Obama wrong about education of Latino children

The New York Times' education writers continue to do a stellar job in examining the education proposals of both major presidential candidates.

In its latest installement, it takes Sen. Barack Obama to task for his proposal for introductory bilingual education to Hispanic immigrant children. But the facts show, however, that bilingual education is not the way to boost achievement scores of these young ones.

I agree. I was involved with English language education in Metro Nashville schools for three years in effecting change in funding and class sizes. We were successful, thanks the Bush administration.

Contrary to what Tennessean columnist Phil Valentine wrote and did not correct, nearly all of the nation and Nashville does not offer bilingual education. And English as Second Language education is English immersion, not bilingual education as Valentine contended.

The Times points out that educators in a very successful California school district use English immersion for immigrant children. My cousin, when she taught religious education in California, only spoke English to her classes. When it was founded in 1929, one of the founding principles of LULAC, the League of United Latin American Citizens, stressed that people learn English for empowerment.

Throughout the presidential campaign, Obama has been less interested and educated in the matters that face Americans of Hispanic descent and non-citizen immigrants. If this nation gets it wrong in the education of immigrant children, then their futures are doomed. Obama should read and heed The Times' article.

To read more, go to: http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/28/the-bilingual-debate-english-immersion/