# data[].attributes.body
April 14, 1947

# data[].attributes.body
Mendez challenged school segregation in Los Angeles. His children and others of Mexican and Latin decent, were segregated into separate schools.

# data[].attributes.body
The court ruled in favor of Mr. Mendez stating that school must be open to all children by unified school association regardless of lineage.

# data[].attributes.body
The Mendez case was the first successful federal school desegregation decision in the nation. It ended segregation in California schools.

# data[].attributes.body
June 4, 1923

# data[].attributes.body
Nebraska passed a law prohibiting teaching grade school children any language other than English. Meyer taught German in a Lutheran school, and was convicted. Did Nebraska violate the 14th amendment's due process clause?

# data[].attributes.body
The court declared the Nebraska law unconstitutional saying it violated the liberty protected by the due process clause of the 14th amendment.

# data[].attributes.body
This was a victory for language-minority parents as the Supreme Court struck down the states' restrictive legislation. States may not pass laws that attempt to prevent communities from offering private language classes outside of the regular school system.

# data[].attributes.body
January 21, 1874

# data[].attributes.body
Lau and others of Chinese descent who did not speak English, brought a class action suit against the officials in the San Francisco Unified School District, claiming that failure to provide supplemental English classes constituted an unequal educational opportunity in violation of the 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights act of 1964

# data[].attributes.body
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Lau, saying that the school system's failure to provide supplemental English language instruction constituted a violation of the California Education Code and Section 601 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because it deprived those students of an opportunity to participate in the public education program.

# data[].attributes.body
This case determined that bilingual instruction should be given to help non-native English speaking students improve their English language proficiency. It helped ease the transition into education for those who did not speak English.

# data[].attributes.body
April 9, 1965

# data[].attributes.body
This was part of President Lyndon B. Johnson's War on Poverty. It brought education into the forefront of the assault on poverty and committed to equal access to quality education.

# data[].attributes.body
ESEA is important because it covers children of low-income families, particularly rural, Native American, neglected, migrant, homeless and English language limited families. It provides for their long-term welfare by improving schools and resources available to them. It's goal is to close the achievement gap by setting benchmarks and goals to measure the progress of students.

# data[].attributes.body
January 2, 1968

# data[].attributes.body
It recognized that the special education needs of the large numbers of children of limited English-speaking ability in the United States.

# data[].attributes.body
The Bilingual Education Act stipulated that the federal government would provide financial assistance for innovative bilingual programs. These funds would be used for the development, implementation, staffing, and training for these programs. This is noted as the first official federal recognition of the needs of students with limited English ability.

# data[].attributes.body
May 25, 1970
September 27, 1991

# data[].attributes.body
The May 25, 1970 memo addresses the provision of the Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in regards to the identification of discrimination and denial of services on the basis of national origin. The September 27, 1991 memo addresses a school's obligation toward national origin minority students with limited-English proficiency.

# data[].attributes.body
These memos made sure that school districts established an identification process that would identify all LEP/ELL students who need assistance and if the identified students needed assistance, the student were being provided assistance. The updated memo was to ensure that schools were complying with their obligation under the Title VI regulations, to provide any alternative language programs necessary to ensure that LEP/ELL students have meaningful access to the school's programs.

# data[].attributes.body
June 23, 1981

# data[].attributes.body
Mexican-American parents brought suit against the school district saying that the school district unlawfully discriminated against Mexican-Americans by using ability grouping, which was based on racially discriminatory criteria and that they discriminated in the hiring and promotion of Mexican-American faculty.

# data[].attributes.body
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled in favor or Castaneda and established a three-part assessment for determining how bilingual education programs would be held responsible for meeting the requirements of the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974.

# data[].attributes.body
Castaneda v. Pickard helped advance the rights of bilingual education by establishing guidelines and requirements that schools had to follow to help students overcome language barriers. Furthermore the schools were responsible for providing adequate resources, materials, and teachers to support bilingual learning.

