# data[].attributes.body
I am Cesar Marquez and have a professional perspective with 11 years as an educator. I am currently a high school counseling intern. The intended audience for this guide are stakeholders in education such as school counselors, teachers, administrators, English Language Learner (ELL) students, and parents. I chose the topic of English Language Learners because it is significantly relevant and pertinent to the west Texas borderland region I live and work in. This is a prominent topic that aligns with the current surge of migrants in all border towns in the US in states of Texas, Arizona, California.

# data[].attributes.headline
#2 Interview of an adult English as a Secondary Language (ESL) instructor

# data[].attributes.subject
#2 Interview of an adult English as a Secondary Language (ESL) instructor

# data[].attributes.body
1) Why the Legal Guide topic is important in your field of education? It is important because adults need to learn to English to better themselves. The laws protect their privacy and security. It is important to teach them for them to reach their goals to be integrated into society (C. Fierro, personal communication, September 26, 2022).

2) What are best practices related to English Language Learners? Three best practices are authentic learning through real-life situations, language immersion, and sentence dictation (C. Fierro, personal communication, September 26, 2022).

3) What is an emerging issue related to your topic that educators should watch to see how it plays out and impacts your work? I do not focus on one single issue. I am always paying attention to the news regarding the surge of migrants in this area of El Paso, TX. I attend professional developments for the compliance and best practices of ELL education practices (C. Fierro, personal communication, September 26, 2022).

4) Who I interviewed: Corina Fierro, Adult ESL instructor at the Canutillo Family Literacy Program in association with Borderplex and the Texas Workforce Commission.
https://tcall.tamu.edu/detail.aspx?provider_id=105

5) Are there legal requirements or compliance issues you regularly monitor or have to be attentive to in this area? If a student is 16 years old they  has to be mandated to take GED classes. If they're 17-18 it has to court-ordered. 19 and up is voluntary (C. Fierro, personal communication, September 26, 2022).

6) Are there certain student or employee rights that relate to this issue? The students right to education t regardless of their national origin without a social security card. We do require ID and a U.S. address (C. Fierro, personal communication, September 26, 2022).

7) Have you attended or provided any trainings recently on this topic, what? I have attended FMLA trainings regarding student information privacy (C. Fierro, personal communication, September 26, 2022).

8) How do you stay current on this topic? My boss updates me if there's any legal changes that affect the students or our jobs (C. Fierro, personal communication, September 26, 2022).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Welcome to the Adult Education Provider Directory Search

Organization Name:
Canutillo Family Literacy Program

Department:

Student Support Services

Physical Address:

7000 5th Street and Central
Canutillo, TX 79835

Postal Address:

PO Box 100
Canutillo, TX 79835

Contact Person:

Ms. Julia Correa
Position: Coordinator
Email: jcorrea@canutillo-isd.org

County Located:

El Paso

County Served:

El Paso

Organization Type:

Other

Services Provided:

Basic Skills Instruction, English as a Second Language, High School Equivalency Test Preparation
Click to view service definitions

Additional Information:

Not open in Summer.

Spanish Speaker:

AVAILABLE

Workforce Area:

Borderplex

Official log

Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
TCALL is the statewide Adult Education and Literacy professional development and resource center for Texas, housed at Texas A&M University.

# data[].attributes.headline
#3 School counselor professional association related to ELLs

# data[].attributes.subject
#3 School counselor professional association related to ELLs

# data[].attributes.body
School counselors can support ELL students with opportunities, people, and resources to ease their transition into a school through (Bell, 2019):

proper course placement

extracurricular activities

pairing EL students with a student representative who is fluent in the EL student's language of origin

ensure that students that are both special education and english language support services receive both distinctly

small group support for positive school adaptation (Bell, 2019).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
While the English learner (EL) population is growing by leaps and bounds within U.S. public schools, most school counselors don't receive any sort of specialized training in how to work with these students or their families. School counselors are in a unique position to support the inclusion and success of English learners in Utah schools. Baseline data has revealed that English learners have the largest gap across all outcome indicators. They face unique challenges in the school system, including cultural differences, language barriers, poverty and lack of resources.

