English Language Learners Essay

"The question here is whether a Chinese citizen of the United Stаtes is denied equal protection of the lаws when he is clаssed аmong the colored rаces and furnished fаcilities for education equаl to thаt offered to аll, whether whitе, brown, yеllow, or black. Wеre this a nеw quеstion, it would call for very full argumеnt and considеration, but we think that it is the sаme quеstion which has bеen many timеs decidеd to be within the constitutional powеr of the stаte Legislature to sеttle, without intervеntion of the fedеral courts undеr the fedеral Constitution." The Court аligned this case under the lаnguage of Plessy v. Ferguson, which it sаid involved the "more difficult question" of segregаtion on railway carriers. In Plessy, the Court had listed many cases from state courts, upholding the prаctice of segregаting schools.

148 & 163). The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 was an “updated version of the child benefit theory” where federal aid followed the poor child to open “educational opportunities” for them (p.148-149). Finally, federal aid was able to pass through Congress since the “race-religion deadlock” wasn’t an issue so much anymore, therefore the money was able to follow the poor child (Ravitch, p.148). The biggest and most obvious injustice still at that time, was the slow pace of school desegregation. So, when the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 had been passed it allowed Title VI to have actual power since it stated, “No person...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” (Ravitch, p. 162- 163).

Kluger writes that “Plessy v. Ferguson, which had upheld the concept and practice of state-endorsed racial discrimination-Jim Crow- the chimera of separate but equal public accommodations and institutions for blacks and whites.” (Kluger 1). Plessy states there were no multicultural schools in certain states. Attorneys for the Board of Education had to argue with this because it was true, but argued that the schools were equal in every way. They claimed the amount of funding, teachers, supplies, classes, courses and activities all depended on where the students went.

Both Stevens, Stovall, and Fridland emphasize the need for awareness and education in fighting language-based prejudices and biases. By developing an understanding of how language is used to perpetuate discrimination, individuals can work towards creating a more just and fair society. Furthermore, critical literacy can help students challenge language use in legal situations. By analyzing the language used in legal documents and proceedings, students can identify instances of bias or discrimination and work to address these issues. This approach can be especially effective in cases where language use has a direct impact on legal

Since the case, education for Hispanics has been working towards complete equal rights. Education for Hispanics is a major part of the Chicano civil rights movement because of the way that integration happened

At the time, I was living in the poor area and lots of kids (American and non-America) could not write or read English. Instead of helping all the kids the school only had one English program to help kids learn English and that was the ESOL program, paid for by the state. The school itself did not care enough for the American kids to learn English, it cared more about the kids that were not American. So to get back to the question at hand if the person at hand is in need to help and they are not white, they will get help faster and they would also get more help. This is of course if it is not anything to do with anything else except for race.

The Consent Decree (also known as the META or ESOL Consent Decree) of 1990 is Florida’s framework for compliance with federal and state laws and jurisprudence regarding the education of English Language Learners (ELLs) (Govoni & Palaez, 2011). The Florida ESOL Consent Decree came about when the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), along with other civil rights/educational community organizations, decided to sue the Florida State Board of Education. The organizations were fighting for equal educational opportunity for all students, regardless of the individual’s primary language. Students in English for Speakers of Other Language (ESOL) program were not receiving an education that met their cognitive level because teachers in most schools were not properly trained to give ELL students an appropriate education. Teachers lacked the training to facilitate equal opportunity to the students.

These students have the potential to succeed, but quickly become discouraged in the demanding programs (Sander 6). Use of an affirmative action program “tantalizes unprepared students with the promise of a [...] degree and all of the opportunities that it offers,” (Justice Powell qtd. in Chingos par. 3). This tendency of such a program to actually hurt those it attempts to help, means that the program should not be used. When California voters realized this, they passed Proposition 209.

Marking the last year of the Civil Rights Movement were the the East LA Walkouts of 1968; the 1950s and 1960s were times of social unrest. Thousands of high school students of Hispanic descent walked out of class in March of 1968 in protest of the discrimination they faced on a day-to-day basis, not only at school, but in society as well. This event in particular was so impacting and crucial to the development of society from that point forward. Along with the fact that they brought educational and social equality for Mexican Americans, the walkouts increased the diversity of language spoken in schools as well as the amount of inspiration brought to student protests today. It is for this reason that the East LA walkouts be kept in the newer

This shows that after this case study, it was established that US Citizens have the right to a K-12 education, one that is equally funded so that all students are learning on a level playing field. For this case study, the Texas Supreme Court established the right for students to receive a public school education Texas citizens have the responsibility to take action against an issue they find unconstitutional, either by voting or joining an interest group.

Nichols (1974), was a civil rights case that was brought by Chinese American students who had limited English proficiency. The students claimed that they were not receiving special help in school due to their inability to speak English, which they argued they were entitled to under Title VI because of its ban on educational discrimination on the basis of national origin. Finding that the lack of linguistically appropriate accommodations (e.g. educational services in English) effectively denied the Chinese students equal educational opportunities on the basis of their ethnicity, the U.S. Supreme Court in 1974 ruled in favor of the students, thus expanding rights of students nationwide with limited English proficiency. The Supreme Court stated that these students should be treated with equality among the schools. Among other things, Lau reflects the now-widely accepted view that a person 's language is so closely intertwined with their national origin (the country someone or their ancestors came from) that language-based discrimination is effectively a proxy for national origin discrimination.

Segregation of Mexican Americans from the dominant Anglo race has been around for many years. Since the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo Mexican Americans have been treated like a second-class race facing racism and segregation. As a result, segregation in the education system affected Mexican American children. An increasing number of Mexican Americans across California led to an increase of Mexican children enrolling in schools. Author David James Gonzales (2017), explores the degrading school facilities Mexican students were assigned to.

INTRODUCTION “We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no place.” -Chief Justice Earl Warren Separate But Equal, directed by George Stevens Jr, is an American made-for-television movie that is based on the landmark Brown v. Board of Directors case of the U.S. Supreme court which established that segregation of primary schools based on race, as dictated by the ‘Separate but Equal’ doctrine, was unconstitutional based on the reinterpretation of the 14th amendment and thus, put an end to state-sponsored segregation in the US. Aims and Objectives:

Throughout many of the affirmative action legal cases, one of the main arguments from proponents is that it is necessary in order to right the wrongs of past racial discrimination. Some say that affirmative action is justified because even though white applicants may be more qualified, this is only because they did not face the same hardships as their minority counterparts (Rachels, Ethics, 1973).  Many argue if we do not integrate disadvantaged minorities into mainstream social institutions, they will continue to suffer the discrimination that has plagued our country for centuries and that this is detrimental to not only the minorities but also society as a whole (Anderson, 2002, 1270–71). However, the debate has recently shifted to the benefits of diversity in the classroom which the Supreme Court has affirmed as being a positive thing

As Americans, we view the Constitution as a stepping stone to making the great country we live in today. Yet, we the people of the United States failed to realize another component in order to form a perfect union. Which is to establish and promote equal opportunities for a quality education for all. However, we live in a society where social locators such as class, gender, and race are huge factors in the determination of one’s educational future.