-
Period: to
1800's
-
U.S. Constitution of Admendment 14
The U.S. Constitutional amendment 14 was created on July 9, 1868. It is under the 14th constitution amendment that requires states to give citizens or naturalized citizens’ equal opportunity. This amendment says that states are required to not make or enforce laws that take away privileges or immunities from its citizens. With that being said, one of those privileges being the right to an education for language minority students. -
Native Americans Taken from Reservation.
Native American children are taken from their home on the reservations and taught in only English. If students used their native tongue, they would be punished severely. The main objective of these schools is to Americanize these Native Americans and abandon their culture. These cruel treatments lead to a hatred that spread from the Native Americans toward “American” culture. -
Brown Vs. Board of Education
It was in this case that decided that Negro and White students should be allowed to go to the same schools as one another. This decision helped to fuel the doctrine of equal education opportunities for students much like the US Constitutional 14 amendment. Overall, this case helped ALL students to be entitled to a education in which every student had the same opportunities as another student, including receiving bilingual and English as a second language education. -
Civil Rights Act
It is in Title Vi of the Civil Rights act that does not allow discrimination based on race, color, or national origin within all federally funded programs. Being that many students come from a different origin and race that receive Bilingual/ESL education and are enrolled in the public school system, this is an important act for them. It is because of this act that schools received supplemental funding to be used specifically for their “special education needs” populations and therefore any and -
The Bilingual Education Act, Title VII
The Bilingual Education Act of 1968 is the first occurrence of the federal government recognizing the needs of language minority students. It is within this act that schools were given grants and resources to help develop useful materials and train teachers to help students succeed within their education. However, the act did not require states or school districts to offer such programs to their students rather it just encouraged them. -
Bilingual Education Act (revised)
Previously in the Bilingual Education Act of 1968, specified services to only be provided to students whom come from environments where the dominant language is other than English and their family income is below $3,000 per year. This left a gap between students whose parents made more money and students who were behind in English. The amendment in 1974 changed this to students who are of limited speaking ability and taking away the income requirement all together. This amendment also allowed -
Serena V. Portales
Within the Serena V. Portales case, it was found that within the Portales municipal school, students with Spanish last names were struggling within their schooling than those of their white classmates. Therefore, the students with Spanish last names were being denied an equal education. Within this court case, the school was required to implement a bilingual curriculum within their school. The school was also required to come up with new assessments and hire bilingual personnel to help studen -
Lau V. Nichols
Within Lau V. Nichol, the case brings up the issue that identical education is not necessarily equal education when it comes to English language learners. Being that more than 3,000 Chinese students were not being provided with an equal education, this case helped to jump start bilingual programs and set regulations in compliance of Title VI in the civil rights act. It was in this court case that gave students who do not speak English an equal opportunity for education. -
Rios V. Reeds
Within the Rios V. Reeds case, the Federal District Court found that the Pastchogue-Medford School District’s bilingual program was inadequate to the needs of their bilingual students. The court found that even though the district wanted to teach the bilingual students with good intentions, it was not allowing the student to have meaningful education before the students received proficiency in English. Therefore, the students needed to have a basic understanding of English and have a meaningfu -
Castanenda V. Pickard
A school district in Raymond, Texas was found to be in violation of language minority students’ right to a equal opportunity education. It was within this case that the fifth circuit court created standards to bilingual programs that are used within schools today. These standards include; The school must pursue a program based on an educational theory recognized as sound or, at least, as a legitimate experimental strategy, The school must actually implement the program with instructional prac -
Plyer V. Doe
Within the Plyer V. Doe case, the main argument was that schools would have to legally report parents and children who could not provide legal documentation that they are in fact a U.S. Citizen. Because of this argument it was ruled that this violated the Constitution and children have the right to an education regardless of the ability to provide documentation. The US Supreme Court declared that schools are not responsible to enforce immigration laws and whether or not an immigrant or alien i -
Keyes V. District #1
Under the Castaneda test, school districts must follow three criteria in order have an acceptable Bilingual/ESL program. These criteria include, the school must pursue a program with an educational theory that has been experimented and proven, the school must implement programs that practice those theories into realities, and the school must not persist in a program that fails to produce results with students. Within the Keyes V. School District #1, the school failed to satisfy the implementi -
Proposition 227 (California)
Ron Unz presented Proposition 227 in California in 1998. It is within this proposition that all bilingual education is taken away. LEP students are put into English only taught classes as well as, has a shorten amount of time that the students may stay in the program. Although it was passed in 1998, it is still heavily debated today. This proposition peaked people’s interest in bilingual education and was a significant event in California’s educational history. -
English for Children Arizona Proposition 203
Like Proposition 227 in California, Proposition 203 was also spear headed by Ron Unz. This proposition eliminates bilingual education and only allows English as a Second Language courses to be given that are taught only in English. This was passed by 61% of the voters claiming there was not enough information that proved that Bilingual education was successful to LEP students. Later, Massachusetts and Colorado followed with similar propositions. -
No Child Left Behind Act
Within the No Child Left behind Act, bilingual education programs are eligible for funding without restrictions however only allows students be enrolled in a program for three years. However, this act does help English language learners by allowing students to be tested to monitor their progress, gives states the freedoms to find the best methods of instructions, requires states to set standards, and place highly qualified teachers within their positions. If the state and school district fails