When English learners come into your school from their country of origin, cultural rules and norms can be confusing and feel very foreign. School counselors serve an important role in connecting EL students with people, opportunities and resources that will help ease their transition into your school culture. Some strategies that may help EL students' transition are:

Proper course placement - placing EL students in the appropriate classes to meet their individual needs can increase school success

Connecting them with clubs and extra-curricular activities

Pairing them with a student representative, preferably one who is fluent in their native language, to acclimate them to the school. For example, they can give a tour of the building, explain the school rules and policies and introduce them to their teachers and other students

Ensuring that students are appropriately identified for special education services. A disproportionate number of EL students are placed in special education. English language fluency does not always correlate with a need for special education services.

Ensuring that students who are identified for special education services are also provided English language supports. Students should be afforded both services; one does not supersede the other.

Organizing small groups to foster positive school adjustment

Conversation group - In a conversation group, EL students can practice English in a safe setting, share information about their culture and personal experiences, develop social-emotional skills and learn local culture from peers.
College group - A college group can introduce EL students to the college system in the U.S., help them with admissions requirements and applications, offer writing workshops, bring in guest speakers, assist with financial aid and scholarships and offer field trips to local colleges.

Include families in the conversation

Provide families with resources. Organizations such as Catholic Community Services, the Refugee and Immigrant Center - Asian Association of Utah, and the English Skills Learning Center provide many services. Families of EL students can be a great resource for expanding cultural conversations in schools. Make sure they have a place at the table.
Arrange for a translator to be present at meetings with families of English learners. It is respectful to face the family during the conversation, not the translator.
Provide translated correspondence, resources, and documents in preferred language.

Additional Resources: Contact Holly Bell, USCA past president, at holly.bell@utschoolcounselor.org.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How School Counselors Can Support English Learners

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
While the English learner (EL) population is growing by leaps and bounds within U.S. public schools, most school counselors don't receive any sort of specialized training in how to work with these students or their families. School counselors are in a unique position to support the inclusion and success of English learners in Utah schools.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
The 5 Most Common Challenges ESL Learners Face (and How to Solve Them) - eLearningInside News

# data[].attributes.body
The following are some of the challenges that ELL students face everyday in public schools throughout the country:

Learning the language without a goal

Most of these students are not passionate about learning the language (Korneev, 2020).

Bored by traditional methods

Students need to find a medium they are interested in to learn the language (Korneev, 2020).

Feelings of embarrassment

Students may feel embarrassed because they may pronounce words incorrectly in front of native speakers and it can be difficult and overwhelming (Korneev, 2020).

Not enough time

Some students may feel there is not enough time to study and learn a new language.

Lack of interaction with naive speakers (Korneev, 2020).

Students may have difficulty finding a partner to practice English with and do not spend enough time interacting with native English speakers (Korneev, 2020).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The 5 Most Common Challenges ESL Learners Face (and How to Solve Them) - eLearningInside News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
ESL learners face many challenges in growing their language skills. Max Korneev describes his experience as a learner and language app CEO.

# data[].attributes.body
Providence public schools provided ELLs with fewer services than the law requires.

Three parents of ELL students sued the school district for providing little to no instruction from an English as Second Language teacher (Borg, 2022).

The teachers in question were teaching an antiquated model of ESL instruction (Borg, 2022).

The teachers are incompetent despite a 100 continuing education (Borg, 2022)

Parents of English learners with disabilities had to choose between their child choosing ELL and disability services (Borg, 2022).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
PROVIDENCE - A Superior Court judge has ruled that the Providence Public Schools failed to provide English language learners with anywhere near the instruction needed to succeed in school.

Judge Netti Vogel found that the Council on Elementary and Secondary Education and the state Department of Education violated the rights of students who were English language learners by providing them with fewer services than the law requires.

