# data[].attributes.body
My professional perspective is working as an elementary school teacher. I have taught first and second grade and each year have had English Language Learners (ELLs) in my classroom. I am English as a Second Language (ESL) certified and have seen firsthand the struggles they face in the public school classroom. I have spent time in trainings and researching best practices to use with these students. This Legal Guide Padlet is a resource guide for classroom teachers, interventionists, or school counselors. This Padlet is designed with the objective of providing insight on the legal obligation to serve these students. I chose this topic because there are roughly 1 million English Language Learners in Texas public schools today. They currently account for 18% of the student population in America's public schools. This number is projected to be 25% by the year 2025 (Education Dive, 2020). In order for them to have an equal opportunity as their native English speaking peers, and obtain high academic achievement, they must receive quality instruction tailored to their language needs. It is important to know our role as teachers and counselors in best meeting the needs of these students.

Education Dive. (2020). Improving academic outcomes for emergent bilingual students. Retrieved from https://www.educationdive.com/spons/improving-academic-outcomes-for-emergent-bilingual-students/575137/.

# data[].attributes.body
Summary
The topic of legal obligation to ELLs is important for a number of reasons. For example, there are currently approximately 5 million ELLs in America’s schools. These children are oftentimes at a disadvantage due to their language barrier. The students' limited English proficiency affects their ability to participate successfully in school and reach high academic standards, if the proper support is not embedded into their learning. It is the responsibility of the school system to ensure guidelines and laws are being followed in order to serve these students and support them academically and socially (Mitchell, 2017).  They have the right to fair and equal access to education, just like their English-proficient peers. In order for them to have this, there are necessary programs and supports put in place in schools to serve these students. It is important educators are familiar with these legal responsibilities.

Emerging Issues

There are many challenges and issues that English Language Learners face while attending American schools. One issue that is being researched is how under-resourced schools and under-prepared educators are hindering English Language Learners from getting the support and services that they need in order to be successful. There is a lack of teacher training on best practices for ELL students. Schools are also under-resourced, but expected to cater to a variety of students' language needs, without the appropriate funding (Mitchell, 2017). Both of these issues combined lead to ELLs not receiving proper instruction, and therefore not reaching their full academic potential.

Mitchell, C. (2017).

Schools often fail to educate, support English-Language Learners. Retrieved from http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/learning-the-language/2017/02/schools_provides_substandard_s.html

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide 3- Professional Association- NABE Blog: Teaching ELLs with Short Animated Videos

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide 3- Professional Association- NABE Blog: Teaching ELLs with Short Animated Videos

# data[].attributes.body
The National Association of Bilingual Educators (NABE) releases a number of blogs and other resources regarding ELLs and their families. The blog I came across, Teaching ELLs with Short Animated Videos provided insight into best practices to use with younger ELLs in the classroom. The blog highlighted strategies to improve ELLs literacy skills. It also focused on using animated videos for language acquisition purposes.

This particular blog was informative and would be helpful for teachers of primary students. Many teachers would benefit from the strategies that were explained for ELL literacy instruction. The NABE website is a great resource for all educators, and provides a lot of insight and information into bilingual education.

Gonzalez, V. (2018).

Teaching ELLs with short animated videos. Retrieved from https://www.middleweb.com/39038/teaching-ells-with-short-animated-videos/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A MiddleWeb Blog

One of the best ways to help kids love reading and get enthusiastic about school is by making learning fun!

Make them want to be part of it. Make them laugh, cry, think deeply...engage them and evoke emotion, and suddenly you have kids who want to do the work of learning.

Short animated videos are excellent for supporting literacy skills while making the learning fun and engaging. They are especially effective for English learners because they are visual in nature. Think of the short animated video as a scaffold to a written form of the text.

Since often English learners are reading in English at levels that are lower than their cognitive level or their ability to read in their native language, the use of the video allows students to think critically and experience a story at a higher level than they can decode on their own.

Short animated videos offer a quick narrative. Their generally brief form allows for multiple views to go deep into the literary moves the author makes.

What is a short animated video? Technically it is a film not long enough to be considered a feature film or movie. For our purposes, we will consider videos such as short cartoon clips that tell a story. Let's explore.

Characteristics of good short videos

Many short animated videos lack dialog which is a plus for teachers with English learners in class - we can use that with our students! We can ask them to create dialog that the characters might say. Students can take on the characters' roles and practice speaking. For English learners, the opportunity to practice speaking in a low stress environment is always a bonus.