# data[].attributes.body
August 21, 1974

# data[].attributes.body
This new law addressed civil rights issues in education, barring states from discriminating against students based on gender, race, color, or nationality and required public schools to provide for students who do not speak English

# data[].attributes.body
This law mandated that schools must offer both English classes for non-native speakers and classes in other subjects taught in students' native languages. Later on the Supreme Court ruled that, based on the EEOA, undocumented students not only had the right to attend public schools but were obligated to do so, the same as all American children.

# data[].attributes.body
The English Only Movement began in the early 1980's as an effort to change national immigration law and bilingual services.

# data[].attributes.body
It was originally introduced by supporters of the 1984 California initiative opposing bilingual ballots.

# data[].attributes.body
Studies have shown that there is little difference in academic outcomes for students in English-only programs over their performance prior to the passage of English-only laws. No achievement gaps between English learners and English speakers achievement were closed and they remain big. The laws do impact EL's access to qualified teachers.

# data[].attributes.body
June 15, 1982

# data[].attributes.body
A revision of the Texas education laws in 1975 allowed the state to withhold from local school districts state funds for educating children of illegal aliens. The question was did the law violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

# data[].attributes.body
The Supreme Court decided that states cannot constitutionally deny students a free public education on education on account of their immigration status. They found that any resources which might be saved from excluding undocumented children from public schools were far outweighed by the harms imposed on society at large from denying them an education.

# data[].attributes.body
Plyler v Doe insured that schools cannot close their doors to one of society's most marginalized groups. This ruling insured that denying public education based on class would not be allowed.

# data[].attributes.body
January 23, 2001

# data[].attributes.body
President George W. Bush proposed the use of federal aid to create a plan which would hold schools accountable for the educational outcomes of students.

# data[].attributes.body
The No Child Left Behind Act allowed local flexibility for choosing programs of instruction, while demanding greater accountability for ELL's English language and academic progress. States were now required to develop standards for English Language Proficiency and to link those standards to the state's Academic Content Standards.

# data[].attributes.body
December 10, 2015

# data[].attributes.body
ESSA reauthorized the 50 year old Elementary and Secondary Education Act. This new law built on key areas of progress. The previous version of the law was the NCLB in 2002. The purpose of this was to provide all children significant opportunity to receive a fair, equitable, and high-quality education, and to close educational achievement gaps.

# data[].attributes.body
NCLB demanded that schools must make sure that ELLs are part of their state's accountability system and that ELL's academic progress is followed over time. This ensured that their was an increased focus on setting higher expectations and accountability for ELL students.

# data[].attributes.body
Colorín Colorado (2014) Colorín Colorado: Youtube Channel [Video file]. Retrieved from  https://www.youtube.com/user/colorincolorado/featured

Ell 101. Learning for Justice. (2017). Retrieved August 31, 2022, from https://www.learningforjustice.org/magazine/spring-2017/ell-101#:~:text=Federal%20Laws%20Protecting%20ELL%20Students&text=The%20Equal%20Educational%20Opportunities%20Act,language%20barriers%20for%20ELL%20students.

English learners family toolkit - ed. English Learner Family Toolkit. (n.d.). Retrieved August 24, 2022, from https://ncela.ed.gov/files/family_toolkit/EL-Family-Tool-Kit-All.pdf

# data[].attributes.body
Another key point here is that they provided funding to help with this.

# data[].attributes.body
You are correct and another key point here is that this memorandum prohibited the use of data related strictly to language as a key reason for assigning students to special education

# data[].attributes.body
The three part assessment is important here as well as this is where it became mandatory to screen ELs for language programs.

Three-part assessment:
•      be based on sound educational theory and;

•      Implemented with sufficient personnel, time, and resources

•      evaluated to determine whether they are effective in helping students overcome language barriers

# data[].attributes.body
Very good....and not just federally funded schools, but ALL schools in the US

# data[].attributes.body
The big idea here is that we must provide free educational services to all student regardless of citizenship.

# data[].attributes.body
Excellent!!

# data[].attributes.body
What is truly big here is the inclusion of parents in the process now and they have the right to opt-out their child if they want ot.