-
Meyer v Nebraska
Meyer v Nebraska is a supreme court appeal in relation to a 1919 Nebraskan law known as the "Simon Act" which stated that no other language besides English could be used in public schools to teach students. This law was determined to be unlawful under the fourteenth amendment which concerned the equal rights of citizens and possible civil liberty violations. It is important for modern immersion bilingual education programs where academic and language instruction are in two languages. -
Farrington v Tokusige
Farrington v Tokusige is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States struck down the Territory of Hawaii's law which made it illegal for schools to teach foreign language without a permit. Today, Farrington v Tokusige strengthened the rights of parents to have a say in their child's education. -
ESEA
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act brought education to the forefront of the national assault on poverty, and represents equal access to quality education. ESEA was reauthorized on December 10, 2015 as the Every Student Succeeds Act. The Every Student Succeed Act significantly strengthens accountability provisions while at the same time authorizes substantial increases in funding targeted at English-language learners. -
Period: to
Title VII
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1968 was another important step for bilingual education. Title VII of that act, known as the Bilingual Education Act, established federal policy for bilingual education. It was reauthorized in 1994 as part of the Improving America's Schools Act. Today, the goal is to access to bilingual programs for children of limited means. -
Lau v Nichols
Lau v Nichols is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States denied funding for education to undocumented immigrant children in the United States.Chinese American students in San Francisco were placed in mainstream classrooms despite their lack of proficiency in English. They were either left to "sink or swim". Today, this does not happen unless parents refuse ESL services. -
EEOA
Lau Remedies was codified into federal law through the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974. Section 1703 declares: "No state shall deny educational opportunities to an individual on account of his or her race, color, sex or national origin". Today, regardless of race, color, sex, or national origin every single child is granted equal services. -
Castaneda v Pickard
Castaneda v Pickard was a case filed against the Raymondville Independent School District whom failed to establish sufficient bilingual education programs. The US court appeal ruled in their favor. The decision set up the guidelines to govern accountability of bilingual education programs today. -
Plyer v Doe
Plyer v Doe was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States denied funding for education to undocumented immigrant children in the United States. Plyler v. Doe found that it was unconstitutional to deny children living in the U.S., whether legally or not, a free public elementary and secondary education.Today, regardless if you are a legal citizen or not you are granted free public education. -
Gomez v Illnois State Board of Education
Under Illinois state law, the board of education was required to promulgate guidelines for ascertaining and training of LEP children. In Gomez v Illnois State Board of Education found that the State board of education and superintendent failed to uniform guidelines for identification, placement, and training of limited English proficiency children. Today, all students on their first day of school will begin the process for ESL services. -
CA Proposition 227
Ca Proposition 227 required California public schools to teach LEP students in special classes that are taught nearly all in English. Today, this effect eliminated bilingual classes in most cases. -
Flores v Arizona
The school funding case of Flores v Arizona was filed on August 20, 1992 in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. The plaintiffs, several students and their parents, claimed that the state failed to properly fund programs for English language learners. Today, The federal government provides grant funding to states through Title III to help ELLs with language acquisition and with meeting content standards. -
AL Proposition 203
AL Proposition 203 was a ballot initiative that was passed by 63% of Arizona voters on November 7, 2000. It limited the type of instruction available to English language learner students. -
Title III
The Title III Program is a United States federal grant program to improve education. It began as part of the Higher Education Act of 1965. It provides support to strengthen various aspects of school through a formula grant program. Today, the fund ensures that English learners attain English language proficiency through the use of the states English Language Proficiency Standards, -
Period: to
NCLB
No Child Left Behind was President George W. Bush's plan for the reauthorization of of the ESEA. NCLB makes it clear that whatever ELL programs districts choose to offer, they are to ensure that ELLs learn English as quickly as possible. NCLB relies heavily on high stakes testing and indirectly discourages bilingual programs. The Every Child Succeeds Act replaced NCLB. This act modified but did not eliminate provisions relating to the periodic standardized tests given to students. -
MA Question 2
MA Question 2 required that, with limited exception "all public school children must be taught English. This must be done by all ELL students being taught all subjects in English and being placed in English language classrooms. Today, ELL students are granted ESL classes as well as general education classes taught in English. -
ESEA Flexibility
States may be granted flexibility from the Title I accountability requirements of NCLB. Obama administration invited states to apply for ESEA Flexibility. Today states may be granted flexibility from the Title I accountability requirements of NCLB. -
ESSA
The Every Student Succeeds Act was signed by President Obama on December 10, 2015. The act relies on multiple measures to track school quality, growth on state standardized testing, graduation rates, and growth on English language learners proficiency. Today, there are concerns about the law’s lack of focus on the value of multilingualism, as well as on individual state’s abilities to monitor ELL progress.