Bilingual Education Timeline

In this case, Nebraska had a law that no language other than English be taught in schools under 8th grade. Meyers took this case all the way to the Supreme Court and they ruled that language minorities were protected under the 14th amendment and therefore this law was then unconstitutional.

In 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that school segregation based on race was unconstitutional. Although it did not specifically mention Hispanics or other ethnic minorities, the ruling stated that it applied also to others similarly situated. While this ruling did not affect the education of non- Englishspeaking minorities directly, it introduced a new era in American civil rights and led the way to subsequent legislation that would create programs for the disadvantaged.

Title VI prohibits discrimination of the basis of race, color, or national origin in the operation of all federally assisted programs.
Implications for English Language Learners (ELLs) or Limited English Proficient (LEP) Students:
1. Students cannot be discriminated against due to language. ELLs/LEP students cannot be denied services, e.g., AG because the teacher does not speak the language.
2. Students cannot be refused enrollment due to Limited English Proficiency (LEP). Students are entitled to an education in a public school until age 21.
3. Students cannot be retained due to Limited English Proficiency. Additionally, this means that as a practice Fs, Ds, or Us should not be given if English language ability prevents the students from performing the same as a native speaker of English. However, grading decisions are made at the school level and such variables as effort, participation, and attendance should be considered. Students cannot be expelled or suspended because of their limited English proficiency status.

Establishes federal policy for bilingual education for economically disadvantaged language minority students, allocates funds for innovatice programs, and recognizes the unique educational disadvangtages faced by non-English speaking students'. Passed on the heels of the Civil Rights Movement, its purpose was to provide school districts with federal funds, in the form of competitive grants, to establish innovative educational programs for students with limited English speaking ability.

Title II of the Educational Amendments Act of 1974, the Equal Educational Opportunity Act, also affected the education of LESA students by specifically mentioning that language barriers were to be overcome by instructional programs. This Act effectively extended the Lau ruling to all students and school districts, not only to those receiving federal funds. School districts were required to have special programs for LESA students regardless of federal or state funding.

When a lawyer in San Francisco learned that the son of one of his clients was failing school because he did not know English, the case of Lau v. Nichols was initiated. This case was a class- action suit brought against the San Francisco school district, alleging that 1,800 Chinese students were being denied an equal education because of their limited English skills. Although the lower courts disagreed that equal education was being denied, in 1974 the Supreme Court overruled the lower courts, arguing that the same facilities, textbooks, teachers, and curricula do not constitute equal education. Justice William 0. Douglas wrote that because the students knew little or no English, they were "foreclosed from any meaningful education"

Emphasize the strictly transitional nature of native language instruction, expand eligibility to students who are limiteed English proficient (LEP), and permit enrollment of English-speaking students in bilingual programs. In addition, the amendments specified the goals of transitional bilingual education programs. Such programs were to prepare limited English proficient students to enter the regular classroom as quickly as possible. The native language was to be used only to the extent necessary for students to become proficient in English. Programs designed only to maintain the native language were excluded from funding. Reading and writing skills were added to the program goals to further enable LEP students to become proficient in English

The Bilingual Education Act of 1984 addressed the need for increased flexibility in the implementation of programs for LEP students by giving local school districts a greater voice in deciding how LEP students should be taught. School districts were able to apply for funds for different types of programs that used various teaching strategies. This reflected a new approach to educating LEP students since the 1970s when the Lau Remedies had called for the use of native language in the instructional method.

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

In 2004, a group represented by the Mexican American Legal Defence sued the State of California. They claimed that the state did not provide the students with adequatly trained teachers or clean, safe buildings. They were over crowded and didn't have the right materials to teach their children. They won the lawsuit and funding was given for teacher training for ELL students and repairs to the schools.