Return-Path: <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id h84Gbx724071; Thu, 4 Sep 2003 12:37:59 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 12:37:59 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <000d01c37302$0fc4f240$304cdc42@trudy> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "Ken Taber" <kentaber@inetgenesis.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-ESL:9398] Re: Accept English Only donation? X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; Status: O Content-Length: 5009 Lines: 87 Joe, I'm not sure I understand your question. So, please rephrase your question if I don't answer the question you are asking. I will try to make some points on the subject in hopes that somewhere in my answer I speak to your question. State legislatures and Congress make laws that affect education. Sometimes the laws that are written are considered unconstitutional for a variety of reasons. Sometimes that only way to solve these differences in the law in through the federal courts. Last Saturday, I wrote on the listserv the Legal History of LEP Programs in the US. The entire history is surrounded by the conflict of laws that are left to various legal interpretations. Laws, even unjust laws, stay on the books until the federal courts append the laws. For this to happen, someone must challenge the unjust laws. English-Only Laws, in themselves, may or may not be unconstitutional; however, they will stay on the books until challenged. US. laws and state laws, in theory, should have no conflicts and all laws passed by Congress, in theory, should uphold the decisions of the Supreme Court. When they don't a legal remedy is the only recourse. Take a look at the previous posting and let me know if I've answered your question. We, as ESOL teachers, must have a working knowledge of the legal history of LEP programs in the US. Also, visit the following website: www.lep.gov The Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights is responsible to make sure that states and individual school districts follow their guidelines. However, when they don't... any citizen, or immigrant, can file an OCR complaint. They also may file a federal lawsuit. In addition, the US Attorney General may also file a complaint against any state that does not comply with the OCR guidelines or if their state laws are in violation of federal law. The federal government can take away state funding if states continue to not be in compliance. But nothing happens to any law when left unchallenged. Hope this answers your questions. Funding of all K-12 LEP programs is supported by the federal government and states are held accountable to uphold the No Child Left Behind Act. Adult Ed. LEP programs are held accountable by the federal government but work by a slightly different set of funding rules. The term bilingual education refers to 50% English instruction. Most given in the 1st 4 years with an exist strategy. Other programs, like Structured English Immersion use a 70% English instruction with the 30% given to newcomers who have not mastered social English (BICS). Sheltered English Immersion is English instruction with ESOL modifications in Content areas. Research has shown all to be successful with proper teacher training. Research does say that parents are more involved with bilingual education than the other two. All programs allow for the teacher to teach in the student's primary language. States that are now experiencing an influx of foreign-born students, do not have enough bilingual educators to run an effective bilingual education program. Many do not have adequate staff to train teachers so their programs are in compliance with OCR guidelines leaving LEP students with a dead end approach called English Submersion. This sink or swim philosophy is outlawed by the Supreme court because it is not considered "appropriate action" to giving foreign-born students a meaningful education. It is this same philosophy that the English Only Movement promotes. Federal Law does not mandate bilingual education. It allows of any LEP program that can show results according to the research of ESL experts in the field. And there is no valid research that shows that English-Only is better, no, this comes from the misinformation of the English Only Movement. They write their own conclusions to research from notable scholars and state their own self-created myth as fact. However, there is no law against free speech. The English Only Movement has free speech protection, even if they are wrong, they have a right to promote their propaganda. They do not have the right to exclude foreign born citizens from equal protection under our laws and infringe on the rights of any minority in this country. Welcome to America! Ken Taber kentaber@inetgenesis.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Little" <fyi@americanliteracy.com> To: "Multiple recipients of list" <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 10:17 AM Subject: [NIFL-ESL:9394] Re: Accept English Only donation? > > "English-Only Laws anywhere in this country are a threat to > > Bilingual Education everywhere!" > Ken & all, > Sorry to do this in two emails. Do u mean English-Only laws anywhere in this country are a threat to the federal or state funding of bilingual education, right? I'm not terribly familiar with the English-Only campaign but my gestimate given our federal situation is that a U.S. law would not nix state funding and a state law could not prevent federal or other state.joe >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 11 2004 - 12:16:23 EST