The lawsuit was brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and Rhode Island Legal Services against the Rhode Island Council on Elementary Education, the state Board of Education and the school district.

In 2016, the suit was filed on behalf of three parents of English learners in Providence who said their children had been provided with little to no instruction by a teacher certified in English as a Second Language. The children also received special education services.

Prior to March 2018, a certified ESL teacher provided guidance to the regular classroom teacher about how best to meet the needs of a student learning English.

At that time, the U.S. Justice Department issued a scathing report on the district's treatment of English learners. It found that English learners with disabilities often suffered the most, and parents were sometimes forced to choose between obtaining special-education services or English-language services for their children.
More: More: Providence elementary school teachers chafe at language-certification mandate 315 Providence teachers learn they may have to apply for new jobs. Here's what we know
At least 327 English-language learners during the 2016-17 school year were placed in programs that did not provide any direct English-language services from a qualified instructor, according to the report.

Some students received far less than the required amount of ESL instruction.

On Thursday, the state Department of Education said that the school district hasn't used the instruction model in question since at least August 2018, when then interim Supt. Frances Gallo signed a settlement agreement with the Justice Department that the model was educationally unsound.

"All of this occurred prior to the state takeover of the district and Commissioner AngélicaAngelica Infante-Green has consistently made clear from the outset of her tenure that the model may not be used in the district or elsewhere in the state," said education department spokesman David Folcarelli.

Nicholas Domings, a spokesman for the district, sa9d Providence has since more than doubled the number of ESL certified teachers to 467..

"We are also now providing up to $8,000 for teachers to obtain their certification," he said. "We have also created more than 200 integrated classrooms, along with more dual language classrooms."

The Council on Elementary Education contended that the district's approach was valid because it drew from several educational models listed in state regulations. The council also argued that Providence wasn't required to ensure that all English language instruction was provided by a certified ESL teacher.

The council argued that English language learners received multiple levels of instructions through their classroom teachers, who consult with ESL teachers.

Vogel wrote that English language instruction carries its own specific set of skills and said the record shows that some of the district's English-speaking teachers were inadequately prepared to teach in a bilingual classroom, despite completing a 100-hour continuing education course.

"A language remediation program," she wrote, "cannot reasonably be expected to be successful if it relies on general and special educators obtaining those skills through periodic consultations of unspecified length with ESL-certified managers."

Vogel found that the district violated "the clear and unambiguous language of the state regulations" by using this model with special education students such as the plaintiffs.
Linda Borg covers education for The Journal.
Vogel also concluded that the district "failed to ensure that programs for English language learners are based on sound educational theory" and supported by effective staff. Special education students who are also English learners have been denied the same educational opportunities as regular education students.

Vogel remanded the case to the Board of Education and ordered the board to consider compensatory services to the plaintiffs, which could include anything from tutoring to help with earning a GED.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Rhode Island violated rights of English language learners in Providence, judge finds

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
PROVIDENCE - A Superior Court judge has ruled that the Providence Public Schools failed to provide English language learners with anywhere near the instruction needed to succeed in school. Judge Netti Vogel found that the Council on Elementary and Secondary Education and the state Department of Education violated the rights of students who were English language learners by providing them with fewer services than the law requires.

# data[].attributes.body
The fourteenth amendment is constitutional law.
U.S. Const. amend. XIV.

The 14th amendment states that "nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws" (U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Copy and paste the Ray ID when you contact the site owner.

# data[].attributes.body
The English Language Acquisition Language Enhancement and Academic Achievement Act is an administrative law.

English Language Acquisition, Language Enhancement, and Academic Achievement Act, 20 USC § 6811(a).

Ensures that English Language Learners and immigrant children attain English proficiency in schools (20 USC § 6812(a)).

Assists schools in enhancing their instructional programs for schools (20 USC § 6812(a)).

Promotes parental, family, and community participation in language instruction programs for EL parents, families, and community members (20 USC § 6812(a)).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
§6811. Short title

This part may be cited as the "English Language Acquisition, Language Enhancement, and Academic Achievement Act".

