Introduction

The debate over educational policies aimed at improving schools has taken center stage in recent years. In California, this debate intensified with the proposal and eventual passage of Proposition 227 in 1998. As an educational reform, Proposition 227 represented an effort to "change schools in order to correct perceived social and educational problems" (Tyack & Cuban, 1995, p. 4). The perceived failure of bilingual programs to teach children English was cited as a reason to implement reform. As an initiative voted on by California voters, Proposition 227 departs from other past reform attempts and as such, poses an interesting case study in the discussion of school reform. Yet, like other reforms, Proposition 227 was experienced as a top-down mandate by teachers charged with implementation. Our interviews conducted with 77 teachers throughout California aim at understanding teachers' role in implementing Proposition 227. Their perspectives offer insight on the impact of Proposition 227 on their teaching profession, their instructional practices, impact on students, and impact on school culture and teacher relationships. Findings from this study of the second-year implementation of Proposition 227 reveal that teachers experienced Proposition 227 as a top-down reform. In addition, other factors such as high-stakes testing and teacher accountability played a role in the way teachers interpreted and acted on their district and school's plan for Proposition 227.

As the teacher's reaction to Proposition 227 in the opening excerpt illustrates, top-down reform strategies overlook the knowledge base of teachers who are responsible for implementing change within the classroom setting. This perspective echoes much of the research on school reform which suggests that top-down reform strategies often come into conflict with what Fullan (1991) terms the "subjective realities embedded in people's individual and organizational contexts and their personal histories" (p. 43). Reforms originating from outside the school context, in other words, ignore the culture of the school and the pedagogical beliefs of teachers who form a large part of the school's climate. Teachers constitute a critical component in the implementation of any reform, argues Fullan, since it is at the individual level that meaningful change will occur (p. 45). Given the critical role teachers play in the successful implementation of any school policy, it is important to take note of teachers' reactions to policy. Fullan argues that teachers' concerns revolve around four central areas: (a) effectiveness of change on students' learning; (b) clarity of implementation guidelines; (c) personal impact (time, energy, sense of fulfillment generated from the proposed change; and (d) impact on peer interactions. Teachers respond to change in diverse ways depending on the impact felt at these four levels. The nature of the teaching profession itself is also highlighted as a reason for the diversity of responses to change and the difficulty of implementing reform uniformly.

In their respective studies, Lorite (1974) and Sarason (1996) assert that isolation and independence characterize the teaching profession. These two qualities, according to Sarason, leave the teacher "constantly thrown back on personal resources, having little or no interpersonal vehicles available for purposes of stimulation, and change" (p. 196). The isolated nature of teaching results in teachers' varied and individualized responses to change. Yet, as Fullan indicates, teachers are constrained in how thoroughly they can implement a given reform due to the multidimensional nature of educational innovations.

Fullan lists three components at stake in teachers' successful implementation of school reform: (a) the possible use of new materials, (b) use of new teaching strategies, (c) a change in pedagogical beliefs. Interviews conducted with teachers reveal that many educators faced with implementing Proposition 227 faced many challenges, including lack of clear guidelines regarding implementation, and perhaps most importantly, in the case of bilingual teachers who switched to a structured English immersion setting, pedagogical conflict with the new law. Tyack and Cuban and Fullan all argue that changes in beliefs about what and how to teach are the most difficult to achieve, since they challenge educators' core beliefs about the goals of an education.

Literature on school reform suggests that, as the final line of the implementation process, teachers determine to a great extent whether reforms will become meaningful at the local or school level. Individual characteristics such as beliefs and practices and teacher biography represent key factors in teachers' individual interpretations and implementation of top-down policies.

Yet, theorists in the area of critical pedagogy take a different approach to analyzing teachers' relationship to school reform.

Carlson (1996) maintains that teachers can be important agents for transformative change by pulling their individual acts of resistance into a collective base. "Teachers' everyday resistances are important," argues Carlson, "but so long as they remain kept in the closet of the self-contained classroom, these resistances [can become] fragmented, and isolated from group effort" (p. 285). The analysis of teachers' reactions to Proposition 227 underscores this idea. Teachers in schools that collectively sought waivers (through active principal, teacher, and community leadership) were most able to resist Proposition 227 in their school community and classroom. On the other hand, teachers whose classroom assignment changed from bilingual education to structured English immersion described the absence of a collective apparatus to challenge Proposition 227. By considering teachers' perspectives of Proposition 227 implementation, we can assess the relationship between school reform and teachers' challenges to these policies.

