English Assimilation

Prior to the passing of California proposition 227, immigrant children, mainly Latinos, were taught in their native language until they could transition into English-only classes. Students with limited-English-proficiency (LEP) would participate in bilingual education over a number of years before making this transition. After proposition 227, the percentage of children in bilingual programs dropped from 29 percent to 11, only those who were able to obtain waivers from school authorities were permitted to stay in bilingual programs (Bali, 2001). Proposition 227 was controversial because its opponents claimed that it was rooted in anti-immigrant sentiments and it was a return to ‘sink or swim’ programs which would

Around 1959, bilingual education took flight in the United States. Starting in Miami and quickly making its way San Francisco, bilingual education soon led to the Bilingual Education Act which promoted “No Child Left Behind”. Only twenty years later, the act acquired the attention of high schools around the country. Nonetheless, bilingual education is not always taken to be the cure-all for acclimating immigrants to the United States. In his article “Aria: A Memoir of Bilingual Childhood”, Richard Rodriguez argues that students should not take part in bilingual education by explaining how it takes away individuality and a sense of family through use of ethos, diction, and imagery; Rodriguez also uses

Florida is a state composed of diverse cultures and languages. Prior to 1990 there were not any modifications or accommodations in the classroom for English Language Learners (ELL), which had become an increasing issue. During this decade Florida was the third largest state with residents that were not native-born. Historically, Florida has become the home for many individuals who migrated from Central and Latin America (MacDonald, 2004). According to the Consent Decree (n.d.), the Florida English speakers of other languages (ESOL) Consent Decree was a result of the case, LULAC et. al v. State Board of Education, August 14, 1990. This case addresses the civil rights of English Language Learners (ELLs). The plaintiffs in this case were LULAC and Multicultural Education, Training and Advocacy (META) and the defendant were Florida Board of Education. LULAC and META came together to bring justice to students whose native language was not English. The plaintiffs’ sought to implement policies to protect students whose native language was not English in order to create an equal learning environment. For example, English was the only means of communication in the classrooms and students who did not speak or understand the language would find themselves at a disadvantage. Due to the lack of modifications in place, students would eventually fall through the cracks of the school system. This case brought

To many opponents of the bilingual education program that existed prior to these laws, encouraging bilingualism and biculturalism threatened the very definition of the American culture, which, they believed, promoted the values and language of a common group (Weisman and Hanson,2002). ). These proponents of the initiatives believed that new immigrants must abandon their native languages and cultural practices to fully assimilate into U.S. society. They feared that Spanish-speaking immigrants in particular had been "clinging" to their language and resisting learning English (Mora,2009).

Title III law is on language instruction for limited English proficient and immigrant students. Title III is part of the no child left behind act. The Act states that LEP students must not only attain English proficiency but simultaneously meet the same academic standards as their English-speaking peers in all content areas. Federal funding is given to meet these requirements. There are also regulations regarding parent communication. Any school receiving title III funds is obligated to inform families and communities of LEP and immigrant children about their ESL programming and how they can assist in their child’s progress (Wikipedia 2016). Also, schools are required to provide communication in the family’s native language.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how the Federal Bilingual Education Act of 1968, ended the War on Poverty. Bilingual education is the use of more than one language to deliver curriculum content. The bilingual education system is designed for students to become proficient in English, and also encourage students to become bi-cultural; and function in two, or more linguistic and cultural groups. The policy expressed U.S commitment to the needs of the growing number of children in the public schools, whose first language was not English. In 1968, the government passed the Bilingual Education Act, which required language minority students to be taught in both their native language and English. I myself had to undergo English as a

In the article, Speak Spanish, You’re in America!: El Huracan over language and Culture, Juan Gonzalez, a journalist and broadcaster of the daily show, Democracy Now, describes how bilingualism has impacted the United States’ modern education system. He describes an amendment that would constitute English as the official in the United States, which he believes can be a potential threat to the educational system. Gonzalez suggests that instead of having an amendment that constitutes English as the national language, American schools should implement Spanish to highlight the importance of being bilingualism in the American educational system. A constitutional amendment declaring English as the national language would be damaging to bilingual students because it would limit their capability of communicating in English or their native language, and therefore they have would fall behind in classes and will not succeed in the American educational system. To highlight the importance of bilingualism, even more the educational system should implement a variety of languages.

