History Chapter 9 Marsh by Caeley Harsch

The Nationality Act of 1906

cmharsch7220 — 2025-10-10 20:50:43 UTC

This 1906 Act required all immigrants to speak in English in order to become "naturalized Americans" (Baker & Wright, 2021). People started believing that there should be one shared common language for schooling. This was largely because their was a call for increased child literacy, decreased child labor, a desire to have a unified country and increased centralized control.

I believe this event is important in the history of bilingualism today because many people still hold the opinion that there can/should only be one centralized language in schools. This belief has almost certainly led to the extinction of some language, as students are pressured to speak only one language in schools, even if it is not their home language.

The National Defense Education Act 1958

cmharsch7220 — 2025-10-10 20:57:29 UTC

After the Russians launched Sputnik into space in 1957, debates arose as to the quality of United States education and educators. The National Defense Act promoted the learning of foreign languages in elementary schools and showed an increased concern of learning other languages than just English.

This event was important because it demonstrated the importance of a well-rounded education, as well as the benefits of learning multiple languages. Politicians started to recognize the benefits of bilingualism, and the importance of doing it at a young age.

No Child Left Behind-December 13, 2001

cmharsch7220 — 2025-10-10 21:08:53 UTC

This Act was signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2001. This Act used the term 'limited English proficient' which viewed ELL's in a deficient way by focusing on what they lack, rather than what they are capable of. No specific criteria was given as to how "highly qualified teachers" would be hired, though it was said to be a priority. Bilingual programs were allowed, but it was up to the state to determine which program models could receive federal funding. Because of testing requirements, teachers were forced to teach their students at a rapid pace, full of test-driven content.

This Act is important in the history of bilingualism because it hindered the legitimate progress of bilingual education. There was no specific guidelines on how to hire highly qualified teachers, and content was forced to be fast-paced and driven by testing requirements. As well as this a model of deficient language was used, and is still being used today, to address English language learners.

Common Core State Standards 2010

cmharsch7220 — 2025-10-10 21:17:05 UTC

The Common Core Standards were a State-led initiative that promoted college and career readiness in both English and math. Many educators and ELL advocates feared the Standards placed too much emphasis on high-stakes testing. There were also little efforts being made to create these exams in other languages, which hindered bilingual programs. ELL teachers feared they would have to rapidly prepare their students to take the exams in English only.

These Standards were monumental in the history of education and bilingualism because the emphasis on high-stakes testing continues to exist today. Schools fear they can't offer bilingual programs because they have to prepare their students for English-only tests. Thus these programs are not able to flourish as they may have normally.

Every Student Succeeds Act-December 10, 2015

cmharsch7220 — 2025-10-10 21:23:27 UTC

This Act was signed into law by President Barack Obama and recognized some of the failures of the No Child Left Behind Act. Less emphasis was placed on student test scores and states were given greater flexibility in their goal-setting and how to intervene in low-performing schools. As well as this, progress of subgroups of students was allowed to be tracked, which took into account the unique needs of ELLs rather than lumping them into one big category.

This is an important Act because it de-emphasized the importance of testing in education. While tests were still required to be given, states could choose what specific goals to set. Bilingual programs did not have to focus so stringently on preparing students for English-only exams. Students' levels of English proficiency were also considered when setting achievement goals, which is positive in addressing students' specific learning needs.