Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.


Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "COMPETENCY 001 HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF BILINGUAL EDUCATION"— Presentation transcript:

The bilingual teacher understand the foundation of bilingual education and the concepts of bilingualism and biculturalism and applies this knowledge to create an effective environment for students in the bilingual education program. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF BILINGUAL EDUCATION Colonial Period. 13 colonies were founded by people from many languages background: Welsh French Swedish German Dutch English Official documents during the Revolutionary War were printed in: English – German – French 17th to 19th Centuries. 1600’s – 1800’s: multi languages other than English were used as the language of instruction in U.S. schools. 1694: German schools were in operation in Philadelphia. By 1890, children were receiving instruction in: German: Pennsylvania, Maryland, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, Nebraska, Colorado and Oregon (about 600,000). Swedish, Norwegian and Danish: Wisconsin, Illinois, Minnesota, Iowa, the Dakotas, Nebraska and Washington.

2 Polish and Italian : Wisconsin
Dutch: Michigan French: Louisiana Czech: Texas Spanish: Southwest 2nd half of 19th century: many parochial and public schools in large cities were offering Dual Language Education. The bilingual education movement was so strong in the U.S. that the state legislatures in Ohio (1836), Louisiana (1847) and New Mexico (1848) passed laws authorizing instruction in two languages. Military conflicts in Europe restricted the immigration of speakers of the colonial languages and the influence of French, Dutch and German decreased and English emerged as the national language and bilingual education as official policy disappeared from public view. 20th Century: First part of the 20th century new immigrant did not enjoy the linguistic flexibility of earlier immigrants. New immigrant were expected to Americanize, learn English, and abandon their native cultures and languages. 1919: 15 states laws called for English-only instruction English Language Learners (ELLs) were punished for using their language on the playgrounds or in the classrooms. Dual Language Instruction virtually disappeared in the U.S.

3 1920 -1960 – SUBMERSION – SINK OR SWIN:
ELLs were submersed in English without any support through their first language (L1) SINK OR SWIN resulted in academic failure for many ELLs. 1940’s as part of the Americanization program, English as a foreign language was develop as a field of study at the University of Michigan and in the 1960’s the field evolved into what is known today as English as a Second Language (ESL). 1966: Teachers on English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) was founded to study and improve methods and strategies to teach English. 1953: a document publish by the United Nations (UN) title The Use of the Vernacular Language in Education provide the foundation for the rebirth of the dual language instruction in the U.S, establishing one of the cardinal points in bilingual education. This document indirectly launched the development of the bilingual education program if the 1960’s: “ It is axiomatic that the best medium to teach a child is his mother language” 1959: The Cuban Revolution and the resulting mass exodus of Cubans to the U.S. The U.S. government sponsored the creation of the 1st Dual Language Program of the 1960s in Dade County, Florida. 1964: based on the success in Florida, Texas began experimenting with bilingual education using local funding. The Civil Rights Act 1964 Title VI, specifically prohibit institutions receiving federal funding from discrimination on the grounds of race, color, or national origin. This legislation was used as a foundation for the court cases that emerged in the 1970’s seeking support for the education al language minority students.

4 Intervention of the Federal Government
1965: Congress enacted the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) to provide financial support for public education: Title I: specifically helped children from low socioeconomic backgrounds. 1968: Title VII: The Bilingual Education Act: Provided funding for programs to address the needs of ELLs, prepare bilingual teacher disseminate materials and promote parental involvement. The legislations was compensatory in the nature and did not specify a program model The ESEA legislation regulated for 31 years the types of services and programs to address the needs of language minority students in the nation and in 2001it was replaced with the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) Key changes of the legislation and the effects on bilingual education programs: 1973 – 1974: Bilingual education was officially mentioned as the model to address the needs of ELLs. They didn’t addressed the maintenance of L1 versus the transition to the second language (L2). 1978: The legislation specified the transitional nature on the approach, which led to the creation of the early –exit transitional bilingual education programs, but also prohibit the use of federal funding to create language developmental/maintenance programs. 1984: The law allocated funding for alternative programs that did not require minority languages for instruction, also eliminated the 1978 restriction to the use of funding for maintenance programs and provide special grants to promote “developmental/maintenance bilingual education programs”. Allocated more funding for teacher preparation, and general terms broke away from a compensatory model to an enrichment approach.

5 No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)
1994: The ESEA was renamed the Improving America's School Act and School Reform. Continued providing remedial and compensatory education to poor students. Allowed the participation of English proficiency students in the bilingual education program, which open the door to the implementation of two-way dual language programs Continued sanctioning the use of funding to support developmental/maintenance bilingual education programs and provided special funding for higher education to prepare bilingual teachers. No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) The NCLB, replaced the ESEA in 2001, contains 2 elements: Title I: requires school districts to hire highly qualified teachers. Since 2006, school districts are required to provide evidence that teachers serving low-income language minority students are fully certify and proficient in the languages used for instruction. Title III: The Bilingual Education Act was renamed English Language Acquisition, Language Enhancement, and Academic Achievement Act. The aim of the legislation is to promote English Language development, but it allows for local flexibility in the implementation of programs.