The primary goal of any school district’s English Language Learner policy should be to ensure that all students receive equitable access to the curriculum. The Office of Civil Rights memorandum (May 25, 1970) requires school districts to take affirmative steps to provide equal access to instructional program for students with limited English proficiency. The Illinois Constitution guarantees every child from kindergarten through grade 12, access to a free public education; which means, regardless of a child’s home language, he/she deserves a free and appropriate education (Illinois State Board of Education, 1998).

When it comes to students that have not officially mastered the English Language, schools should give students the opportunity to learn it. Schools are supposed to arrange services for students who are not familiar with the English Language. All students should be treated with the same respect and all students should receive some type of education no matter what their background comes from. English is a language that is very popular today in this world. When it comes to legal obligations for students that are English language learners, every student is supposed to have equal access to their education. It was mentioned that in the year of 1970 the Federal Office for Civil Rights, distributed a letter to all school’s districts mentioning that

Another one of the most famous authors, Edgar Allan Poe, like Richard Connell his background has greatly impacted his writing. January 19, 1809 in Boston, Massachusetts Edgar Allan Poe was born to parents with careers with acting, and who unfortunately died when he was three years old. Being raised by John and Frances Allan he was their foster child, at the time they lived in Richmond, Virginia. John was a tobacco exported and Poe was sent to the best boarding schools and then went to the University of Virginia. He academically advanced, but soon was encouraged to leave after one year due to debt. This was because his foster father John, didn’t pay Poe’s debts of gambling (“Edgar Allan Poe”). Poe fell into a great deal of debt and sorrow from

Since the early 1800’s, our nation has been trying to adopt English as a universal language among our citizens. Louisiana, in 1807, was the first state to begin this movement in its constitution as a condition to admittance to the Union. After the Mexican-American War in 1848, there were several tens of thousands Spanish speaking civilians that moved into our country, and this didn’t include the other non-English speaking people who lived among us. While we remain to be a free country, we are a people who needs to be on the same page. Laws and education need to remain consistent throughout.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was the initial drive for bilingual education in the United States. It granted financial assistance to the public. The Act outlawed discrimination based on race, color or national origin in programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance. The Act symbolized a less negative attitude to ethnic groups, and possibilities for increasing tolerance of ethnic languages, at least in the Federal level (Baker, 2011).

School principals will find in the following lawsuits the legal framework to provide educational services to ELLs in public schools. Baker (1997) points out that a landmark case in favor of bilingual education in the United States was a lawsuit in 1970. The case was a class-action suit brought by the parents of nearly 3000 Chinese students against the San Francisco School District (Lyons, 1990). This case originated that in 1974 the Unites States Supreme Court handed down its only substantive decision regarding the responsibilities of school districts serving ELLs (Lyons, 1990). The court indicated that under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, the Chinese students were entitled to receive specific support to allow them full participation in the school program (Crawford, 1989). This case was known as Lau v. Nichols and its verdict outlawed English submersion programs for language minority students, and resulted in nationwide ‘Lau Remedies’ (Baker, 1997). Lyons (1990) writes that the ‘Lau Remedies’ specified how to identify and evaluate language minority students, determine appropriate instruction, decide when ELLs were ready for mainstream, and determine the professional standards expected of teachers serving language minority students. Under the Lau Remedies school districts were encouraged to provide

to Baker (1997), this legislation was designed to assist Spanish-speaking students who were failing in school. Senator Yarborough explained that the bill was needed because of the failure of the school system to educate Spanish-speaking students that was reflected in comparative dropout rates (Lyons, 1990). The Hispanic dropout rate was close to 75 percent in certain areas (Ovando et al., 2006). In 1968, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Bilingual Education Act into law, which indicated the first commitment made by the U.S. government to address the special needs that ELLs bring to public schools (Crawford, 1989). According to Wiese & Garcia (2001), the BEA of 1968 represented the main federal legislative endeavor to provide ELLs with equal educational opportunities.

Movements for bilingual education rose in 1974 with the Equal Education Opportunity Act and Bingual Education Act, which ordered federally funded schools to meet special educational needs for students not proficient in English. Unfortunately, dropout rates and lack of English-language proficiency alarmed the states that these bilingual programs were not efficent. Because of this, arguments between English-only advocates and supporters of bilingual educations emerged. Articles such as the New York Times have proclaimed the failures of bilingual education. One cause could be the resistance of immigrants from English language acquisition, who hold tight onto their first language and culture. Despite this, studies show that generations