What makes short animated videos supportive for English learners? They

Are highly visual in nature

Have short narrative structures

Have engaging topics

Evoke emotion

Reduce the decoding load

Support all language domains (listening, speaking, reading, and writing)

These key instructional moves make lessons more accessible for English learners:

Multiple viewings

Pause during viewings to discuss or clarify

Embed opportunities for structured partner conversation
model what is expected to set students up for success

There are many compelling and relevant short animated videos that middle schoolers love. You just have to find one that relates to your students and the skills or topic you are studying.

Here's Jacob Frey's wonderful short, "The Present," his thesis film from the Institute of Animation, Visual Effects and Digital Postproduction at the Filmakademie Baden-Wuerttemberg in Ludwigsburg, Germany (the small bits of dialogue are in English).

Video learning with middle schoolers

Here's an example overview using an animated short film with middle school English learners in mind.

1. First viewing is for the students to enjoy and get the gist of the narrative and perhaps make predictions.

2. Second viewing is to watch for story elements and plot them together on a graphic organizer.

3. Third viewing is to notice specific literary elements.

Teaching Suggestion:
With each viewing, tell students in advance why they are viewing it...the purpose. During and after each viewing, provide specific opportunities to speak with a partner or group and write. The three viewings work best if shown on different days rather than all at once.

Sample Daily Sequence:
Day 1: "Students, today we are going to watch a short film called ' Dustin.' It's a story about two unlikely friends. Think for a moment about a time when you made a friend that wasn't like you." Give wait time. Write the sentence stem "I made an unlikely friend when..." for all students to see and say, "When you are ready to share with you partner, stand up and share with them using the sentence stem."

After all students have shared with their partners, call on a couple of students randomly to share with the whole class. "Now let's watch the video, and as we watch, let's see how the characters become friends." Play the 7 minute video. Following the video, ask students to share with their partners what surprised them most about the story.

Day 2: "Readers, today as we watch 'Dustin' again, I want you to look closely at the story elements. We will be filling in the story map together after the video. Be prepared to share ideas." (Choose a favorite story elements graphic organizer and adapt for video if needed. Share ahead of time so students will know what to look for while viewing the video. If you are introducing new story elements, teach them here.)

View the video, pausing after the first story element is introduced to do a think aloud. "Oh, I see here that the story is taking place..." Or "I'm thinking that the characters are..."

After the video say "Readers, think about the way the author tells the story. How does the author use music to set the tone and mood? Turn and share with your partner." Partner A shares first; then partner B can either agree or disagree, using "I think the author"..."I agree because"..."I disagree because." After students finish collaborating, work as a class to complete the story elements graphic organizer.

Day 3: "Readers, today as we view 'Dustin' again, I want you to zoom into how the characters' relationships change throughout the story and why. I want you to really look closely at when the shift happens. You can take notes if it will help you to remember. You can draw or sketch also. In addition, here are some discussion starters you and your partner can use when we stop to talk: In the beginning...but now.... At first they...but then.... A change happened when.... Their relationship changed from...to.... I noticed that...."

Students can chorally read the stems with you or echo read them. Play the video, stopping at critical moments for partner discussions.

Following the multiple viewings and discussions, students can write. Depending on the language proficiency of your students, you can either ask students to write independently or give students a paragraph frame to support their linguistic needs. The paragraph frame should be similar to what students were asked to discuss with their partners.

Try a Language Experience Approach

Another way to support students in writing is to do a Language Experience Approach ( click here to listen to Carol Salva's voicED podcast on the Language Experience Approach) with the animated short that the class viewed. Since the group experienced the same video, they can do a shared writing.

In this case, the LEA strategy offers maximum support for English learners who are at beginner or emerging levels of proficiency. The class works together to produce a summary of the story. For more on the language experience approach click here.

Pairing the short animated video with a read aloud or a text that the class is reading will provide students with a connection to text. Discuss the connection and compare the two narratives or pieces. Using the short animated video as a way to implement a gradual release model allows students a guided practice and a model of thinking the process aloud with you and with their peers before they go off and do it on their own.

Here's one more to sample, Alike by Daniel Martínez Lara and Rafa Cano Méndez.

Where to look for more videos

Here are some additional resources where you can find more information about using short animated videos with your English learners to boost listening, speaking, reading and writing.
Larry Ferlazzo's The Best Fun Videos for English Learners in 2018 The Seven Best Short Films for ELT Students by Kieran Donaghy
ALSO CHECK OUT THESE

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Teaching English Learners with Short Animated Videos

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Short animated videos support literacy skill development while making learning fun. For English learners they serve as a scaffold to a written form of the text.

