| In June 1998 California voters passed Proposition 227 which limits instructional use of students' primary language, requiring, instead, a transitional program of "sheltered English immersion" that is not normally to exceed one year. The purpose of this study is to analyze the policy making process of Proposition 227 and to examine whether the policy is a sound public policy that can provide the best and the most effective solution to resolve problems regarding educating English learners in California's public schools. Using ethnographic qualitative research method, the study argues that the politics, public opinion, and interest groups influenced the formulation process of Proposition 227. Public choice, as its source of the policy, impacted its effective implementation and, therefore, could unintentionally jeopardize the future of English learners. The lack of clarity in the articulation of the regulation and its requirements resulted in problems with its successful implementation and the proponents of the bilingual programs questioned its policy objective and policy soundness. As a pedagogical policy for educating English learners, Proposition 227 cannot provide the best and the most adequate and effective method for teaching English learners. An incremental reform policy based on the study and research of different bilingual educational approaches might provide a better solution for the education of English learners, rather than a complete revamping of the system. |