Method

In order to provide a cross sectional analysis of the implementation of Proposition 227, the analysis draws from a random sample of data collected by researchers at the University of California at Berkeley (see García & Curry Rodríguez, this issue). Out of 77 teachers interviewed in the study, eight teachers from each instructional setting were randomly selected for this paper. Perspectives from the following three instructional settings are analyzed: teachers who maintained bilingual education, those who switched from bilingual education to structured English immersion, and structured English immersion or English-only teachers who continued in their setting. From the structured interviews, the paper focuses on four areas of impact: (a) impact on teacher profession, (b) effect on instructional practices, (c) impact on students, (d) impact on school culture and teacher relationships.

The following are the questions used to gather perspectives in these areas:

These questions aim at identifying key areas that concern teachers' implementation of any school reform. This paper also looks at how teachers were affected by their school's implementation procedures and the multiple challenges they faced in implementing Proposition 227.

Impact of Proposition 227 on the Teaching Profession

In this section, we will discuss how implementation procedures influence teachers' credentials and their own pedagogical views regarding bilingual education. This information is organized by type of instructional setting: (a) bilingual education, (b) structured English immersion (SEI) (formerly bilingual education), and (c) structured English immersion or English-only with no changes in instructional setting after Proposition 227.

Teachers who maintained bilingual education instruction

In regards to impact on their teaching credential, teachers expressed that Proposition 227 did not affect their credential. Of the eight bilingual teachers in this sample, six held BCLAD (Bilingual/Cross-cultural Language, and Academic Development) credentials and continued to teach primary language instruction. However, it is important to note that as part of a community of bilingual educators these teachers felt devalued and demoralized. These teachers projected that in the future, primary language instruction would eventually diminish. As one teacher expressed:

This teacher felt devalued as a Spanish bilingual educator even though he was able to continue teaching bilingual education. As Fullan cites (1991, p. 36), educational reforms collide with the occupational identity (Marris, 1975) of teachers by challenging "the accumulated wisdom of how to handle a job derived from their own experience. Change threatens to invalidate this experience by robbing them of the skills they have learned and confusing their purposes." In the context of Proposition 227, bilingual teachers felt that implementation procedures questioned their expertise in teaching second language learners. This questioning of bilingual teachers' expertise significantly affected teacher morale.

Teachers who switched to structured English immersion

From the pool of teachers in this sample, some expressed no impact on their current credential. However, teachers on emergency credentials described having to get their CLAD (Cross-cultural Language, and Academic Development) certification much sooner than before the passage of Proposition 227. It is important to point out that in this second year of implementation of Proposition 227, districts are placing greater emphasis on CLAD certification, and less emphasis on BCLAD. These teachers were provided opportunities for training in English language development (ELD) teaching strategies. Although there is an overall greater emphasis on ELD, teachers in this scenario who have their BCLAD continue to use primary language for support in the SEI setting. Out of our sample, two out of the eight teachers in this setting lost their bilingual stipends as a result of Proposition 227.

While pedagogically opposed to Proposition 227, teachers in this sample did not express "outward defiance." Teachers described following the school plan as a result of pressure to increase their students' standardized test scores:

High stakes testing played an important role in the second year of implementation as districts were pressured to raise test scores. Teachers have had to carry the burden of raising scores in order to meet standards. As a result of this climate, teachers in this sample did not project an outward defiance to implementing Proposition 227 in their classroom. Because of this high stakes testing environment teachers described feeling constrained in their field and excluded from any decision-making regarding the implementation of the proposition.

Teachers who remained in structured English immersion

In this sample, two of the eight teachers were in English-only settings and the other six were in SEI. Teachers who continued teaching in the structured English immersion setting expressed no effect on their teaching credential. However, similar to those teachers who switched from bilingual education to SEI, two of the eight teachers described a stronger push for CLAD certification after Proposition 227. In addition, Proposition 227 did not create any changes in their classroom assignment.

In terms of their pedagogical views toward teaching English language learners, SEI teachers expressed an overall awareness and consciousness about the benefits of bilingual education. As one teacher put it:

SEI teachers perceived that even those schools that secured bilingual education through waivers were vulnerable as well. Indeed, bilingual educators did experience the effects of Proposition 227 filtering into their classrooms, particularly in regards to changes in their instructional practices.

Impact of Proposition 227 on Instructional Practices

Teachers who maintained bilingual education

In describing their students' key language and literacy needs, teachers reported greater exposure to English, vocabulary development in both English and the primary language, and phonemic awareness. To address these needs, teachers have modified their language arts program to include more oral language development and phonemic awareness. Teachers rely on poems, songs, and phonemic awareness activities to encourage students' language growth. As Gándara et al. (2000) describe in their study of the initial impact of Proposition 227:

As in the first year, the second-year implementation of Proposition 227 saw teachers placing greater emphasis on vocabulary development and phonemic awareness, and a greater emphasis on English in all the instructional settings.

