Editor;
Walnut Creek has been here before, and our community said no.
In 2022, families, educators, and state leaders pushed back against a proposal that would have fractured the Mount Diablo Unified School District and deepened racial and economic segregation. The attempted Northgate secession was rejected by the California State Board of Education because it would have created exclusionary schools, destabilized the district, and significantly increased segregation. State leaders warned that Foothill Middle School and Northgate High School could become overwhelmingly white and affluent, while students of color and lower income families were left behind.
That proposal failed because it conflicted with California’s commitment to equity.
Today, the district risks reaching a similar outcome through a quieter and far less transparent decision: relocating the Spanish Two Way Dual Immersion program from Bancroft Elementary.
On January 28, 2026, just days before kindergarten registration opened, families learned through an email that the district plans to move Bancroft’s long standing Spanish dual immersion program to Woodside Elementary beginning in the 2026 to 2027 school year. There was zero engagement with families ahead of time. No advance notice. No public data shared to explain why a successful program would be removed from a high performing school.
The timing matters. Families make enrollment decisions years in advance. Announcing a major change nine days before registration forces parents to choose schools without clarity or confidence in the process.
The impact of this decision will not stop at Bancroft.
By phasing out dual immersion at Bancroft, the district is not just relocating a program. It is slowly dismantling it for the students who remain. As fewer new dual immersion students enroll at Bancroft, current students will experience less bilingual presence in classrooms, fewer peers learning alongside them, and diminishing language rich environments. Over time, there will be less specialized staff support, fewer curriculum resources, and reduced institutional focus on bilingual education within the school.
That matters. Dual immersion programs rely on consistency, community, and sustained investment. When a program is gradually hollowed out, students lose access to the full benefits that made the program successful in the first place.
Dual immersion is also one of the strongest tools districts have to support integration. These programs attract linguistically diverse families, help retain families in public schools, and create long term academic pathways where students from different backgrounds learn together over many years. Bancroft’s dual immersion program does exactly that and it feeds directly into Foothill Middle School and Northgate High School.
Removing dual immersion from Bancroft narrows that pathway.
The likely result is reduced diversity in the district’s most sought after middle and high schools. Families who value bilingual education and inclusive learning environments will look elsewhere, whether that means transferring out of the area, leaving the district, or choosing private schools. Over time, Foothill and Northgate risk becoming less reflective of the broader community, drifting toward the very outcomes California rejected just a few years ago.
This is not speculation. It is a pattern we have already seen.
What makes this moment especially concerning is that state law and district policy require a better process. California’s Local Control and Accountability Plan requires districts to meaningfully engage families before making major program decisions, especially those that affect English learners and historically underserved communities. That did not happen here. Families most impacted by the dual immersion program were not consulted, and no clear data has been shared to justify the move or explain how equity will be preserved.
Many families chose Bancroft specifically because of the stability and success of this program. They trusted the district’s stated commitments to equity and inclusion. Instead, they now face sibling separation, logistical strain, and the dismantling of a thriving language immersion program without a clear educational reason.
This decision also conflicts with the district’s own values. Board Policy 0415 commits the district to inclusive and equitable learning environments. The proposed relocation undermines that commitment and ignores the lessons learned from the failed Northgate secession effort. Segregation does not always happen through dramatic breakaways. Sometimes it happens through quiet decisions that slowly erode diversity one program at a time.
Families are not asking for conflict. They are asking for transparency, real data, and a pause. They are asking the district to explain its reasoning, follow required engagement practices, and explore alternatives that keep dual immersion at Bancroft, where it is working.
If a decision this significant can be made without families at the table, it sets a precedent none of us should be comfortable with.
Regards,
Pegah Charest & Acacia Landfield/Walnut Creek
Since when does the district owe anyone any explanation. If you aren’t happy with the way public schools are run, send your kid to private or parochial school.
Precisely because it is a public school responsible to its constituents. The school board is elected.
They are responsible to its constituents. They don’t have to explain away their reasoning. There’s a difference. If they had to answer to every parent who wanted an answer to every situation, they’d have to close the schools. Parents can be too demanding, and IMO they’re asking too much. As parents, sometimes you have to accept a decision a school board makes the same way we have to accept the decision our boss makes. It’s the way of the world.
Parents can be too demanding, but the question is who can speak and how. The way I would disagree with my boss and the way I would disagree with my elected representative are way different. The expectations and power dynamics are not analogous. The former is more autocratic and the latter more democratic. An elected official can’t wish away constituents.
Its a violation of their own LCAP.
Well said. Thank you for sharing-that’s truly disappointing to hear.
I should add, people move to that area so their kids can attend this program. If you had one child in the program and expected your other children to attend, you too would be (rightfully) pissed that the district unilaterally and without warning moved the program. My kids attended the program long ago, and I’d be furious if they simply changed up like this.
I wish the author had explained what Dual Immersion is, then provided a clear argument for why its location matters so much. I’m not saying I disagree. I’m saying I don’t understand.
I certainly agree that 9 days’ notice of any major change is grossly insufficient.
I would love to share more. The letter was already lengthy 🫣
The Northgate/Foothill change was rejected not because of racial issues, but that the overall test results for Mt. Diablo
School District would have dropped significantly. This would have put a spotlight on the underachievement of the parents
and district.
Firestone 11R
It is my understanding that the proposal was rejected due to equity and access concerns, not to protect test scores or blame families. Public education should be transparent and focused on serving students, not avoiding accountability.
I came here hoping that someone would acknowledge that the state of California will never be able to achieve equity. Equity as to what? Race? Testing Proficiency? Mechanical Skills? What? I would define equity as the latest buzzword pablum.
There is an expression: “in pursuit of perfection” or in pursuit of excellence. Is the pursuit of a worthy goal less worthy or even meaningless because the ideal is never fully achieved? Are ideals just platitudes in your world view? That appears to be your position.