As a high school principal in Chelsea, where almost 70 percent of the students speak a language other than English at home, I witnessed the disastrous consequences of a failed policy of transitional bilingual education that has ill-served generations of young immigrant students in Massachusetts. This is why I left Chelsea in order to lead the ballot question campaign to change our bilingual education laws.

The bilingual education law passed in August by our legislature will ensure that almost nothing changes or improves in our education of Spanish-speaking children, who are most likely to be enrolled in bilingual education programs. Far too many of these students will remain trapped in Spanish-language classrooms for years while learning English very slowly, if at all.

Because of transitional bilingual education, too many Spanish-speaking students are segregated from their English-speaking schoolmates, which has contributed significantly to the abysmal educational results for Hispanic students in Massachusetts: the lowest MCAS scores and the highest drop-out rates among all major racial and ethnic groups.

It is time to bring sense into the education of our immigrant and non English-speaking children. The faster and more intensely we teach these children the English language, under the guidance of trained and caring teachers, the sooner these students will be able to benefit from the educational opportunities that lead to skilled jobs, higher education and full participation in our society.

It is absurd, not to mention educationally harmful, to think that Spanish-speaking children entering kindergarten or first grade in Massachusetts need to wait three or four years to participate in regular classes with their native English-speaking classmates, as is claimed by bilingual education “experts.”

Indeed, these “experts” would prefer that we ignore the fact that in California, where a similar ballot question passed in 1998, state-wide test scores clearly indicate that students immersed in English are three times more likely to be successful on English-language tests than those still attending holdout bilingual education programs, where subjects are taught in the native language.

Three outrageous misrepresentations commonly made by our opponents must be dismissed.

First, opponents of the ballot question say that it prohibits a child’s native language from being used at all in English immersion classrooms and that teachers will be sued if they dare speak a word of any other language in the classroom. That is pure demagoguery. Nothing in Question 2 prohibits a child’s native language from being used in a classroom to clarify a new lesson or to place a lesson in appropriate context when necessary.

Question 2 also allows waivers for native-language academic instruction for older students who might have serious difficulty in quickly acquiring strong English skills. Question 2 does allow for suits against teachers and administrators who willfully and repeatedly violate the law by providing, in the absence of waivers, all or almost all instruction and teaching materials in their students’ native languages, in direct contravention of the law’s English immersion provisions. As an educator, I can assure you that teachers and administrators who willfully and repeatedly violate legitimate laws are the last people we want teaching our children and running our schools.

Second, the new bilingual education “reform” bill that legislators say will give school districts local choice of educational programs is in reality a shallow cover for protecting the supremacy of the same old native-language classes defended by the bilingual education bureaucracy. Are we to believe that the large urban school districts in Massachusetts, dominated by this bureaucracy, will voluntarily choose the most promising and effective programs that focus on the early teaching of English?

Finally, it is the last refuge of scoundrels to say that Question 2 is “anti-immigrant” or “racist.” Our worst public figures use this divisive tactic when they have no solid arguments or evidence to rely on. But nothing could be further from the truth. As an immigrant, I know firsthand that there is nothing more pro-immigrant in our country than to provide a child with the very foundation of success here — a command of English as quickly as possible.

The politicians on Beacon Hill have had years of opportunities to show the courage and resolve to make real reforms in our bilingual education laws, but they have repeatedly failed to do so. It is now time for Massachusetts voters to do the right thing by voting “yes” on Ballot Question 2 on Nov. 5. Guided and immediate immersion into English gives immigrant students the best chance for equal educational opportunities in our country.