
o
carta
s
y n
oti
c^ia
s
de
L
a escu
ela
en
rela
cio
n
a q
ue
asista
a talleres
para^o
rie
n-
tarm
e
de
co
mo
ayudar
mas
a m
l hijo/a
en
su
s
estu
dio
s.
CU
AN
Tp
ES
TA
UD
. D
E
AC
UE
RD
O
Muy
de
En
Alg
o
en
En
Muy
en
C
ON
.ES
TA
S
DE
CL
AR
AC l
ON
ES
Acu
erd
o
Acuerd
o
Desacii
erd
o
Desacu
erd
o
Desacu
erd
o
139
CNJ CNi CM CN CNJ (NJ <N CM
CO fO CO CO CO fO CO CO
m co m tn m m 40 40 40
c
- • o 3 (0 CO c 3 -3 01 01 01 3 • C 3
CO O 3 U 3 CO • 'cc c 3 K • \ • • = 1 = 01 3 U -3 3
O CD o c C K Cl 3 3 “3 —J fj c «3 CO 01 E 3 3.3 \ •r-i 01 \ ^ \ ^ 3 3 C C Cl -H 3 (0
Cl tn ^ J-l CD OO CD C- ^ 01 cr-« 13 o XJ O
01 o XJ C XJ (0 -3 Cl xi V)
c o CO •H CO 01 to CO to to U 01 3
Cl - E ^ 01 01 O C 3 3 C w Cl. 01 01 L. O 01 3
u o ^CD Q -H C XJ O XJ XI 3 xl *3 O 3 «-< >>
u XJ .O c 3 CO Cl CO 3 3 W 3 3 jO CO C 01 O 01 01 Cl 3 ^ •rS 3 3 E
3 • 01 01 -H 3 to C CO ^* 01 o
tfi CO -D u •w u s o E o C CO *3
CO Cl CO 01 •H 3 3 3
Cl o CO (0 L. CO £ ^ “3
E o • c o 3 •*-i 3 o o G O CO 3 O
Cl O 5^ . CC O “r-i .E CO E CO ^ xl ^ S 3 3 C. 3
u CO ^ TO o u O •3 3
u Cl t-H o o 01 o 01 c 01 o u CO 3 c
(0 U 3 CC > 3 T? 3 *3 3 4-< 3 O 3 O 3 O
Q 01 CJ ^ Xm C" c C 3 cr 10 3*^C0 XJ ^ -3 C" O
• CO 01 01 01 01 01 U 3 3
o CO CO 01 3 CO O O •'H O XJ 0*^3 3 -3 O 3
•rC 01 u Cl "O 01 “3 01 CC Cl OO^ U 3 U •
Wto CO Ol u c U 3 U CO U c CO « ^ L. Xl u
*01 01 ^ 01 c a 01 U 01 o u ► * 01 •ri O O 3
CL 01 u u c xl O 00
a CO c CO -n o o. o c. o o 0^3 3 O O C o 2 Ou 01 J.XJ >- CO CO >- CO >• 01 3 -3 «xi >- 3 JC
V)
c 01 Z3 o (0
01
01
<0 E 01 J-} ifi
(0
01
01
or
o >- e
sta
ciu
dad
pro
voe
una
Co
ord
inn
cJo
ra
oil
ing
ue
para
ay
iid
ar
a m
ejo
rar
las
rela
cio
nes
en
tre
la
com
un I
d a
d
y,l
o
escuela
. E
sta
Coord
inadora
es
util
p
a r
a ’
a y
u d
a r
e ti
las
tt g
c e
s i
d a
d o
s c
d u
-
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alpa V. Durkin. Suit: Civil Action No.: 78-1150K. United States District Court. Boston, MA, 1983.
Anders son, Theodore and Boyer, Mildred. Bilinp.ual Schooling in the United States. Austin, Texas: National Educational Laboratory Publishers Inc 1978.
Bell, Terre H. Seventh Annual Report of the National Advisory on Bilingual Education (1982-1983). Rosslyn, Virginia: InterAmerica Pvesearch Associates, Inc., 1984.
Bro\vn, Larry. The VJay VJe Go To Scipol: A Report by the Task Force on Children Out of School. Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1971.
Bureau of Transitional Program. Two VJay. Boston, MA: Third Printing, 1978.
Center for Urban Education. The Center Forum, Vol. 4, No. 1, September, 1969.
Cohen, Andrew. ’’Bilingualism”, A Sociolinguistic Approach to Bilingual Education, Experiments in tne American Southwest. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House, 1978.
Cohen, Bernard H. Models and Methods for Bilingual Education. Hingham, MA: Teaching Rsources Corporation, 1979.
Coleman, J. and others. Equality of Eoucational Opportunity. Office of Education, U.S. Department^ of Health, Education, andVJelfare. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966.
Fishman, Joshua A. Bilingual Education^_^ Sociological Perspective. Rowley, MA: Publishers, 1976.
International
Newbury House
Glasser, Robert. Schools Without Failure. Nev7 York Harper and Row, 1969.
140
Guevara, Gloria; Juan Rosario and Norman Gold. Mendoza Report ■ V.'ashington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health, Education and VJelfare, Office for Civil Rights, 1978.
