History of English-Language Learner Instructional Policies

1954 1970 1992 2006 2019

Brown v. Diana v. 1974 Flores v. Arizona Arizona
Board of Board of Lau v. State of House Bill Senate Bill
Education Education Nichols Arizona 2064 1014

1968 1974 1981 2000 2015

Bilingual Equal Casteñeda Arizona Every
Education Education v. Pickard Proposition Student
Act Opportunity 203 Succeeds
Act Act

 Brown v. Board of Education overturned Plessy v. Ferguson, prohibiting segregation in schools by nullifying the claim
“separate but equal.”

o This might be a stretch because neither I nor my parents were born yet in 1954, but I’d like to touch upon the
notion of “separate but equal.” Take a gallery walk project, for example, a summative assessment at the end of
the year where students compile all their learning throughout the semester and present their accomplishments on
a display board. For students who come from wealthy families, this is not a big deal. For disadvantaged students
whose families are members of the lower socioeconomic division, however, school supplies may not be a priority
for the family, especially when the students’ parents are struggling to make ends meet and prioritize other
purchases to satisfy their physiological need for survival. Certainly, both projects may be equal content-wise, but
with the wealthy student’s glorious project setting the “bar” so high, a teacher may inadvertently set an
unattainable standard of expectation for the less fortunate students.

o As a teacher, considering these socioeconomic factors when evaluating assignments is crucial in ensuring
fairness, and it also shows students that their economic capacity does not entirely define them, if at all. Perhaps,
providing resources for all the students’ projects will help level the “playing field” and narrow the gaps, or
digitizing the project may provide all students with a more equal selection of resources for completing the
assignment.
 o I suppose the sentiment of “separate is not equal” also applies toward separating ELLs from their native-speaking
peers. Although both groups of students may be taught the same material, the social ramifications to being
isolated (including the benefits to learning associated with being mixed with other students) and quarantined from
others is not something an educator can afford to neglect, as many ELLs likely suffer from some degree of social
anxiety and are aware they are not on the same “level” on the social hierarchy as their native-speaking peers.
Social anxiety can make a student (or anyone, for that matter) feel cramped, uncomfortable and insane—with
fear exaggerating one's perception of both how much others are paying attention and the potential harshness of
their judgments.

 Also known as Title VII, the Bilingual Education Act recognized the needs of English-language learners by creating
equal education opportunities for low-income ELLs and allowed educators to use the student’s native language in
instruction.

o As a future English teacher, being allowed to use the student’s native language in instruction would open more
opportunities for me to accommodate the student’s needs when teaching him or her English and also allows me
to improve the student’s learning by drawing connections between words and concepts in English and the
student’s native language.

 Diana v. Board of Education declared testing for special education consideration must be conducted in the student’s
native language to prevent ELLs from being mistakenly placed in special education classes.

o As teachers, we want our students to be intellectually challenged and strive to achieve their best. Considering
that, this includes properly placing students in classes that match their intellectual capabilities. Not knowing how
to speak a language does not signify a student is mentally handicapped, and to best accommodate a student’s
needs, the language used in our assignments and assessments must be clear, concise and understandable by
the students.

 The Equal Education Opportunity Act (EEOA) is a federal law prohibiting discriminatory conduct and segregation based
on color or origin. Additionally, the EEOA also required school districts to take action to overcome barriers that impede
students from equal participation in education, such as language barriers.
 o One of the goals in the classroom is to develop an inclusive sense of community. Not knowing how to speak a
language should not disqualify a student from participating and feeling welcomed in the classroom. To help the
student assimilate into the classroom culture and with their peers more easily, teachers should prioritize helping
the emerging bilingual student learn the language so the student may feel more inclined to participate as a
valued member in the classroom and benefit from all educational services provided by the school.

 Lau v. Nichols mandated schools must address an ELL’s language and/or communication barrier, ruling the lack of
supplemental language instruction for ELLs violates the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

 Casteñeda v. Pickard established the “Casteñeda Test,” assessing whether schools followed the Lau v. Nichols ruling.
To assess whether schools are complying, the principles must be based on “a sound educational theory,” be
“implemented effectively,” with adequate resources and personnel, and must be evaluated whether the efforts are
effectively benefiting ELLs.

