The Education Wonks
Yes, I suppose -- but only if the job is that of foreign language teacher.
For those in positions of authority living and working in the US southwest (principly California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas)and Florida, Spanish has been spoken there since the 1540's when Coronado's Expedition to what is now the US Southwest. And, since the 1700's, it has been spoken there on a regular basis. IMO, I believe it would be in a school principals best interest to be able to communicate at some level with many of the students and parents whom his/her school serves.
As a teacher in a predominently hispanic cultural region, my lack of Spanish language ability hinders my ability to communicate with some of the parents of my students. But then again, I cannot communicate with the parents who speak Korean or Arabic either. At my school, there are many other adults who help out with translations if a Spanish speaker is needed. I speak a bit of Spanish, it makes my students laugh, but when it comes to conferencing with parents in Spanish, it is time for translation help.
As for the school board in Dallas, they have the right to request their principals become conversant in Spanish. I expect other school boards will start making this a requirement for their administrators. I hope the boards are paying for the lessons.
Also, taking Spanish language classes might not work.....around here, we have many "Spanglish" speakers, a strange muntant language consisting of Spanish vocabulary and whatever words in English that the speaker does not know how to say in Spanish. Castillian Spanish is NOT the language spoken by many "spanish" speakers in the Americas.
Holy cow! Things are more out of hand than I realized!
Goodness, Edwonk, you are one of a kind, it seems like!
I don't know about being one of a kind, but I'm glad that the readers put up with me. 
I dunno, three years seems reasonable...
If you have a foriegn language teacher, with spanish being the predominant one with respect to the area in question, wouldn't it make more sense to use the foriegn language teach as an on-site translator and to pay him/her appropriately for their time. I'm sure it would be more cost effective than trying to be reasonably fluent in a foriegn language.
I'm not sure about the rest of you, but I remember nothing about the two-year minimum of foriegn language in Texas schools from 10 years ago. And I certainly remember little from my foriegn language credit in college.
I'm against *requiring* additional certifications after hiring, especially if the district doesn't pay for them and allow release time for them.
Why should a principal be required to pay his own money, on his own time, to take courses, just to *keep* his job?
I wonder if those school board types ever complain about "unfunded mandates." Hire a freakin' interpreter.
According to http://www.kltv.com/Global/story...y.asp?
S=3771174 , the district will pay for it. As for release time, I wouldn't have any sympathy for them after the hours teachers have to put in on various administrative issues. I have learned it's just part of the job.
No, my concern would be the legality, the message it sends, and whether it is even a plan that could be made to work at all.
Maybe it would be more reasonable to require (and pay for) each school to have at least one person fluent in Spanish who works in the main office... or broaden it so that if a certain number/percentage of families spoke a particular language as their primary language, that language would need to be spoken by a member of the administration. So schools with a large proportion of Chinese families would need someone who spoke that language, and so on.
And believe me, the foreign language teachers have enough to do, and tend not to be free to do translation during the school day, when a parent might show up at any time.
I have a few thoughts on this issue. (1) The district should not force already existing principals to learn Spanish. It should be voluntary participation. (2) The district should have to pay for the training. (3) If it were voluntary, what intelligent principal would refuse to do this? It seems like the obvious answer to the "What is best for kids" question, and the "What is best for my career" question. (4) Why aren't these districts seeking out Hispanics to fill the role of principal in these predominantly Hispanic schools--it seems logical. (5) The district should make it a requirement to speak spanish for any new hires in the role of principal.
While being able to speak Spanish (or other languages) would certainly be an advantage to a principal, I'm not sure it should be a requirement. Would principals only have to take language classes, or pass some sort of foreign language proficiency test? Becoming "fluent" in another language is likely to require many hours of study, and probably more than three years.
Plus, making the principals learn a foreign language does nothing to help immigrant parents when they have to deal with all other people (teachers, secretaries, non-school personell) who don't speak their language.
Just the thoughts of a foreign language teacher (who was required to pass a language proficiency test for her job)...
Mr. McNamar has it pegged. It just makes sense in some parts of the country. In some neighborhoods and communities it might not be Spanish but another language that is needed. Do what is best for the kids.
I can think of any number of private sector jobs where knowledge of a second or third language would be a prerequisite. That the principal rather than some other school functionary have the responsibility in an immigrant neighborhood is worth discussing, but having somebody in such a neighborhood is a plus.
Commenting by HaloScan.com