Although bilingual teachers continued to teach primary language instruction after the passage of Proposition 227, they expressed concerns in two key areas: (a) difficulty in acquiring primary language materials, and (b) heavier emphasis on English language development and pressure to transition students into mainstream programs at an earlier age. The latter idea is well-expressed by the following teacher:

Even though this school has remained bilingual we can discern that this program may be moving in the direction of SEI. Teachers did in fact express concern over this eventual change.

Teachers that switched from bilingual education to structured English immersion

Teachers in this setting described a great impact on their instructional practices as a result of Proposition 227. Some teachers lamented not being able to instruct in Spanish and using Spanish only for primary language support. Changes in instructional practices included the absence of primary language materials in the classroom, and an increase in English materials. One teacher described her instruction as now "watered down" because the majority of the day is focused on English language development. Teachers also expressed difficulty in reaching students. One teacher described bilingual classes as faster paced and producing more results. This same teacher described having to spend more time on each unit, whereas in the bilingual setting, the teacher was given the opportunity to cover more material:

Due to their inability to use Spanish on a consistent basis, teachers in this category have had to rely on visuals, music, manipulatives, and total physical response strategies to create a more interactive setting. One teacher described these new strategies as having to "act everything out" for students.

Additionally, teachers reported having to devise more effective ways to manage the classroom in order to maximize student interaction and learning. Although teachers do strive to increase student interaction, they expressed concern about not having enough English role models in the classroom. In schools with high limited English proficient (LEP) populations, there is limited opportunity for providing fluent English speakers in the classroom to serve as role models.

Teachers who remained in structured English immersion setting

When asked about Proposition 227 and its effect on their language and literacy lessons, teachers expressed no overt changes in their teaching. In this setting, SEI and English-only teachers continue to rely on strategies such as providing student-centered work, guided reading books, interactive activities and phonics based programs. As one teacher put it:

This can be interpreted as standardized testing guiding curriculum and instructional practices in the classroom. In July 2000, American Federation of Teachers president Sandra Feldman expressed that tests should be one aspect of the standards reform process:

Thus, the intersection of high stakes testing and Proposition 227 implementation needs to be seriously considered and analyzed.

Impact of Proposition 227 on Students

Teachers who maintained bilingual education instruction

Teachers were asked what impact Proposition 227 might have on students in the long run. Interestingly, although teachers continued teaching in the bilingual setting, many expressed a negative impact on students as a result of the proposition. Teachers expressed that the 30-day SEI period proved to be the most difficult and frustrating:

For teachers in this setting, placing students in a structured English immersion class for 30 days took time away from meaningful instructional time that could have been spent in the bilingual setting. More importantly, teachers perceived that although students remained in a bilingual classroom, many have internalized negative ideological attitudes towards their native language. This may be due to the negative climate toward the primary language brought on by the proposition.

Teachers who switched from bilingual education to structured English immersion

Teachers perceived that Proposition 227 impacted students on two levels: self-identity, and academic achievement in the long run. In these two areas, teachers predicted a negative impact on students. One teacher, for example, described Proposition 227 as producing a "generation of subtractive bilinguals":

In addition to losing their primary language, one teacher described the negative effect as a loss of cultural identity. For example, this same teacher foresaw students not being able to communicate with parents and losing ties with their community and family:

SEI teachers repeatedly described a growing inter-generational gap between parents and their children. As a result of the emphasis on administering English tests, such as the SAT- 9, teachers described students as "frustrated" when taking these tests. Because students are not given a choice as to what language to use in the classroom, teachers described students as lacking self-confidence in their academic achievement. Another major concern among teachers in this setting was the inability of parents to assist their children with homework assignments as a result of the switch from bilingual education to structured English immersion.

Teachers who remained in the structured English immersion setting

In this setting teachers projected a wide array of impact on students ranging from no impact to possible impact on their cultural and linguistic identity. Teachers who projected no impact on students explained that their students had never been in a bilingual setting. This, however, poses a problem when we consider high student transiency rate. One teacher stressed the importance of learning English as essential to living in this country:

This teacher valued students' primary language, but nonetheless believed that learning English took precedence over maintaining their first language. Teachers who expressed possible impact raised concerns over students' self-esteem in SEI or English-only classrooms; nonetheless, they reiterated the importance of learning English first.

Impact on School Culture and Teacher Relationships

Teachers who remained in the bilingual education setting

As a result of Proposition 227, teachers felt that there were divisions between bilingual education teachers and structured English immersion or English-only teachers. Similar to the findings of Gándara et al. (2000) regarding the first-year of implementation of Proposition 227, bilingual teachers attributed these divisions to monolingual teachers' misunderstanding of the waiver process. For example, monolingual teachers in schools that retained bilingual education saw the law as completely eradicating bilingual education and, therefore, questioned their school's continuation of bilingual education. The following bilingual teacher described these divisions:

The picture that emerges from these perspectives is that Proposition 227 not only changed instructional programs for second language learners, but it also legitimized monolingual teachers' negative feelings toward primary language instruction.

