Bilingual

ELL Policies

By Kaelynn
  • Period: to

    Sink or Swim

    English immersion policies were in the midset of "sink or swim." There were few if any services provided for learners of English. Students were generally held behind till they learned enought English to move into the next grade.
  • Civil Rights Act

    Civil Rights Act
    Title VI prohibts discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in the operation of all federally assisted programs.
  • Bilingual Education Act

    Bilingual Education Act
    Title VII of the Elmentary and Secondary Education Act of 1968: Establishes federal policy for bilingual education for economically disadvantaged language minority students, allocates funds for innovative programs, and recognizes the unique educational disadvantages faced by non-English speaking students.
  • United States of America v. State of Texas, et al.

    United States of America v. State of Texas, et al.
    This case was a desegregation case centered on the issue of discrimination and whether the San Felipe and Del Rio school districts were providing Mexican American students an equal educational opportunity. The result of the lawsuit came down to a court order, Civil Action 5281, which eliminates discrimination on grounds of race, color, or national origin in Texas public and charter schools.
  • Lau v. Nichols

    Lau v. Nichols
    This suit was filed by Chinese parents in San Franciso the lead to the ruling that identical education does not constitute equal education under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. School districts must take affirmative steps to overcome educational barriers faced by non-English speakers. This ruling established that the Office for Civil Rights, under the former Dept. of Health, Education, and Welfare, have the authority to establish regulation for Title VI enforcment.
  • Rios v. Reed

    Rios v. Reed
    The court system found that at a New York school, Pastchogue-Medford School District, their transitional bilingual program was basically a course in English and that students were denied an equal educational opportunity by not receiving academic instruction in Spanish.
  • Amendment 1

    Amendment 1
    First admendment emphasized the strictly transitional nature of native language instruction, expand eligibility to students who are LEP and permit enrollment of English-speaking students in bilingual programs.
  • Cintron v. Brentwood

    Cintron v. Brentwood
    The Federal District Court for the Eastern District of New York rejected the Brentwood School District's proposed bilingual program on the grounds that it would violate "Lau Guidelines" by unnecessarily segregating Spanish-speaking students from their English-speaking peers in music and art. The court also objected to the program's failure to provide for exiting students whose English language proficiency was sufficient for them to understand mainstream English instruction.
  • Castaneda v. Pickard

    Castaneda v. Pickard
    This ruling established a set of basic standards to determine school district complanice with EEOA (Equal Educational Opportunities Act).
    Theory: school must pursue a program based on an educational theory recognized as sound or, at least, as a legitimate experimental strategy.
    Practice: school must actually implement the program with instructional practices, resources, & personnel necessary to transfer to reality
    Results: school must not persist in a program that fails to produce results
  • United States v. State of Texas et al

    United States v. State of Texas et al
    Court mandated school to have bilingual education in grades K-12. This decision outlined specific requirements including: three year monitoring cycles (which is the same for IEP's), identification of LEP students, and language survey for students entering school. It also estabilshed the need for exit criteria.
  • Admendment 2

    Admendment 2
    The second admendment allowed for some native language maintenance, provide program funding for LEP students with special needs, support family English literacy programs, and emphasize importance of teacher training.
  • Plyler v. Doe

    Plyler v. Doe
    An important court decision the state does not have the right to deny a free public education to undocumented immigrant children.
  • Admendment 3

    Admendment 3
    Include increased funding to state educatin agencies, expanded funding for "special alternative" programs where only English is used, established a three-year limit on participation in most Title VII, and created fellowship programs for professional training.
  • Reconfiguration of Title VII programs

    Reconfiguration of Title VII programs
    New provision reinforce professional development programs, increase attention to language maintenance and foreign language instruction, improve research and evaluation at state and local level, supply additional funds for immigrant education, and allow participation of some private school students.
  • NCLB

    NCLB
    The reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 appropriates funds to states to improve the education of limited to English proficient students by assisting children to learn English and meet challenging state academic content and student academic achievement standards.