Summary: It's All About The Law

It’s All About the Law

School diversity is not a surprise as presently a large number of the educational population is comprised of students from many different cultural backgrounds. According to research conducted by Education Week (2011) there was a large growth of English language learners in the United Sates over the 21st century. This rise mandated the need for public schools throughout the nation to assist English language learners with the instruction of special language.
Legislation has provided the rise of laws that mandate states to provide quality education to English language learners. With these laws and initiatives arise issues, challenges, and benefits. In the case Meyer v. Nebraska (1923) Supreme Court Jude James McReynolds penned,
“The protection of the United States Constitution extends to all, to those who speak other languages as well as to those born with English on the tongue" (Walsh, 2009). This legal decision provided parents with a constitutional right to
influence and strengthen the education of their children. The law evolved as a result of the state of Nebraska preventing any curriculum that was not English based. This was later deemed unconstitutional and therefore the law evolved.
The State of California in June of 1998 passed Proposition 227, also known as the English in Public Schools Initiative (1999). With the evolution of this legislation came a change in the way Limited English Proficient students were taught. This legislation not only decreased the amount of time these students stayed in special classes, it required California public schools to educate this population of students in special classes that are taught nearly in all English (1999). Drafted by Ron Unz, California Proposition 227 eliminated bilingual classes in a lot of cases. This legislation also ended a great deal of programs in the state of California that previously established special classes to this population over a several year span that required these students to change from special classes to regular education classes once they obtained acceptable knowledge of English. Because it was determined that this population of non-English or limited English learner would be placed in special immersion classes for a “normal” period of less than one year, it was the hope that these students would be able to mainstream into the classroom setting where English would be the primary language.
Passed in 2002 the state of Massachusetts passed Question 2 where bilingual education programs were replaced with instruction of English immersion classes for a one year period (2010). Opponents of this regulation argued that it would allow educators and teachers to be sued for teaching a language other than English but despite the opposition, the legislation was approved. The Massachusetts Question 2 legislation required public school aged students be taught all subjects in English, regardless of if they are in the same cultural, ethnic, or native language group or not.
In 2000 the state of Arizona mandated with Proposition 203 an initiative that dismantled most bilingual education in Arizona (Krashen, 2012).With this legislation structured immersion was developed to instruct language minority children in English in one year by allowing them to do classroom work in the mainstream in English. As a result of this legislation, along with the Flores v. Arizona case, Arizona mandates certified teachers and personnel receive Structured English Immersion certification.
A lot of attention is paid to a diverse group of students, the English Language Learners, who according to Jenkins (2008), is the most rapidly growing group of students in the United States.
Most agree that all students need to learn the English language and be provided full access to the English curriculum so that they can be academically successful. In order to be academically successful, students must also understand English instruction and by not receiving this instruction in their native language, frustration occurs. How can students learn if they do not understand the language? An issue with state initiatives and laws is that students do not receive instruction in their native language and that is a problem. Olsen (2010) maintains that English Language Learners will require a minimum of seven years to develop proficiency in English. This is met with much opposition as students are required to receive English assessments at various times to test
proficiency. According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress, also known as NAEP, there is a wide range in reading and math in students who are English Language Learners than those who are non- English Language Learners in three mandated English immersion states as compared to states that offer education on a bilingual level (Zehr, 2008). There are various legislations that discuss issues concerning this population of students and despite the legislation all maintain that this population demands and deserves attention in regard to receiving instruction.

References
Jenkins, A. F. (2008). ETS symposium targets ELL assessment. The Hispanic Outlook in Higher Education, 18(14), 28,30-31.
Krashen, S. 2012. Did immersion triumph in Arizona? Culver City, CA: Language Education
Association. Retrieved September 18, 2012 from https://www.sdkrashen.com/articles/arizona/all.html. Olsen, L. (2010). Changing course for long term English learners. Leadership, 40(2), 30-33.
Walsh, M. (2009). ELLs and the law: Statutes, precedent. Education Week, 28(17), 8- 9.
Walsh, M. (2011). Research center: English-Language Learners. Education Week. Retrieved September 18, 2012 from https://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/english-language-learners. Zehr, M. A. (2008). NAEP scores in states that cut bilingual ed. fuel concern on ELLs. Education Week, 27(37), 10.