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide 3, Contd.- NAE ELL Advocacy Guide-"How Educators Can Advocate for English Language Learners"

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide 3, Contd.- NAE ELL Advocacy Guide-"How Educators Can Advocate for English Language Learners"

# data[].attributes.body
The National Education Association (NEA) published a guide titled "How Educators Can Advocate for English Language Learners". A link to this guide was provided on their website. This guide provides a wealth of knowledge regarding advocating for English Language Learners, educator training, best practices to use in the classroom, curriculum access and language rights, and a variety of other topics. This is a very informative resource regarding all things multilingual education.

National Education Association (NEA). (2015). How educators can advocate for English Language Learners. Retrieved from http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/18285_ELL_AdvocacyGuide2015_low-res_updated_6-23.pdf

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide 4- Current event article- Providing curricular support for ELLs during pandemic a two-pronged challenge

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide 4- Current event article- Providing curricular support for ELLs during pandemic a two-pronged challenge

# data[].attributes.body
Taken from a credible source, EducationDive.com, the article outlines issues ELLs are facing in light of the COVID-19 distance learning platform. Schooling has been moved to solely online learning, which presents a number of challenges for all students, but especially ELLs. The issues that are discussed in the article include:

Fewer opportunities for ELLs to practice their skills with schools closed.

ELLs are no longer with English speakers on a regular basis.

Parents of ELLs are often ELL as well, and need support themselves.

Parents of ELLs are typically out of the home for work, therefore unable to assist their child in schoolwork.

(De La Rosa, 2020).

De La Rosa, S. (2020). Providing curricular support for ELLs during pandemic a two-pronged challenge. Retrieved from https://www.educationdive.com/news/providing-curricular-support-for-ells-during-pandemic-a-two-pronged-challen/576500/.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Dive Brief:

In Nebraska's Millard Public Schools, teachers serving English learners are supporting these students in math, English and other core subjects instead of focusing solely on English, as students may not benefit from regular English instruction if they are stressed about their other classes, District Administration reports.

English learners have fewer opportunities to practice their skills now that schools have closed and students are no longer with English-speakers on a regular basis. Parents, who are often ELLs themselves, need support as well.

Many parents request information be translated from English into their native language so they can support their children at home. The moves districts make now to address teacher-parent language barriers will be useful later when schools eventually reopen.

Dive Insight:

The transition to online learning is particularly daunting for ELL students. A December 2019 report by the U.S. Department of Education found few teachers assigned ELL students digital learning resources outside of class, providing a reference point to where things stood before the coronavirus pandemic forced a shift to online learning. Teachers who did assign digital learning tools also tended to use general education resources rather than those designed for ELLs.

Many teachers are going above and beyond the call of duty to make sure their students seamlessly adapt to distance learning during the pandemic. From delivering hotspots to hosting Sunday video chats, a number of efforts are in play to keep these students, and their families, included and up to speed with their peers.

Family engagement is particularly important during school closures, but that may present a further challenge for ELL families who struggle with English or may still be out of the home for work. Immigrant Connections has compiled a list of videos, articles and clips to share with non-English-speaking parents to help them support their children.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Providing curricular support for ELLs during pandemic a two-pronged challenge

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In Nebraska's Millard Public Schools, teachers serving English learners are supporting these students in math, English and other core subjects instead of focusing solely on English, as students may not benefit from regular English instruction if they are stressed about their other classes, District Administration reports.

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide 5- Current event article- Improving academic outcomes for emergent bilingual students

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide 5- Current event article- Improving academic outcomes for emergent bilingual students

# data[].attributes.body
This article discussed research taken from a subgroup of the K-12 bilingual population. It pointed our various challenges that these ELLs face in the public school system. It also gave six steps that educators can take to improve the academic achievement of their English learning students.  Some of the challenges ELLs face include:

Low achievement outcomes

High drop-out rates

Low college attendance rates

Low college graduation rates

(Education Dive, 2020).

It specifically outlined two factors that contribute to this:

A lack of teacher training in bilingual education best practices

Schools in which bilingual students tend to be concentrated in are highly segregated, underfunded schools

(Education Dive, 2020).

In order to "close the gap" between bilingual students' academic success in comparison to their native English peers, there are six steps that educators can implement.
These include:
(1) embrace diversity; (2) focus on academic achievement; (3) identify long-term English learners; (4) accelerate learning with education technology, or EdTech; (5) address the ELL teacher deficit; and (6) recognize the bilingual advantage (Education Dive, 2020).

