Rebuttal 1 - My opponent argues that Proposition 227 improved standardized test scores when it passed. Even if it was, which many studies disagree over, it is not beneficial anymore. It is outdated. Proposition 227 was passed 18 years ago – before the iPhone existed, before we had our first Black president, before we created laws against smoking. Our world has changed in ways that would have been unfathomable in 1998. And so have our education systems. Studies have been conducted, tests have been analyzed, and we were wrong. Proposition 227 was never the best answer for our students. Why would we not change our stance on bilingual education to keep up with the evolution of our world and our students?
- In an interview for KQED Radio, Adolfo …show more content…
When Proposition 227 was passed, there was less welcoming of immigrants and more resentment, as is recognized by the Los Angeles Times. In fact, Los Angeles Times also recognizes that before Proposition 227 was passed, many Spanish teachers were not trying their hardest to help children become fluent in English and were instead just letting them stay in Spanish class. This is a direct example of how test scores may have gone up, but it does not mean that we should still be confined to the constraints of Proposition 227. What we need to do is allow bilingual education, and then equip schools with the tools to do it the right way, which has proven to be much more beneficial than English only.
Rebuttal 2 - My opponent argues that students can be in bilingual classes if they get a waiver, which is true. However, obtaining a waiver is not something every student had access to. In fact, it is much easier to obtain a waiver if you are a fluent English speaker looking to learn a second language. In this light, we can see that this proposition is actually an act of discrimination against immigrants. Parental waivers are not good enough. We need to give all children the chance to receive bilingual education regardless of their fluency in English, regardless of if their parents sign a …show more content…
It leaves everything up to interpretation by whoever is in charge. Special needs can be anything from a documented need written by a doctor to a need to be fluent in English. Who is to decide which children have special enough reasons to be allowed into bilingual classes?
- The huge injustice of waivers was caught and began to be amended, but it has not been amended enough. It will not be amended enough until it is all gone. All children need to have access to whichever classes will benefit them the most, to whichever classes will give them the education they need to achieve their dreams.
- Furthermore, in a KQED interview, state senator Ricardo Lara speaks about the fact that the main opponent of Proposition 58 is Ron Unz, the white man who created Prop 227. He says: "[It] is really troubling and really condescending to me to think that somebody who doesn 't have the experience of an immigrant family or being taught in our public schools through a dual immersion program determine what is right and correct for folks in my community.” His insight reminds voters that these laws were not created by immigrant parents who wanted to help their children – they were created by white men who have not lived through the very experiences they speak
- In an interview for KQED Radio, Adolfo …show more content…
When Proposition 227 was passed, there was less welcoming of immigrants and more resentment, as is recognized by the Los Angeles Times. In fact, Los Angeles Times also recognizes that before Proposition 227 was passed, many Spanish teachers were not trying their hardest to help children become fluent in English and were instead just letting them stay in Spanish class. This is a direct example of how test scores may have gone up, but it does not mean that we should still be confined to the constraints of Proposition 227. What we need to do is allow bilingual education, and then equip schools with the tools to do it the right way, which has proven to be much more beneficial than English only.
Rebuttal 2 - My opponent argues that students can be in bilingual classes if they get a waiver, which is true. However, obtaining a waiver is not something every student had access to. In fact, it is much easier to obtain a waiver if you are a fluent English speaker looking to learn a second language. In this light, we can see that this proposition is actually an act of discrimination against immigrants. Parental waivers are not good enough. We need to give all children the chance to receive bilingual education regardless of their fluency in English, regardless of if their parents sign a …show more content…
It leaves everything up to interpretation by whoever is in charge. Special needs can be anything from a documented need written by a doctor to a need to be fluent in English. Who is to decide which children have special enough reasons to be allowed into bilingual classes?
- The huge injustice of waivers was caught and began to be amended, but it has not been amended enough. It will not be amended enough until it is all gone. All children need to have access to whichever classes will benefit them the most, to whichever classes will give them the education they need to achieve their dreams.
- Furthermore, in a KQED interview, state senator Ricardo Lara speaks about the fact that the main opponent of Proposition 58 is Ron Unz, the white man who created Prop 227. He says: "[It] is really troubling and really condescending to me to think that somebody who doesn 't have the experience of an immigrant family or being taught in our public schools through a dual immersion program determine what is right and correct for folks in my community.” His insight reminds voters that these laws were not created by immigrant parents who wanted to help their children – they were created by white men who have not lived through the very experiences they speak