This paper critically examines Huddy and Sears' 1995 study, "Opposition to Bilingual Education: Prejudice or the Defense of Realistic Interests?" published in Social Psychology Quarterly. The paper explores how the study investigates the roots of parental opposition to bilingual education — distinguishing between realistic interest prejudice, rooted in resource competition, and old-fashioned racial prejudice rooted in stereotypes. The analysis notes that while Huddy and Sears shed light on the sources of opposition, their study offers limited insight into actual student educational outcomes. The paper extends their findings by applying basic principles of human behavior, particularly childhood socialization of attitudes, to argue that parental opposition may function as a self-fulfilling prophecy that undermines the effectiveness of bilingual programs.
Predicting the effect of bilingual education on student outcomes using the work of Huddy and Sears, Opposition to Bilingual Education: Prejudice or the Defense of Realistic Interests?, is problematic. The authors investigated the bases for parental prejudice against bilingual education; they did not investigate in any detail what the educational outcomes might be for the children involved. They made only incidental reference to the possibility that Latino, African-American, or other minority students — or even Anglos — might experience diminished educational outcomes in the presence, or for that matter absence, of bilingual education. In fact, they were not investigating outcomes per se; they were investigating the source of prejudice.
Huddy and Sears proposed that current prejudice against bilingual education takes two forms. The first is the realistic interest variety. Those who practice this form of prejudice believe that spending money on bilingual education to serve Latinos does a disservice to the education of non-Latinos by shifting funds that would otherwise be available to enrich English-language education. The second form is old-fashioned racial prejudice, ranging from external explanations (Blacks, Latinos, etc. do not do well because they were prevented from getting an education) to internal ones (Blacks, Latinos, etc. do not do well because they are lazy and do not want to work hard).
At the outset, Huddy and Sears note that extending the concept of realistic interest to Latinos seems inevitable given current moves toward restricting access to public services such as education for undocumented immigrants, most of whom are Latino. In other words, Anglos fear that education dollars are ill spent on Spanish-language instruction, especially for students who may have no established right to public education in the United States. On further investigation, Huddy and Sears noted that this attitude was most prevalent among Anglos and African-Americans living in the same areas as Latinos, whether or not their children were enrolled in bilingual classes. Arguably, in those areas, education in general is not on par with predominantly Anglo middle-class communities.
"Prejudice transmitted through early childhood socialization"
"Economic threat drives strongest Anglo opposition"
"Study raises unanswered questions about bilingual effectiveness"
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.