Abstract
In 1998, California passed a voter initiative—Proposition 227—that severely restricted the use of primary language for instructional purposes, and instead provided a transitional program of “structured English immersion” that was not normally to last more than one year. Now more than two years after the passage of Proposition 227, the pundits and the policymakers are anxiously making pronouncements about its effects on California's English learners. However, the numerous reform efforts underway in California, and the limitations of existing data, make it impossible to draw conclusions about the independent effects of the passage of Proposition 227 on the academic achievement of English learners. Contrary to the political statements and shoot-from-the-hip analyses being touted in the press, the achievement scores of California's English learners yield little evidence of long term benefits for these students.