The Arizona school year has ended with pending litigation from a parent who accuses school leaders of disregarding a state law that requires classroom instruction to be provided in English, not Spanish or any other language.
Patricia Pellett’s lawsuit against the Creighton School District in Phoenix alleges that a voter-approved law requiring an English language immersive environment for students still learning the English language continues to be ignored in favor of a dual-language education plan.
The complaint, filed March 19 in Arizona Superior Court, Maricopa County, names Creighton District Superintendent Jay Mann and five board of education members. Ms. Pellett seeks to have them all removed from public office for five years and a court injunction requiring the school to comply with all English language immersion requirements.
Ms. Pellett’s attorney, Carmen Chenal Horne, wife of Arizona State School Superintendent Tom Horne, said a conference between the two sides is scheduled for May 24.
Arizona Proposition 203 English Immersion Initiative, affirmed in a 2000 voter referendum, requires English instruction in an immersive classroom setting. The goal of the legislation was to accelerate English proficiency rapidly in a state where many children speak Spanish at home, according to the complaint.
“If the school day was partly taught in another language, this would delay their mastery of English,” the complaint reads. “If half the school day spent in class is taught in Spanish, the students will certainly learn English more slowly.”
Proposition 203 makes a few exceptions for dual-language instruction if the student meets specific criteria and the parents sign a waiver. A student who comprehends English instruction orally but struggles with writing it would be an applicable situation, the complaint notes.
The Creighton district’s English proficiency rate for students who were still learning the language in 2023 was 5 percent, far lower than that of neighboring districts, which ranged between 23 and 33 percent, according to the complaint.
“Schools like Creighton,” Ms. Pellett said, “continue to break the law.”
Arizona State School Superintendent Tom Horne issued a new release supporting Ms. Pellett’s lawsuit, though he is not a party to it.
“Each member of the Creighton Elementary school board will be compelled to leave the board immediately and will not be able to hold a position of authority in Arizona public schools for five years if the court agrees that they are violating the voter-approved Proposition 203,” Mr. Horne said in a March 19 news release.
Earlier Attempts
This is not Mr. Horne’s first fight over Proposition 203.In 2006, the Arizona state legislature created an English language learner task force and began reducing the immersion requirements to allow some instruction in other languages during the school day.
By 2019, the required amount of immersion time was reduced to two hours a day for grades kindergarten through five and 100 minutes a day for grades 6-12, according to the Arizona Attorney General’s Office.
The state legislature transferred the powers of the task force to the state Board of Education in 2020 and, over objections from Mr. Horne, approved a dual language model that stipulated schools should provide instruction entirely in English for half a day and in a “partner language” the other half of a day.
Mr. Horne attempted to overturn the dual language model. In June, he sent a letter to school districts advising them that the state Board of Education requirements violated Proposition 203. The Attorney General’s Office has maintained that only the state Education Department has the authority to change English language immersion or dual language model requirements.
“Any legal opinion issued by the superintendent – like the superintendent’s June 19 statement – lacks legal force,” Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes wrote in a July 17 legal opinion.
In the news release, Mr. Horne says that under Proposition 203, Arizona voters authorized him, not the state legislature or state board of education, to oversee the education of English learners. Even though his previous attempt to overturn the dual language model requirement was unsuccessful, “it would pave the way for any parent of any public school in Arizona to file another lawsuit that would result in these draconian penalties.”
Ms. Pellett, a mother of five school-age children, said none of her kids were enrolled in the Creighton district, and she acknowledged that she never spoke with a Creighton parent who takes issue with the dual language model. She said she became an advocate for school reform after budget cuts in the nearby Scottsdale district required her special needs son to participate in a ride-share program. She has also pushed back on school indoctrination matters, declining test scores and state public education rankings, and curriculum teaching third graders that protests are examples of “good citizenship.”
Ms. Pellett’s lawsuit does not say the dual language model hinders instruction for English-speaking students who don’t know Spanish, and it does not get into whether or how classroom instruction is separated by language for half of the school day. She supports the concept of bringing all students along to the point of English fluency as quickly as possible and then offering all children the chance to learn a second or third language before they graduate.
“I jumped in the fight for our kids,” she said. “We can do so much better for our children.”
Creighton School District communications director Emily Waszolek said her district follows the dual language immersion model in accordance with Arizona Board of Education regulations.
“We always strive to do what is best for our kids,” she said in an email response. “We will continue to support parent choice and the programs that are supported by our community and families. “