"Bilingual students thrive when educators and administrators work together with parents and communities" (Education Dive, 2020). "Working together toward a common goal will go far toward changing prevailing learning outcomes and assisting emergent bilingual students in their quest to achieve academic success at the same rate as their English-proficient peers" (Education Dive, 2020).

Education Dive. (2020). Improving academic outcomes for emergent bilingual students. Retrieved from https://www.educationdive.com/spons/improving-academic-outcomes-for-emergent-bilingual-students/575137/.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In public schools throughout the US, the number of emergent bilinguals, or English language learners (ELLs), is growing at an increasing rate. By 2025, it's predicted that they will represent 25 percent of total enrollment. Yet despite this growth, emergent bilinguals remain the lowest-performing subgroup nationally.

There are five million emergent bilingual students in grades K-12, representing hundreds of primary languages, the vast majority of which are native Spanish speakers. Though the country has made significant strides toward the equitable and effective education of these students over the past several decades, the efficacy of these efforts has been less than what's needed.

As a result, the academic achievement and schooling outcomes for emergent bilinguals vary greatly. Taken as a subgroup of the K-12 population, emergent bilinguals have low achievement outcomes, high dropout rates, low college attendance rates, and even lower college graduation rates. Two factors contribute to this: teachers may not be adequately trained to support their emergent bilingual students, and emergent bilinguals tend to be concentrated in highly segregated, underfunded schools.

However, teachers and administrators can take six steps to improve academic outcomes for their emergent bilingual students: (1) embrace diversity; (2) focus on academic achievement; (3) identify long-term English learners; (4) accelerate learning with education technology, or EdTech; (5) address the ELL teacher deficit; and (6) recognize the bilingual advantage. For more details about each step, refer to the Rosetta Stone ® white paper, Six Steps Toward ELL Success.

The use of technology, in particular, has been shown to help emergent bilinguals and other diverse groups of students engage cognitively at high levels, generate knowledge, analyze issues, articulate realities, and achieve academically through expanded notions of what it means to be literate. Technology tools, then, can be used to promote equity in education, providing increased access to content for emergent bilinguals. These tools also allow for learning differences and differentiation in the ways that students can demonstrate learning and express what they know.

Through education technology, students can learn English at their own pace. As their pronunciation is guided by real-time aural feedback, their oral proficiency increases. Lesson content is reinforced in interactive games and activities that make learning fun and interesting, for better student engagement. And expanded access using technology enables emergent bilinguals to learn and practice at home as well as at school.

In addition to technology, recognizing the bilingual advantage can also help emergent bilinguals thrive. Encouraging and celebrating bilingualism benefits everyone, as it's an important requirement of college and career readiness in the twenty-first century global economy.

Emergent bilingual students succeed when teachers and administrators work together with parents and communities. Teachers can adapt curriculum and methods to accommodate emergent bilinguals in and out of the classroom, while administrators can allocate resources for teacher training tools to measure English language learning effectiveness.

Working together toward a common goal will go far toward changing prevailing learning outcomes and assisting emergent bilingual students in their quest to achieve academic success at the same rate as their English-proficient peers. Download the Rosetta Stone white paper, Six Steps Toward ELL Success, to learn more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Improving academic outcomes for emergent bilingual students

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In public schools throughout the US, the number of emergent bilinguals, or English language learners (ELLs), is growing at an increasing rate. By 2025, it's predicted that they will represent 25 percent of total enrollment. Yet despite this growth, emergent bilinguals remain the lowest-performing subgroup nationally.

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide 6-School districts that have 20 or more ELL students enrolled must provide a bilingual or special language program. (Tex. Educ. Code § 29.053)  -Statutory Law

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide 6-School districts that have 20 or more ELL students enrolled must provide a bilingual or special language program. (Tex. Educ. Code § 29.053)  -Statutory Law

# data[].attributes.body
According to Tex. Educ. Code §29.053, school districts that contain 20 or more English Language Learners in the same grade level (of any language) must provide bilingual education for these students. The districts that meet this criteria must follow the following: (1)  bilingual education in kindergarten through the elementary grades; (2)  bilingual education, instruction in English as a second language, or other transitional language instruction approved by the agency in post-elementary grades through grade 8;  and (3)  instruction in English as a second language in grades 9 through 12. (TEC § 29.053).