6 Key provisions of the NCLB legislation
Consolidate services and funding for language minority students with the Emergency Immigrant Education Program. Make Local Education Agencies (LEAs) responsible for the English language growth of ELLs. Have the flexibility to choose the method of instruction schools use to teach ELLs. Provide funs to the states based on the formula using the number of ELLs and immigrants students identify in the state and reported to the federal government. Recognize the important role of the parents in the education of their children. LEAs must inform parents of the rationale for placing students in special language programs, and parents in turn have the right to agree or disagree with the decision. Parents have the option of blocking the placement by completing a parental denial form. Require school districts to use 95%of the funding for direct instruction for ELLs. Establish mandatory testing for reading and language arts for ELLs who have attended school in the U.S. for at least 3 consecutive years. Mandate a federal accountability system to ensure that school districts provide effective instruction to ELLs. Based on the accountability system, districts must develop Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) to monitor students progress in attaining English proficiency and notify parents if the program fails to meet the AMAOs for two consecutive years. After 4 years of failing, the state will require the LEAs to modify its curriculum, programs and methods of instruction. If the situation is not solved, the entity can lose federal funding.

Federal Court Cases Serna v. Portales (1972 and 1974) a federal court mandated that the school district in Portales, New Mexico, implement a bilingual-bicultural curriculum, revise assessment procedures to monitor Hispanic Students’ academic achievements, and recruit bilingual personnel. Lau v. Nichols (1974) Kinney Lau, initiated a class action suit against the San Francisco Unified School District seeking support for Chinese students who were failing school because they could not understand English. In 1974, the U.S. Supreme Court, based on the Civil Right Act of 1964 and the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) Memorandum of 1970, found in favor of the plaintiffs. However, the court did not specify a remedy and left it up to the district to decide how to comply with the mandate of providing “meaningful education” to students of limited English proficiency. The San Francisco Unified School District agree to provide bilingual-bicultural education. This case became the facto tool for the implementation of bilingual education in the U.S. Aspira v. New York (1974) The court mandated a citywide assessment and identification of students in need of special language services and the implementation of a district wide bilingual education program to address identified needs.

8 Rios v. Reed (1977) A federal court ruled that the Patchogue-Medford School District in New York had violated the rights of ELLs by providing a “half-hearted” bilingual program that relied mostly on ESL and did not include a bicultural component. The court upheld the importance of teaching English to students but also recognize the need to provide meaningful education while accomplishing the language goal. This ruling clearly called for the use of L1 instruction for the content areas while developing English proficiency. Castaneda v. Pickard (1981) when the school district of Raymondville, Texas, was charged with violating the Equal Educational Opportunity Act (EEOA) of The 5th Court of a Appeals mandated a three-step process to develop quality bilingual education programs. The court ruled that program implementation must be based on sound research, with adequate resorts and opportunities for students to have access to the full curriculum. U.S V. the State of Texas (1981 and 1982) U.S District judge William Wayne Justice ordered the state of Texas to offer a bilingual education program for Mexican American students in kindergarten through grade 12. Although the ruling was reversed a year later, the case led the governor of Texas to appoint a bilingual education task force to draft a state plan for bilingual education. Plyler v. Doe (1982) guarantees the right of undocumented immigrants to free public education. In 1994, California voters passes Proposition 187 in an attempt to slow down immigration. It required school personnel to report to law enforcement agencies and the federal Immigration and Naturalization Service children or personnel unable to prove their legal immigration status. Based on Plyler v. Doe, the reporting requirements of Proposition 187 were declared unconstitutional. The judge ruled that immigration is a federal responsibility and the states do not have the option of establishing their own system.

FOR CIVIL RIGHTS Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Title VI prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin in any program receiving federal funding. Office for Civil Rights Memorandum of 1970: issued this memorandum to school official nation wide, requiring districts to offer appropriate instruction to address the educational needs of language minority students. The document also prohibit the use of data relying strictly on language as the key reason for assigning students to special education programs. Equal Educational Opportunities Act (EEOA)of 1974: Prohibits states receiving federal funds from denying equal education opportunity to people base in race, color, sex, or national origin. This civil right statute provided additional support for the Lau ruling and put more pressure on districts to offer meaningful education to ELLs. The EEOA applied to all schools, not just those receiving federal funding. Lau Remedies in 1975: This document describes the process for identification and evaluation of student in bilingual education programs. It furthers established that school districts must not assign students to classes for the mentally retarded on the basis of criteria that measures language development n English. This document also mandated bilingual education for elementary schools and ESL instruction for older students. Further, it described the guidelines for exiting students from the program and the professional standards required for teacher participation in the program. In 1980, Senator S. I. Hayakawa of California initiated a campaign to declare English the official language of the U.S. and to eliminate bilingual education (English-only movement) English-plus movement (1985): was funded by the League of United Latin American Citizen (LULAC) and the Spanish American League Against Discrimination (SALAD)

10 English-plus movement (1985): was funded by the League of United Latin American Citizen (LULAC) and the Spanish American League Against Discrimination (SALAD)


Similar presentations

Ads by Google