 Flores v. State of Arizona challenged state funding for ELLs, mandating educators must undergo training relating to the
education of ELLs.

o In states such as California and Arizona where the number of ELL students is rising (and because education is a
constitutional right), it is more important than ever that teachers know how to differentiate their instruction to
teach both native speakers and ELLs. Today, “teach[ing] the middle” is becoming a less viable option because
the gap between “the middle” and other ends of the spectrum is steadily expanding.

o I believe here is a good place to mention my parent’s relevancy to the dates on this timeline. When my mother
was 28 years old, she emigrated to the United States from Vietnam in 1986 and was taught the English language
in an adult school. Despite the Bilingual Education Act allowing educators to use the ELL’s native language in
instruction, my mother recalls being taught only in English, along with studying and heavily relying on a
dictionary. Perhaps learning a new language as an adult differs from learning a new language as a child.
Certainly, science has shown children are more receptive to and grasp concepts sooner than adults, but adults
also have a more developed sense of society and survival. If my mother learned English soon after she was
born, I predict she would not have taken certain measures in learning English, such as forcing herself to read
dictionary entries and memorizing commonly-used phrases until they became emblazed into her mind.
 Proposition 203 established an English-only status and limited the methods of instruction for ELLs. The proposition
mandated subject matter must be initially taught in English and maintained SEI programs for ELLs for no more than one
year. Foreign language classes remain a possibility for students with special needs and for students who are already
fluent in English (to clarify content instruction), and when parental waivers are signed.

 House Bill 2064 mandates a minimum of four hours of English-language development (ELD) classes for ELLs.

o Given the mandate of at least four hours of ELD classes, this bill begs the question, do the ELD classes affect an
emergent bilingual’s opportunity to receive instruction in other content areas?

o Perhaps here is a relevant moment to include the “No Child Left Behind” (NCLB) act from 2001-2015. Besides
promoting STEM and math/science proficiency, NCLB provided SEI funding for ELL classes to ensure emergent
bilingual students do not recede in their content and subject knowledge by simultaneously delivering both
language and subject-area instruction.

 The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) granted ELLs more equity in education: states were now required to create a
uniform process for identifying, educating and transitioning ELLs into general education, schools can use academic
growth of ELLs for accountability purposes during the student’s first two years, schools now must incorporate English
proficiency rates into their accountability framework for Title I, and ELLs now impact a school’s ratings if the bilingual
students are not performing well, flagging the school for improvement. Additionally, the ESSA provided support to
secondary schools with below-average graduation rates where one-third of students do not graduate.

o Some teachers assess students differently; some educators assess by how much a student has improved since
the start, while others gravitate toward the traditional numbers/percentages and their corresponding letter grades.
Certainly, it’s not fair to the other teachers if the school is flagged for improvement because the ELL students are
diminishing the school’s overall rating. This may be a biased opinion, but I find measuring student growth to be a
more optimal method of assessment. By allowing schools to use the academic growth of ELLs for the first two
years of assessment, this provides both parties with a win-win situation. The school has the sense of urgency to
educate and progress ELL students through the state-instituted process for transitioning ELLs into general
education because ELL academic performance will eventually impact the school’s ratings, and the proponents of
the ESSA can rest assured knowing ELLs now play a more substantial role in schools.
 Arizona Senate Bill 1014 mandates schools must utilize, “adopt and approve research-based” models of SEI, along with
support from the department of education to help schools comply with the article. ELD classes now must be at least 120
minutes per day for K-5 students and at least 100 minutes per day for students in grades 6-12. Additionally, instruction
must include oral and written language, access to complex language content, and include strategies for parent
engagement.

o Just because a student is classified as an English-language learner shouldn’t mean he or she is incapable of
being intellectually challenged. By also introducing ELLs to “complex language content,” the emerging bilingual
students are on par with their native-speaking peers by also receiving mentally stimulating content. Additionally,
including strategies for parent engagement is another beneficial revision for ELLs. By calling upon and including
parental involvement, this accelerates an ELL’s journey to learning a new language by exposing the emerging
bilingual to additional instances where he or she may practice the new language. Ultimately, helping the
emerging bilingual become a proficient bilingual student helps him or her overcome their language barrier and
begin developing easier relationships with their peers and perhaps, help the student to develop a greater
appreciation for schooling.