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide 7-Establishment of bilingual education and special language programs in the public schools. (Tex. Educ. Code § 29.051) - Statutory Law

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide 7-Establishment of bilingual education and special language programs in the public schools. (Tex. Educ. Code § 29.051) - Statutory Law

# data[].attributes.body
Studies showed that classes in which instruction was only given in English was not beneficial to students who had limited English proficiency (LEP). This statute outlines the requirements for Texas public schools’ bilingual and ESL programs.

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide 8- United States v. Texas, 572 F. Supp. 2d 726 (E.D. Tex. 2008) – Judicial/Constitutional Law

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide 8- United States v. Texas, 572 F. Supp. 2d 726 (E.D. Tex. 2008) – Judicial/Constitutional Law

# data[].attributes.body
In this district court case, filed by G.I. Forum and LULAC, the state efforts of addressing needs of bilingual and English language learners (ELLs) was criticized and questioned. The court ruled that the Texas Education Agency (TEA) was required to create and implement new and improved bilingual instruction in Texas public schools. TEA was required to do this because it was “their affirmative obligation” and English language learners deserve the right to a quality education.

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide 9- Lau v. Nichols, 414 U.S. 563 (1974) – Judicial/Constitutional Law

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide 9- Lau v. Nichols, 414 U.S. 563 (1974) – Judicial/Constitutional Law

# data[].attributes.body
The US Supreme Court decision in Lau v. Nichols decided that children who are not fluent in English are being denied access to a quality education. In 1975, the Education Commissioner came out with regulations in order to evaluate children with limited English proficiency and began planning for bilingual and English as a Second Language (ESL) education programs to be implemented in public schools.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
LAU ET AL. v. NICHOLS ET AL.
No. 72-6520
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
414 U.S. 563
December 10, 1973, Argued
January 21, 1974, Decided

PRIOR HISTORY:

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT.

DISPOSITION:

483 F.2d 791, reversed and remanded.

SYLLABUS:

The failure of the San Francisco school system to provide English language instruction to approximately 1,800 students of Chinese ancestry who do not speak English, or to provide them with other adequate instructional procedures, denies them a meaningful opportunity to participate in the public educational program and thus violates ï¿½ 601 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bans discrimination based "on the ground of race, color, or national origin," in "any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance," and the implementing regulations of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Pp. 565-569.

Douglas, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Brennan, Marshall, Powell, and Rehnquist, JJ., joined. Stewart, J., filed an opinion concurring in the result, in which Burger, C. J., and Blackmun, J., joined, post, p. 569. White, J., concurred in the result. Blackmun, J., filed an opinion concurring in the result, in which Burger, C. J., joined, post, p. 571.

Opinions

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS delivered the opinion of the Court.

The San Francisco, California, school system was integrated in 1971 as a result of a federal court decree, 339 F.Supp. 1315. See Lee v. Johnson, 404 U.S. 1215. The District Court found that there are 2,856 students of Chinese ancestry in the school system who do not speak English. Of those who have that language deficiency, about 1,000 are given supplemental courses in the English language. n1 About 1,800, however, do not receive that instruction.

note1 A report adopted by the Human Rights Commission of San Francisco and submitted to the Court by respondents after oral argument shows that, as of April 1973, there were 3,457 Chinese students in the school system who spoke little or no English. The document further showed 2,136 students enrolled in Chinese special instruction classes, but at least 429 of the enrollees were not Chinese but were included for ethnic balance. Thus, as of April 1973, no more than 1,707 of the 3,457 Chinese students needing special English instruction were receiving it.

This class suit brought by non-English-speaking Chinese students against officials responsible for the operation of the San Francisco Unified School District seeks relief against the unequal educational opportunities, which are alleged to violate, inter alia, the Fourteenth Amendment. No specific remedy is urged upon us. Teaching English to the students of Chinese ancestry who do not speak the language is one choice. Giving instructions to this group in Chinese is another. There may be others. Petitioners ask only that the Board of Education be directed to apply its expertise to the problem and rectify the situation. The District Court denied relief. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that there was no violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or of ï¿½ 601 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 78 Stat. 252, 42 U. S. C. ï¿½ 2000d, which excludes from participation in federal financial assistance, recipients of aid which discriminate against racial groups, 483 F.2d 791. One judge dissented. A hearing en banc was denied, two judges dissenting. Id., at 805. We granted the petition for certiorari because of the public importance of the question presented, 412 U.S. 938.

