June 21, 2024 Breaking News, Latest News, and Videos

How Much Extra Money Should Go For English Learners?:

At budgeting time, when legislators and the governor decide how much state support each public school pupil should get, it’s pretty clear that some students are more equal than others, as the late “Animal Farm” author George Orwell might have put it.

As things now stand, school districts will start out getting a base grant of $4,920 for every student they register during the next school year. Then there are extras, with the single largest category both in terms of money provided and numbers of kids involved being pupils designated as English learners.

If you have a child who speaks little or no English, his or her school will get at least an additional 8 percent from the state on top of the basic grant.

But if you’ve got an extra-bright kid there’s absolutely no state requirement that your local school district put any money into gifted and talented education programs tailored for that child. So when parents lack the funds to send children to a private or parochial school, the brightest pupils can be out of luck when it comes to the stimulation often needed to hold their attention and facilitate further progress.

Classes for the gifted, unlike teaching English as a second language, are a local option. School districts can spent money for them or not, as local school boards decide, and in an era of extremely tight education dollars, some districts have opted out.

There are plenty of other programs in a similar spot: college counseling for high school students, civic education, training assistance for bilingual education teachers, school safety, ongoing training for principals, summer school and ninth grade class size reductions were just some of the programs on a list the nonpartisan state legislative analyst’s office presented to an Assembly committee this spring.

It’s almost inevitable all those programs will suffer cuts, even if the tax increase initiative pushed by Gov. Jerry Brown should pass.

One reason: The money going to English learners will increase dramatically if Brown’s proposed new state budget passes as submitted.

The theory is that extra attention and teachers need to be diverted to English learners in order to bring them up to speed. So Brown wants to increase the current 8 percent added “weight” given them to 37 percent over the next six years. In short, the state would give districts $6,740 to spend on educating each English learner they have enrolled.

The very thought of this rankles some Republicans, who contend this all is a subsidy for illegal immigrants. It doesn’t matter to those making this claim that the long and vast immigrant tide from Mexico has been brought to a virtual halt by a combination of today’s lousy economy and new enforcement tactics, which combined last year to cause more persons to move from this country to Mexico than the other way around, according to a new study by the Pew Hispanic Center.

“ESL (English as a second language) is really about helping illegal aliens learn English, using money that could go for equipment, textbooks and supplies for honest students,” gripes Stephen Frank, an ultra-conservative blogger and former head of the California Republican Assembly. “(The Brown proposal) means that illegal aliens, instead of having 8 percent more money spent on them for education will now have 37 percent more…Our kids deserve better than having criminals stealing their education money.”

That complaint, of course, ignores the fact most English learner students now enrolled in California schools are U.S. citizens, regardless of their parents’ immigration status. And the fact that youthful illegals can hardly be categorized as criminals just because their parents brought them here at an age where they had nothing to say about the matter.

For sure, there’s one other issue that must be dealt with before the Brown program should go forward: How to prevent the extra money from keeping students in English-learner status long after their language skills are adequate.

Said the legislative analyst report, “High funding linked to English learner status could create fiscal incentives not to reclassify students as proficient in English.” In short, the longer a child is classified an English learner, the more money goes to the school district involved.

Some experts already believe too many students are being kept too long in English-learner status.

The bottom line: Without at least some tweaks to ensure honesty and some consideration for the brightest children, this change should not go forward.

in Opinion
Related Posts

SM.a.r.t Column: The Up Zoning Scam (Part 1)

June 16, 2024

June 16, 2024

Over the last few years, the State of California has mandated a massive upzoning of cities to create capacity for...

SM.a.r.t. Column: Shape Up – On Steroids

June 9, 2024

June 9, 2024

Nine years ago, SMa.r.t wrote a series of articles addressing the adaptive re-use of existing structures. We titled one “Shape...

SM.a.r.t Column: The Challenge of Running a City When City Staff Have Different Priorities

June 2, 2024

June 2, 2024

Living in a city has its perks, but it can be a real headache when the folks running the show...

SM.a.r.t. Column: A Path to Affordable Ownership in Santa Monica

May 27, 2024

May 27, 2024

[Note: our guest author today is Andres Drobny, a former Professor of Economics at the University of London, the former...

SM.a.r.t. Column: A Path Forward for Santa Monica: Part II

May 19, 2024

May 19, 2024

As referenced in Part I of this article, the state’s use of faulty statistics and forceful legislation has left a...

SM.a.r.t. Column: A Path Forward for Santa Monica: Part I

May 12, 2024

May 12, 2024

To quickly summarize, California grapples with an ongoing housing crisis spurred by state implementation of over 100 policies and mandates...

SM.a.r.t. Column: Where Will Our Huddled Masses Sleep? Navigating California’s Affordable Housing Mandates

May 5, 2024

May 5, 2024

Just as Lady Liberty beckons the “huddled masses” of immigrants to America, cities like Santa Monica have an ethical obligation...

SM.a.r.t Column: SMCLC SPEAKS

April 28, 2024

April 28, 2024

SMart (Santa Monica Architects for a Responsible Tomorrow) periodically invites guest columnists who have made a significant contribution to the...

SM.a.r.t Column: Building Modern Boxes Lacks Identity

April 21, 2024

April 21, 2024

In the relentless pursuit of modernity, cities worldwide have witnessed the rise of so-called architectural marvels in the form of...

SM.a.r.t. Column: Santa Monica Needs Responsible Urban and Architectural Design

April 14, 2024

April 14, 2024

[SMa.r.t. note: Eight years ago, our highly esteemed and recently-passed colleague Ron Goldman documented his thoughts on the need for...

SM.a.r.t. Column: BLINK NOW!

April 7, 2024

April 7, 2024

Nine years ago, I wrote a column for SMa.r.t. titled SANTA MONICA: BEACH TOWN OR ‘DINGBAT’ CITY? (https://smdp.com/2015/05/09/santa-monica-beach-town-dingbat-city/)Here is the...

SM.a.r.t Column: ARB Courage (Part 2 of 2)

March 31, 2024

March 31, 2024

Last week we discussed the numerous flaws of the Gelson’s project as a perfect example of what not to do...

ARB Courage (Part 1 of 2)

March 24, 2024

March 24, 2024

On March 4, 2024, your ARB (Architectural Review Board) ruled in favor of the 521-unit Gelson’s Project at Ocean Park...

SM.a.r.t Column: Can California ARBs Balance Affordable Housing with Community Character in the Face of New Housing Laws?

March 17, 2024

March 17, 2024

By suggestion, I attended the March 4th ARB (Architectural Review Board) meeting that addressed the Gelson Lincoln Boulevard Project.  After...

S.M.a.r.t Column: On the Need for Safety

March 10, 2024

March 10, 2024

Earlier this week, in the dark pre-dawn hours, a pair of thugs covered in masks and hoodies burst into the...