( Pub. L. 89-10, title III, §3101, as added Pub. L. 107-110, title III, §301, Jan. 8, 2002, 115 Stat. 1690.)

Editorial Notes

Prior Provisions

A prior section 6811, Pub. L. 89-10, title III, §3111, as added Pub. L. 103-382, title I, §101, Oct. 20, 1994, 108 Stat. 3637, set forth findings, prior to the general amendment of this subchapter by Pub. L. 107-110.

A prior section 3101 of Pub. L. 89-10 was classified to section 6801 of this title, prior to the general amendment of this subchapter by Pub. L. 107-110.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This part may be cited as the "English Language Acquisition, Language Enhancement, and Academic Achievement Act". ( Pub. L. 89-10, title III, §3101, as added Pub. L. 107-110, title III, §301, Jan. 8, 2002, 115 Stat. 1690 .) Editorial Notes Prior Provisions A prior section 6811, Pub. L.

# data[].attributes.body
Plyler v. Doe, 1982 is a judicial law.

The Supreme Court ruled that 1982 Plyler v. Doe states cannot deny students a free public education on account of their immigration status (Plyler v. Doe, 1982).

Schools that collect information about students immigration status is bad policy and unconstitutional (American Immigration Council, 2016).

The court ruled justified that denying immigrants education is denying them contribution to the progress of the United States of America (American Immigration Council, 2016).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Plyler v. Doe

Brown v. Board of Education

Plyler v. Doe

Summary of a Fourteenth Amendment Landmark case:
Plyler v. Doe 457 U.S. 202 (1982)

Facts

In 1975, the Texas Legislature revised its education laws to deny enrollment in their public schools to and withhold any state funds for the education of children who were not "legally admitted" to the country.

A class action was filed on behalf of certain school-age children of Mexican origin residing in Texas who could not establish that they had been legally admitted into the United States. The class filed a motion for permanent injunctive relief, asking the district court to prevent defendants from denying a free public education to members of the class.

In deciding the motion, the district court found that neither the revised law nor its implementation had "either the purpose or effect of keeping illegal aliens out of the State of Texas." The district court also found that the increase in enrollment in Texas public schools was primarily attributable to the admission of children who were legal residents. Finally, the district court found that while barring undocumented children would save money, it would not necessarily improve the quality of the education. The court then concluded that illegal aliens were entitled to the protection of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and that the Texas legislation violated it.

The Court of Appeals affirmed, and the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.

Issue

Whether denying undocumented children of illegal immigrants the right to attend public school constitutes discrimination based on alienage that violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?

Ruling

Yes.

Reasoning

(Brennan, J.) By a 5-4 vote, the Court concluded that the Texas legislation violated the Equal Protection Clause. The Court explained that "education has a fundamental role in maintaining the fabric of our society" and "provides the basic tools by which individuals might lead economically productive lives to the benefit of us all." Further, while persuasive arguments support the view that a state may withhold benefits from people whose presence within the country is a result of unlawful conduct, the children of such illegal entrants "can affect neither their parents' conduct nor their own status," and "legislation directing the onus of a parent's misconduct against his children does not comport with fundamental conceptions of justice."

While the state has a legitimate interest in protecting itself from an influx of illegal immigrants, there was no evidence to suggest that any immigrants came to the country to avail themselves of a free education. Similarly, while the state has an interest in removing burdens on the state's ability to provide high-quality public education, there was no evidence that the exclusion of undocumented children was likely to improve the overall quality of education in Texas.

Accordingly, the majority affirmed the lower court's ruling.

Concurrence

(Marshall, J.) Justice Marshall emphasized that he believed an individual's interest in education is fundamental and that this belief "is amply supported by the unique status accorded public education by our society, and by the close relationship between education and some of our most basic constitutional values."

(Blackmun, J.) Justice Blackmun noted that "when a state provides an education to some and denies it to others, it immediately and inevitably creates class distinctions of a type fundamentally inconsistent with" the purposes of the Equal Protection Clause because "an uneducated child is denied even the opportunity to achieve." When those children are members of an identifiable class, the state has created a separable and identifiable underclass.