Guide to State Education Agencies, National Clearinghouse tor Bilingual Education, Rosslyn, Virginia: Inter America R.esearch Associates, Inc., 1984.
Hispanic Parent Advisory Council. Minutes. VJorcester. M/v: VJorcester Public Schools-Bilingual Education Office, 1972.
Leo, David G. A Eiistorical and Analysis of Bilingual Education in Texas, 1974-1983: An Educator's Perspective. Houston, Texas: University of Houston Press, 1985.
Lesley, Tay. Bilingual Education in California. Los Angeles, Calif.: University of California, thesis, 1971.
Massachusetts Department of Education. Final Audit Report on Bilingual Education: Worcester Public Schools. Worcester, MA: Government Printing, 1980.
Guidelines for Parental Involvement in Transi¬ tional Bilingual Education Programs Pursuant to Chapter 71A, of The General Laws, Acts of 1971, Transitional Bilingual Education. Boston, MA: Government Press, 1972.
New England Regional Council. Overview of the Problems Encountered by Mev; England s Spanish Speaking Populatioru Boston, MA: Government Press, J&TlTTT^iJTtr
Mi errant Office. A Political Analysis on the ^oKHTtion Sf the Spanish-Speaking Students. Boston, MA^-Action tor Boston Community Development (ABCD),
1969.
Morales. Idalia. English-The Roadblock to a Hif.her Educa_- tion. Amherst ,MAl University or. Massachusetts, mi^blished doctoral dissertation, 1982.
142
Naisbitt, John. Megatrends. New York U Y • Brooks, 1984^^- ' ''
National^Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education. Guide to State Education Agencies. Pvosslyn, Virginia: InterAmerica Research Associates, Inc’., 1984.
__• l>naat is Bilingual Education? Rosslyn, Virginia: InterAmerica Research Associates, Inc., 1978.
National Commission on Excellence in Education. A Nation at Risk. Washington, D.C.: Office ol Education, 1983.
National Education Association. The Invisible Minority. VJashington, D.C.: NEA Publishers, 1966. ^
Nieto, Sonia. Curriculum Decision Making: Puerto Rican Family and the Bilingual Child, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, 1979.
Perez, Luis. Interview. September 14, 1983.
Rand, Elaine; Emma Stupp; and Susan Schuuer. Bilingual Education Information Packet. Rosslyn, Virginia: InterAmerican Research Associates, Inc. 1984.
Pveagan, Ronald. National Foreign Language Week Proclama- tion. Seventh Annual Report (1982-83). Rosslyn, Virginia; InterAmerica Research Associates, Inc.,
1984.
Saville, Muriel R. and Troike, Rudolph, C. A Handbook of Bilingual Education. Washington, D.C.; Center for Applied Linguistics, 1971.
Soriano, Jesse. The Language and Cultural Training Needs of U.S. Business-Both Domestic and International. Ross1yn, Virginia: InterAmerica Research Associates,
Inc., 1982.
Teitelbaum, Herbert and Richard Hiller. Bilingual Educa¬ tion: The Legal Mandate. Boston, M4; Harvard
Educational Preview, 1977.
The Evening Gazette. Plans, Worcester
Inc., 1972.
Parents Ask Schools for Bilingual MA'l Worcester Telegram & Gazette,
143
The Evening Gazette. Spanish-Speaking Pupils Meet. Worcester, MA; Worcester Telegram it Gazette Inc., June 16, 1972.
Ubarri, Horatio. Bilingual Education: A Handbook for Educators^ Eric No. ED 038 078, 1970.
bnited States Bureau of the Census. Department of Commerce, 1980 Census of Population: General Social L Economic Characteristics Massachusetts. June 1983.
United States Commission on Civil Rights. Mexican American Study Report 111: The Excluded Student. Washington, D.C.: Office of Education, 1972.
_. The Unfinished Education. Office of Education. Vv'ashington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing, 1973.
United States Department of Education. Chapter 1, Public Law 98-211, 98th Congress (Dec. 8, 1983). Education Consolidation and Improvement Act of 19^81 Amendment. Wasnington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1983.
_. 1968-Act. Sec. 701-704, (20 U.S.C. 880b 2). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing, Enacted, January 2, 1968.
United States Office of Education. Amendment to Title VII of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. Public Law 95-b61: Education Amendments of 1978. Washington, D.C., 1978.
United States Senate, Ninetieth Congress. Special, Sub¬ committee on Bilingual of the Education of the Committee on Labor, First Session on S.428. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DTC.: May
29, 1967.
Vander-Linden Charles E., Interview. July 22, 198j.
Vazquez, Idalia. Interview, September 16, 1983.
Webster's New College Dictionary: Springfield, MA:
G 6t C Merriam Co., 198l.
144
Worcester Public Schools. Voluntary Lau Plan for ^sessment of Students~oi: l.imit-pH Knol _
Worcester. MA: Ottice ot Transitional Bilingual Education, 1983.
Worcester Telegram. Leaders See Expanding Needs for Jobs, Housing and Education" Worcester, MA, 1^8 A.
-• Spanish Parents Charge Inequalities in Schools.Worcester, MA, 1976. -
