Wilson Riles, Director of the newly-formed Division of Compensatory Education within the California Department of Education miraculously distributed 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) funds for services to educationally disadvantaged students of the state of California to approximately 875 school districts, county offices and other eligible agencies.
Two years prior, however, California had funded 24 pilot Compensatory Education projects in anticipation of the "big money" coming from the federal government for such purposes. Through those projects the Department wanted to learn who the educationally disadvantaged students were, where they were concentrated, types of services required, and a host of other particulars which could give a smooth start to Compensatory Education in California. Among the many findings in the 24 projects was the large number of children of migrant agricultural workers not being served and more glaringly, how few were the districts who provided for them even when they knew of them.
School districts with eligible students for compensatory education services were required to submit an application for their entitlements furnishing information such as numbers of students, scholastic/test data, and, obviously, a description of the services to be rendered the students. Although the applicants did not have much time to prepare the applications, most them were good enough for initial approval. It became very apparent, however, that again children of migrant agricultural workers were left out. For decades the plight of such children was known and, even documented, through novels such as Steinbeck's Grapes of Wrath; the movie dramatically described their struggle, Edward R. Morrow's Harvests of Shame also pointed out how those who picked the produce for our dinner tables were, and continue to be, so abused. These agricultural workers, at best, were considered second and third class citizens. Society has made this acceptable and continues to promote the notion that migrants are really not anybody's responsibility.
Leo Lopez, Chief of the Bureau of Community Services within the Division of Compensatory Education, documented and reported these findings to Dr. Riles, recommending initiating a process through which the ESEA of 1965 be amended to categorically fund services for migrant children. Having championed support for all disadvantaged children, Dr. Riles expressed interest and requested additional information. The data was collected through Dr.Lopez's unit from well-informed sources throughout the state, and, thus, began the formulation of the amendment to the ESEA of 1965, guaranteeing services for the heretofore forgotten, quiet minority.
Surprisingly, Dr. Riles' network and Washington, D.C. contacts were also very interested in pursuing such an amendment as it was well known that, as was the case in California, virtually every state of any size and significance had children of migrant agricultural workers who were being neglected. While the fight in Congress was not an easy one, armed with well-documented information and statistical data, Dr. Riles and his supportive colleagues were successful in their efforts to amend the law. The new law gave the responsibility for providing services to this segment of the nation's student population to departments of education.
The California Department of Education responded to its new responsibility very seriously and quickly called together a group of people including many educators to brainstorm ways through which services to eligible children could be provided. A regional concept for delivery of services was conceived and immediately implemented. This concept evolved into a regional plan through which eligible children would be served utilizing service agreements with the school districts where the children were located. Dr. Riles, Leo Lopez and other advocates were making certain that these children of migrant agricultural workers would never again be left without the services and support each deserved and desperately needed.
RAMIRO REYES