(Powell, J.) Justice Powell emphasized the unique character of the case. He noted that under the Texas law, a group of children is deprived of the opportunity for education because of a violation of law by their parents. "A legislative classification that threatens the creation of an underclass of future citizens and residents cannot be reconciled with one of the fundamental purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment."

Dissent

(Burger, C.J.) The dissent asserted that any issues concerning whether or not to admit children of undocumented immigrants into public schools should be dealt with by the legislature as opposed to the judiciary. The dissenting Justices agreed that "it would be folly-and wrong-to tolerate creation of a segment of society made up of illiterate persons." However, they concluded that such a decision should be made by the political branches because it is a policy issue inappropriate for the Court to undertake.

Brown v. Board of Education

Summary of a Fourteenth Amendment Landmark case:
Brown v. Board of Education 347 U.S. 483 (1954)

Facts

In cases brought in Kansas, South Carolina, Virginia, and Delaware, African American children sought admission to the public schools in their community on a nonsegregated basis. In each state, they were denied admissions to schools attended by white children under laws requiring or permitting segregation on the basis of race. In each of the cases other than the Delaware case, federal courts denied relief to plaintiffs on the "separate but equal" doctrine set forth by the Court in Plessy v. Ferguson. Under that doctrine, treatment is equal when races are provided substantially equal facilities, even if they are separate. In the Delaware case, the Supreme Court of Delaware adhered to that doctrine, but ordered that plaintiffs be admitted to the white schools because of their superiority to the other schools. The plaintiffs appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that segregated schools are not equal and cannot be made equal.

Issue

Whether requiring or permitting racial segregation in public schools violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?

Ruling

Yes.

Reasoning

(Warren, J.) The Court concluded that separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. The Court noted that education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments and the foundation of good citizenship. Education includes intangible considerations, such as the ability to study, to engage in discussions with other students, and in general, to learn a profession. To separate students on the basis of race creates "a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely ever to be undone." Therefore, the Court concluded that the doctrine of "separate but equal" has no place in public education.

Cooper v. Aaron

Summary of a Fourteenth Amendment Landmark case:
Cooper v. Aaron 358 U.S. 1 (1978)

Facts

Following its decision in Brown v. Board of Education, the Court formulated a decree to affect the decision. Specifically, the Court required that the defendants "make a prompt and reasonable start toward full compliance" with the Court's order and to end segregation in the public schools "with all deliberate speed."

Three days after the Court's opinion in Brown, the Little Rock District School Board in Little Rock, Arkansas, began preparing a comprehensive plan for the complete desegregation of the school system.

At the same time, however, various state authorities, including the state legislature and governor, were actively pursuing means to perpetuate racial segregation in the Arkansas public school system. For example, in 1957, the School Board and the Superintendent of Schools continued with preparations to carry out the first stage of the desegregation program with the admission of nine African American students to Central High School. The day before the students were to enter the school, the Governor of Arkansas dispatched units of the Arkansas National Guard to the school and placed it "off limits" to African American students. When the nine African American students attempted to enter the high school two days later, the Arkansas National Guard forcibly prevented them from entering the building. The Arkansas National Guard continued to do so every day for the next three weeks.

The federal government, through the United States Attorney and the Attorney General, filed a motion in federal court to stop the governor and the Arkansas National Guard from interfering with the nine students' attendance. A federal district court granted the motion, and the Arkansas National Guard was withdrawn from the school. Subsequently, the President of the United States dispatched federal troops to Central High School to ensure that the nine students would be admitted safely to school.

Because of the hostility, caused in large part by the acts of state authorities, the School Board and Superintendent sought postponement of the desegregation plan for two-and-a-half years. The district court granted their motion. The Court of Appeals reversed.

Issue

Whether the Court should uphold a suspension of a desegregation plan until state laws and efforts to challenge Brown v. Board of Education have been challenged and tested in the courts?