Teachers who continued teaching bilingual education after the passage of Proposition 227 described strong support from principals. Principals at these schools provided moral support; however, teachers in this type of setting have expressed confronting obstacles when trying to purchase primary language materials since the passage of Proposition 227.

Teachers who switched from bilingual education to structured English immersion

In this setting, teachers expressed two scenarios: (a) clear divisions between monolingual teachers and former bilingual teachers who switched to structured English immersion, and (b) a supportive environment due to the principal's effort to facilitating teachers' transition to SEI. English-only teachers in these schools viewed SEI teachers as bilingual advocates and preferred all instruction to be in English with no primary language support.

Overall, there was a general consensus amongst SEI teachers that Proposition 227 had created frustration in the school community. English only teachers were frustrated with the continuance of bilingual education, while SEI teachers faced many challenges in their new instructional setting.

Teachers who remained in structured English immersion

Structured English immersion teachers expressed that the passage of Proposition 227 brought little changes to the school culture and teacher relationships. Some teachers asserted that bilingual education had never been offered at their respective school, and thus, that students had "always known SEI." Additionally, teachers did not perceive any impact on teacher relationships at the school.

Looking Ahead: The Intersection of Multiple State Policies and Pedagogy and its Implications

Data on the second-year implementation of Proposition 227 reveals that teachers continue to feel the effects of top-down reform. However, in this second year of implementation, there are other factors to consider. High stakes testing, in addition to the implementation of Proposition 227, created a tense environment for teachers to work in throughout the year. Teachers can be active agents of change in schools; however, in top-down reform, teachers are limited in the pedagogical decisions they can make in their classrooms. For example, in the schools that continued bilingual instruction teachers expressed being able to continue their instructional practice, but were expected to administer programs such as Open Court, Success for All, and Results. All teachers in this sample, across the three instructional settings, described a refocus on their ELD components and an earlier transition into English-only classrooms. One may look at this trend as the push for the diminished use of bilingual programs.

Similar to Gándara et al. (2000), our second year data also suggest that it is too early to tell if these changes and adaptations best serve English learners. It is too early to evaluate the future outcomes of the implementation of Proposition 227 on student academic achievement for example. Yet, teachers' projections of the impact of Proposition 227 on students indicate that teachers have witnessed an overall negative effect on second language learners' cultural and linguistic identity and educational future.

Teacher impressions on policy provide a window as to how they perceive their surroundings and how their teaching environments have changed as a result of the implementation procedures. This analysis suggests that teachers have, and will continue, to face challenges in the implementation of Proposition 227. Moreover, this study reveals that the second-year implementation of 227 intersected with multiple variables, such as high-stakes testing and increased accountability to create a tense and in many instances, demoralizing environment for teachers. As the teachers in this study have suggested, the key to understanding the challenges educators face in implementing school reform lies in centralizing teachers' experiences inside the classroom, and considering the intersection of these multiple policies with pedagogy.

References

Carlson, D. (1996). Teachers as political actors: From reproductive theory to the crisis of schooling. In P. Leistyna, S. A. Sherblom, & A. Woodrum (Eds.), Breaking free: The transformative power of critical pedagogy (pp. 273-300). Cambridge: Harvard Educational Review.

Feldman, S. (2000, August 12). Uproar over testing. [On-line]. Available: http://www.aft.org/stand/previous/2000/0700.html

Fullan, M. G. (1991). The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press.

García, Eugene E., & Curry Rodríguez, Julia E. (2000). The Education of limited English proficient students in California schools: An assessment of the influence of Proposition 227 in selected districts and schools. Bilingual Research Journal, 24 (1-3), 15-35.

Gándara, P., Maxwell-Jolly, J., García, E., Asato, J., Gutiérrez, K., Stritikus, T., & Curry, J. (2000). The initial impact of Proposition 227 on the instruction of English learners. Davis: University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute.

Lorite, D. (1974). School teacher. Chicago: University Press.

Marris, P. (1975). Loss and change. New York: Anchor Press.

Sarason, S. (1996). Revisiting the culture of the school and the problem of change. New York: Teachers College Press.

Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward utopia: A century of public school reform. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank all the teachers who participated in this research project and provided their perspectives on the impact of Proposition 227 in their classrooms. We would also like to acknowledge the U.S Department of Education, the Spencer Foundation, and the Center for Latino Policy Research at UC Berkeley for providing the funding and support to make this project possible.