The Court of Appeals reasoned that "every student brings to the starting line of his educational career different advantages and disadvantages caused in part by social, economic and cultural background, created and continued completely apart from any contribution by the school system," 483 F.2d, at 797. Yet in our view the case may not be so easily decided. This is a public school system of California and ï¿½ 71 of the California Education Code states that "English shall be the basic language of instruction in all schools." That section permits a school district to determine "when and under what circumstances instruction may be given bilingually." That section also states as "the policy of the state" to insure "the mastery of English by all pupils in the schools." And bilingual instruction is authorized "to the extent that it does not interfere with the systematic, sequential, and regular instruction of all pupils in the English language."

Moreover, ï¿½ 8573 of the Education Code provides that no pupil shall receive a diploma of graduation from grade 12 who has not met the standards of proficiency in "English," as well as other prescribed subjects. Moreover, by ï¿½ 12101 of the Education Code (Supp. 1973) children between the ages of six and 16 years are (with exceptions not material here) "subject to compulsory full-time education."

Under these state-imposed standards there is no equality of treatment merely by providing students with the same facilities, textbooks, teachers, and curriculum; for students who do not understand English are effectively foreclosed from any meaningful education.

Basic English skills are at the very core of what these public schools teach. Imposition of a requirement that, before a child can effectively participate in the educational program, he must already have acquired those basic skills is to make a mockery of public education. We know that those who do not understand English are certain to find their classroom experiences wholly incomprehensible and in no way meaningful. We do not reach the Equal Protection Clause argument which has been advanced but rely solely on ï¿½ 601 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U. S. C. ï¿½ 2000d, to reverse the Court of Appeals.

That section bans discrimination based "on the ground of race, color, or national origin," in "any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance." The school district involved in this litigation receives large amounts of federal financial assistance. The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW), which has authority to promulgate regulations prohibiting discrimination in federally assisted school systems, 42 U. S. C. ï¿½ 2000d-1, in 1968 issued one guideline that "school systems are responsible for assuring that students of a particular race, color, or national origin are not denied the opportunity to obtain the education generally obtained by other students in the system." 33 Fed. Reg. 4956. In 1970 HEW made the guidelines more specific, requiring school districts that were federally funded "to rectify the language deficiency in order to open" the instruction to students who had "linguistic deficiencies," 35 Fed. Reg. 11595.

By ï¿½ 602 of the Act HEW is authorized to issue rules, regulations, and orders n2 to make sure that recipients of federal aid under its jurisdiction conduct any federally financed projects consistently with ï¿½ 601. HEW's regulations, 45 CFR ï¿½ 80.3 (b)(1), specify that the recipients may not

"(ii) Provide any service, financial aid, or other benefit to an individual which is different, or is provided in a different manner, from that provided to others under the program;
. . . .
"(iv) Restrict an individual in any way in the enjoyment of any advantage or privilege enjoyed by others receiving any service, financial aid, or other benefit under the program."

note2 Section 602 provides:
"Each Federal department and agency which is empowered to extend Federal financial assistance to any program or activity, by way of grant, loan, or contract other than a contract of insurance or guaranty, is authorized and directed to effectuate the provisions of section 2000d of this title with respect to such program or activity by issuing rules, regulations, or orders of general applicability which shall be consistent with achievement of the objectives of the statute authorizing the financial assistance in connection with which the action is taken. . . ." 42 U. S. C. ï¿½ 2000d-1.

Discrimination among students on account of race or national origin that is prohibited includes "discrimination . . . in the availability or use of any academic . . . or other facilities of the grantee or other recipient." Id., ï¿½ 80.5 (b).

Discrimination is barred which has that effect even though no purposeful design is present: a recipient "may not . . . utilize criteria or methods of administration which have the effect of subjecting individuals to discrimination" or have "the effect of defeating or substantially impairing accomplishment of the objectives of the program as respect individuals of a particular race, color, or national origin." Id., ï¿½ 80.3 (b)(2).

It seems obvious that the Chinese-speaking minority receive fewer benefits than the English-speaking majority from respondents' school system which denies them a meaningful opportunity to participate in the educational program -- all earmarks of the discrimination banned by the regulations. n3 In 1970 HEW issued clarifying guidelines, 35 Fed. Reg. 11595, which include the following:

note3 And see Report of the Human Rights Commission of San Francisco, Bilingual Education in the San Francisco Public Schools, Aug. 9, 1973.

"Where inability to speak and understand the English language excludes national origin-minority group children from effective participation in the educational program offered by a school district, the district must take affirmative steps to rectify the language deficiency in order to open its instructional program to these students."