Ruling

No

Reasoning

(Chief Justice Warren) The Court unanimously held that law and order cannot be preserved by depriving African American children of their constitutional rights. "The constitutional rights of children not to be discriminated against in school admission on grounds of race or color declared by this Court in the Brown case can neither be nullified openly and directly by state legislators or state executive or judicial officers, not nullified indirectly by them through evasive schemes for segregation." Because the Supreme Court has the ultimate authority in determining what the Constitution means and because it concluded that segregation in public schools violated the Equal Protection Clause, no state authority or state law may require or allow for racial segregation in public education. Accordingly, the desegregation plan could not be suspended.

Concurrence

(Frankfurter, J.) Justice Frankfurter noted that while the State of Arkansas was not a formal party in the proceedings, it was legally and morally a party before the Court as a result of its use of armed force to thwart the law. Violent resistance to law, even if used by a state, cannot be used as a legal reason for the law's suspension. As such, Justice Frankfurter found that Arkansas' actions were "subversive not only of our constitutional system but of the presuppositions of democracy." He also noted that it is the responsibility of those who exercise power in a democratic government to help form the public's understanding and support the supreme law of the land, the Constitution.

What is Your Opinion?

1. Why might it be important for courts to decide cases that tend to have an adverse impact on children?

2. Why should the government have a role in education?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Plyler v. Doe Brown v. Board of Education Summary of a Fourteenth Amendment Landmark case: Plyler v. Doe 457 U.S. 202 (1982) In 1975, the Texas Legislature revised its education laws to deny enrollment in their public schools to and withhold any state funds for the education of children who were not "legally admitted" to the country.

# data[].attributes.body
The Equal Educational Opportunities Act is a statutory law. Equal Educational Opportunities Act, 20 USC § 1701-1758.

Entitles all children to equal educational opportunities regardless of race, color, sex, or national origin (20 USC § 1701(a)).

Prohibits discrimination against students. It also requires school districts and states’ departments of education to take action to ensure equal participation for everyone, including removing language barriers for ELL students (20 USC § 1703).

Educational agencies must take appropriate action to overcome language barriers that impede educational equality (20 USC § 1703(f)).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
[USC02] 20 USC Ch. 39: EQUAL EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES AND TRANSPORTATION OF STUDENTS

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
SUBCHAPTER I-EQUAL EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES Part 1-Policy and Purpose Sec. 1701. 1702. Part 2-Unlawful Practices 1703. 1704. 1705. Part 3-Enforcement 1706. 1707. 1708. Jurisdiction of district courts. 1709. Intervention by Attorney General. 1710. Part 4-Remedies 1712. 1713. 1714. Transportation of students. 1715. 1716. Voluntary adoption of remedies. 1717. 1718.

# data[].attributes.headline
#10 Local administrative policy for ELLs

# data[].attributes.subject
#10 Local administrative policy for ELLs

# data[].attributes.body
El Paso Independent School District (EPISD) states that "English Language Development and Acquisition (ELDA) is designed to provide instructional opportunities for secondary recent immigrant students with little or no English proficiency" (EPISD, 2022, para. 1).

The program enables students to become more proficient in listening, speaking, reading, and writing. EPISD states that the program "addresses cognitive, linguistic, and affective needs in compliance with federal requirements and the provisions of Chapter 89, Subchapter BB, of this title (relating to Commissioner's Rules Concerning State Plan for Educating English Language Learners) under the Texas Education Code, §§29.051-29.064" (EPISD, 2022, para. 1).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Connecting Languages / English for Speakers of Other Languages (ELDA & ESOL) - High School

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
English Language Development and Acquisition (ELDA) is designed to provide instructional opportunities for secondary recent immigrant students with little or no English proficiency. These students have scored at the negligible/very limited academic language level of the state-approved English oral l…

# data[].attributes.body
A.13, f. Provide interpretation of the nature, purposes, results and potential impact of assessment/evaluation measures in language the students and parents/guardians can understand (ASCA Ethical Standards for School Counselors, 2016).

