Discussion Forum 9 by Chris and Marie Fagan

1923: Meyer v. Nebraska

camfagan06 — 2024-10-16 21:37:43 UTC

This Supreme Court case was a win, albeit indirectly, for bilingual education. A teacher at a private elementary school taught Bible stories in German to students outside of school hours. The state originally ruled that "mother-tongue" teaching cultivated ideas and attachments that were foreign to the best interests of the United States" (Baker & Wright, 2021, p. 184). The Supreme Court overturned the ruling on the grounds that states cannot prohibit language instruction outside of school hours. This wasn't exactly a glorious win for bilingual education, however it did provide a constitutional window of hope in the fight against language learning restrictions.

Baker, C., & Wright, W. E. (2021). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism (7th ed.). Multilingual Matters.

1964 Civil Rights Act

camfagan06 — 2024-10-16 21:37:46 UTC

The Civil Rights movement sparked a cultural shift in the United States and sought equal opportunity for all individuals no matter the individual's race, color, or creed. This led to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which "prohibited discrimination on the basis of color, race, and national origin, and led to the establishment of the Office of Civil Rights" (Baker & Wright, 2021, p. 184). Not only did this act help advance civil liberties, but it also helped the fight for bilingual education. The fight for equality for race and culture brought hope to the fight for bilingual education. The movement, and the act itself, highlighted positive outlooks and even shift in tolerance for languages other than English.

Baker, C., & Wright, W. E. (2021). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism (7th ed.). Multilingual Matters.

1970 Lau v. Nichols

camfagan06 — 2024-10-16 21:59:36 UTC

In 1970, a case was brought before the Supreme Court claiming that Chinese-speaking students in a California school did not receive equal education because they were instructed in a language they could not understand. This, in turn, violated the Civil Rights act of 1964, as well as the 14th Amendment. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the students, stating that "There is no equality of treatment mereely 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" (Baker & Wright, 2021, p. 185). This caused a set of guidelines to be created called the "Lau remedies" which finally acknowledged that students need additional support if they cannot speak English, including but not restricted to English as a second language classes and tutoring. This was a major win for bilingual education, even though it did not solve all.

Baker, C., & Wright, W. E. (2021). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism (7th ed.). Multilingual Matters.

2001 No Child Left Behind

camfagan06 — 2024-10-16 22:12:15 UTC

Although not a victory in Bilingual education, 2001's No Child Left Behind law was nevertheless an important event in language learning history. This law "held states, districts, schools, and teachers accountable for the academic performance of LEP students" (Baker & Wright, 2021, p. 191). The term "Limited English Proficient" was used to describe bilingual and multilingual learners, which carried its own negative connotations as it indicated what students lacked versus what they gained in learning. Because the educational industry was held accountable to how well students performed on state assessments, English-only instruction increased while bilingual programs decreased. This was a setback in bilingual learning that took years to remedy and overturn.

Baker, C., & Wright, W. E. (2021). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism (7th ed.). Multilingual Matters.

2015 Every Student Succeeds Act

camfagan06 — 2024-10-16 22:31:15 UTC

In 2015, congress approved the "Every Student Succeeds Act". This Act, signed into law by President Barack Obama, "reflected some recognition of the failures of NCLB (No Child Left Behind), including its unrealistic achievement expectations and over reliance on high-stakes standardized tests as the sole measure of student achievement" (Baker & Wright, 2021, p. 195). Because states considered factors other than test scores for school accountability, it "opened space for a student's level of English proficiency to be considered when setting achievement targets and in interpreting their test scores and opportunities to consider a student's growth over time, rather than just meeting set passing scores" (Baker & Wright, 2021, p. 195). Although this was not a perfect law, it did allow schools to broaden their bilingual programs and search for strategies for education other than "teaching to the test" which mainstreamed most learners into English only instruction. In the years to come, this would receive many revisions, both positive and negative, but this was a good start to reversing what was brought on by NCLB.

Baker, C., & Wright, W. E. (2021). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism (7th ed.). Multilingual Matters.