"Any ability grouping or tracking system employed by the school system to deal with the special language skill needs of national origin-minority group children must be designed to meet such language skill needs as soon as possible and must not operate as an educational deadend or permanent track." Respondent school district contractually agreed to "comply with title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 . . . and all requirements imposed by or pursuant to the Regulation" of HEW (45 CFR pt. 80) which are "issued pursuant to that title . . ." and also immediately to "take any measures necessary to effectuate this agreement." The Federal Government has power to fix the terms on which its money allotments to the States shall be disbursed. Oklahoma v. CSC, 330 U.S. 127, 142-143. Whatever may be the limits of that power, Steward Machine Co. v. Davis, 301 U.S. 548, 590 et seq., they have not been reached here. Senator Humphrey, during the floor debates on the Civil Rights Act of 1964, said: n4

note4 110 Cong. Rec. 6543 (Sen. Humphrey, quoting from President Kennedy's message to Congress, June 19, 1963).

"Simple justice requires that public funds, to which all taxpayers of all races contribute, not be spent in any fashion which encourages, entrenches, subsidizes, or results in racial discrimination." We accordingly reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand the case for the fashioning of appropriate relief.

Reversed and remanded.

MR. JUSTICE WHITE concurs in the result.

Concurring Opinions

MR. JUSTICE STEWART, with whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE and MR. JUSTICE BLACKMUN join, concurring in the result.

It is uncontested that more than 2,800 schoolchildren of Chinese ancestry attend school in the San Francisco Unified School District system even though they do not speak, understand, read, or write the English language, and that as to some 1,800 of these pupils the respondent school authorities have taken no significant steps to deal with this language deficiency. The petitioners do not contend, however, that the respondents have affirmatively or intentionally contributed to this inadequacy, but only that they have failed to act in the face of changing social and linguistic patterns. Because of this laissez-faire attitude on the part of the school administrators, it is not entirely clear that ï¿½ 601 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U. S. C. ï¿½ 2000d, standing alone, would render illegal the expenditure of federal funds on these schools. For that section provides that "no person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance."

On the other hand, the interpretive guidelines published by the Office for Civil Rights of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare in 1970, 35 Fed. Reg. 11595, clearly indicate that affirmative efforts to give special training for non-English-speaking pupils are required by Tit. VI as a condition to receipt of federal aid to public schools:

"Where inability to speak and understand the English language excludes national origin-minority group children from effective participation in the educational program offered by a school district, the district must take affirmative steps to rectify the language deficiency in order to open its instructional program to these students." n1

note1 These guidelines were issued in further clarification of the Department's position as stated in its regulations issued to implement Tit. VI, 45 CFR pt. 80. The regulations provide in part that no recipient of federal financial assistance administered by HEW may "Provide any service, financial aid, or other benefit to an individual which is different, or is provided in a different manner, from that provided to others under the program; [or] "Restrict an individual in any way in the enjoyment of any advantage or privilege enjoyed by others receiving any service, financial aid, or other benefit under the program." 45 CFR ï¿½ 80.3 (b)(1)(ii), (iv).

The critical question is, therefore, whether the regulations and guidelines promulgated by HEW go beyond the authority of ï¿½ 601. n2 Last Term, in Mourning v. Family Publications Service, Inc., 411 U.S. 356, 369, we held that the validity of a regulation promulgated under a general authorization provision such as ï¿½ 602 of Tit. VI n3 "will be sustained so long as it is 'reasonably related to the purposes of the enabling legislation.' Thorpe v. Housing Authority of the City of Durham, 393 U.S. 268, 280-281 (1969)." I think the guidelines here fairly meet that test. Moreover, in assessing the purposes of remedial legislation we have found that departmental regulations and "consistent administrative construction" are "entitled to great weight." Trafficante v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., 409 U.S. 205, 210; Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424, 433-434; Udall v. Tallman, 380 U.S. 1. The Department has reasonably and consistently interpreted ï¿½ 601 to require affirmative remedial efforts to give special attention to linguistically deprived children.

note2 The respondents do not contest the standing of the petitioners to sue as beneficiaries of the federal funding contract between the Department of Health, Education,and Welfare and the San Francisco Unified School District.

note3 Section 602, 42 U. S. C. ï¿½ 2000d-1, provides in pertinent part:
"Each Federal department and agency which is empowered to extend Federal financial assistance to any program or activity, by way of grant, loan, or contract other than a contract of insurance or guaranty, is authorized and directed to effectuate the provisions of section 2000d of this title with respect to such program or activity by issuing rules, regulations, or orders of general applicability which shall be consistent with achievement of the objectives of the statute authorizing the financial assistance in connection with which the action is taken. . . ."