This ethical standard directs school counselors to communicate assessment and evaluation to parents in comprehensible language.  This is pertinent to ELLs because parents are stakeholders in their child's education and have a right to know how, when, and why their children are being tested and evaluated.

# data[].attributes.headline
#12 Personal and legal connection to ethical and legal standards

# data[].attributes.subject
#12 Personal and legal connection to ethical and legal standards

# data[].attributes.body
The laws pertinent to ELLs help me understand the history of how this marginalized population is educated in this country. I learned that "sink or swim" was not viable for ELLs and that they require extra accommodations to attain equality with their English speaking counterparts.

I have been around ELL students and policies throughout most of my personal and professional education journeys. I was not put into bilingual education or ESL courses as an K-12 student as I went to a low-income Catholic school in the 90s and these education options were not available at that particular school at that time. I grew up with Spanish-speaking students and I learned how to speak English through television and interaction with my brothers and friends in a "sink or swim" style.

I believe these laws are just and align with the 14th amendment. I have been a teacher for eleven years in Texas, mostly in the El Paso borderland region. I have taught bilingual education in elementary and been a substitute in ESL courses. The substitution experience at an ESL course opened my eyes to how limited English proficient some of these students are. Their English writing and speaking ability was low and I appreciate the ESL instructor's role and responsibilities in a new light. These students come straight from Juarez, Mexico and barely speak a word of English. This teacher has these students for longer periods of time to provide accommodations for their English development and skills acquisition. I am in awe of the instructor's role and commend ESL teachers for undertaking the responsibility of teaching these Spanish-speaking students to be able to take classes in an American school. I also noticed how most of these students were not fully acclimated to American schools.

I will continue to learn and acquire knowledge relating to best practices and laws to stay compliant for the development of all ELL students. I will advocate for equal education and remain knowledgeable of laws and policies that protect ELL students through adherence and compliance of legal and ethical standards as a school counselor.

# data[].attributes.body
Obligations that schools have to their EL students:

identify and assess EL students in a timely manner (Sugarman, 2019).

sufficiently staff and support program (Sugarman, 2019).

avoid unnecessary separation of EL students from the general population (Sugarman, 2019).

ensure meaningful communication with EL parents (Sugarman, 2019).

EL students have a right to all activities such as sports, advanced courses, extracurricular activities, clubs, etc. (Sugarman, 2019).

meet needs of EL students who opt out of ELL programs and services (Sugarman, 2019).

# data[].attributes.body
American Immigration Council (2016). Public education for immigrant students: understanding Plyler v. Doe. https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/plyler-v-doe-public-education-immigrant-students

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

Bell, H. (2019, October). How school counselors can support English learners. North Carolina School Counselor Association. https://www.schoolcounselor.org/Newsletters/November-2019/How-School-Counselors-Can-Support-English-Learners?st=NC

Borg, L. (2022, June 16). Rhode Island violated rights of English language learners in Providence, judge finds. The Providence Journal. https://www.providencejournal.com/story/news/education/2022/06/16/superior-court-judge-found-providence-failed-english-language-learners/7645677001/

El Paso Independent School District (2022). English for speakers of other languages (ELDA & ESOL) - High school. EPISD, para. 1-6. https://www.episd.org/Page/688

English Language Acquisition, Language Enhancement, and Academic Achievement Act, 20 USC § 6811-6812(a).

Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974, 20 USC § 1701-1758.

Korneev, M. (2020, December 28). The 5 most common challges ESL learners face (and how to solve them). ELearning Inside. https://news.elearninginside.com/the-5-most-common-challenges-esl-learners-face-and-how-to-solve-them/

Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202, (1982).

Sugarman, J. (2019). Legal protections for K-12 English learner and immigrant-background students. Migration Policy Institute, 3. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/publications/EL-Insight_Legal-Framwork_Final.pdf

U.S. Const. amend. XIV