# data[].attributes.body
‘no state shall deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws’

This means that every student is entitled to the same level of education regardless of language, race, ethnicity, disability, culture, class, ect.

This is important for our MLs because it stopped discriminatory practices against them in the classrooms and was the first leap towards an equal education.

# data[].attributes.headline
Title VII Bilingual Education Act (1968)

# data[].attributes.subject
Title VII Bilingual Education Act (1968)

# data[].attributes.body
This act was an amendment to a law that stated that government funds were used to meet the need of "educationally deprived children". Title VII then introduced specific funds to support programs that were designed to meet the needs of ML. Schools were able to initiate bilingual education programs as well as hire bilingual teachers.

This is an important step for ML because it specified ML for the first time. Before tis act, ML where grouped as "educationally deprived" along with students with learning disablities and students who have a low socioeconomic background. Each population in this mega-group have different needs in order to be successful in their education and this was the first time the legislation identified this fact.

# data[].attributes.headline
Diana v. State Board of Education (1970)

# data[].attributes.subject
Diana v. State Board of Education (1970)

# data[].attributes.body
Diana was a spanish speaking student in the 60s and 70s who was diagnosed with a learning disability after taking an IQ test in English. When given the test again by a bilingual psychologist, the test did not prove a learning disability. Diana's case led to a decree that mandated IQ test could not be the sole criteria or primary source for diagnosis.

This case proved that language can be used as a barrier in testing and can lead to inappropriate diagnosis. When testing in a language that the student understands, the test is more accurate and trustworthy. This case lead to the declassification of a lack of the English language as basis for a recommendation for special education. Many ML were taken out of their restrictive environments and were given other supports to scaffold their language skills.

# data[].attributes.body
This case established a three-part test to determine whether schools are taking the appropriate action under the equal Educational Opportunities Act (1974). This test insured that the schools' programs were based in sound theory, supported by adequate funding, and show effectiveness. The case ensured that ENL and Bilingual programs were effective and supported financially in order to support language growth within the students.

ML where no longer subjected to programs that did not support effective language acquisition and resulted in insufficient growth. The guidelines and requirements enacted from Castañeda v. Pickard supported students to help overcome language barriers.

# data[].attributes.body
Title III created a set of standards that aligns with English Language Proficiency. It created a reliable and valid assessment for these standard that annually measures listening, speaking, reading, writing, and comprehension. Title III established measurable achievement objective for English Language Learners.

This is an important leap forward for the rights of ELLs and other ML because it made English language proficiency measureable. Students are now being supported by accurate, MLL-centered standards in order to meet the same challenging academic State standards required of all students.