The United States as amicus curiae asserts in its brief, and the respondents appear to concede, that the guidelines were issued pursuant to ï¿½ 602.

For these reasons I concur in the result reached by the Court.
MR. JUSTICE BLACKMUN, with whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE joins, concurring in the result.

I join MR. JUSTICE STEWART'S opinion and thus I, too, concur in the result. Against the possibility that the Court's judgment may be interpreted too broadly, I stress the fact that the children with whom we are concerned here number about 1,800. This is a very substantial group that is being deprived of any meaningful schooling because the children cannot understand the language of the classroom. We may only guess as to why they have had no exposure to English in their preschool years. Earlier generations of American ethnic groups have overcome the language barrier by earnest parental endeavor or by the hard fact of being pushed out of the family or community nest and into the realities of broader experience.

I merely wish to make plain that when, in another case, we are concerned with a very few youngsters, or with just a single child who speaks only German or Polish or Spanish or any language other than English, I would not regard today's decision, or the separate concurrence, as conclusive upon the issue whether the statute and the guidelines require the funded school district to provide special instruction. For me, numbers are at the heart of this case and my concurrence is to be understood accordingly.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Overview of Lau v. Nichols decision of the United States Supreme Court.

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide 10- Pflugerville Independent School District- Local Administrative Law

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide 10- Pflugerville Independent School District- Local Administrative Law

# data[].attributes.body
According to the PFISD Handbook, in order for a student in Pflugerville ISD to be a part of their Language Immersion Program, there are eligibility requirements. These include: “Students, whose Home Language Survey indicates a language other than English, will be tested to determine English proficiency. The Language Proficiency Assessment Committee (LPAC) will review all the assessment results to determine the ELL status” (PFISD, 2018). This program is designed for children to all collectively learn English to become bilingual.

PFISD. (2018). Multilingual Education Handbook. Retrieved from http://www.pfisd.net/cms/lib/TX01001527/Centricity/Domain/1568/2019_2020%20PfISD%20DL%20for%20WEBHANDBOOK.pdf.

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide 11- ASCA Ethical Standards for School Counselors

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide 11- ASCA Ethical Standards for School Counselors

# data[].attributes.body
According to the ASCA Ethical Standards for school counselors, "School counselors must: strive to use translators who have been vetted or reviewed and bilingual/multilingual school counseling program materials representing languages used by families in the school community" (ASCA Ethical Standards for School Counselors, 2016)

As a school counselor, it is imperative that you are inclusive of cultures and languages represented in your school community. Translating school counseling materials to represent languages used by families in the school community will bring a sense of belonging to those families. You want them to feel included and involved in the school community. They should be represented in your counseling program, and including materials in their spoken language is one way to ensure this happens on your campus.

American School Counselor Association. (2016). ASCA Ethical Standards for School Counselors. Retrieved from https://www.schoolcounselor.org/asca/media/asca/Ethics/EthicalStandards2016.pdf.

# data[].attributes.body
The resource that I found helpful for educators of ESL students is: https://www.edutopia.org/article/resources-for-teaching-english-language-learners-ashley-cronin. This website provides many strategies and resources that teachers are able to use with their ELLs. It highlights classroom tools to implement best practices for ELLs. There are also resources for families and community members to promote cultural diversity on your campus.

Cronin, A. (2016). Resources for teaching English-Language Learners. Retrieved from https://www.edutopia.org/article/resources-for-teaching-english-language-learners-ashley-cronin.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Resources for Teaching English-Language Learners

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From literacy instruction to arts and technology integration, explore strategies for engaging English-language learners.

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide 13- Best Practices for Legal/Ethical Compliance

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide 13- Best Practices for Legal/Ethical Compliance

# data[].attributes.body
Recommendations related to educational practice for this topic, as well as best practices for legal compliance:

Identify ELLs on your campus through home language surveys

Assess individual student needs for ELL services through assessments and data collection

Develop a language program that will best serve the needs of ELLs

Ensure that necessary staff (teachers, ESL interventionists) and curriculum materials are in place and being utilized efficiently

Identify appropriate record keeping and assessments that will be used to track ELLs progress

Develop your language program's exit criteria- How does a student exit the ESL program?

Assess whether or not your program is successful based on student growth

Modify the ESL program when needed

Continue to stay up-to-date with best practices and current research

(NCELA, n.d.).

NCELA. (n.d.). What legal obligations do schools have to English Language Learners. Retrieved from https://ncela.ed.gov/faqs/view/6.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Q: What legal obligations do schools have to English language learners (ELLs)? | NCELA