Bilingualism…It Pays! Hispanics who speak English "very well" and who also speak Spanish tend to have higher incomes than Hispanics that know only English or that know only Spanish. Boswell, Thomas D., Ph.D. (1998). Implications of demographic changes in Florida's public school population; in Creating Florida's Multilingual Global Work Force: Educational Policies and Practices for Students Learning English as a New Language. Fradd, Sandra H., Ph.D. & Lee, Okhee, Ph.D., eds., University of Miami. pp I-1-I-23).
Latino Growth • By the year 2000 Hispanics had become the fastest growing minority group in the U.S. • Their numbers grew by 58% during the 1990’s (from 22.4 million to 35.3 million) • Hispanics now make up 12.5% of U.S. population. They are the largest minority group on U.S. soil. Source: Latino Growth in Metropolitan America: Changing Patterns, New Locations
Latinos as a Force of Urban Renewal • A 2001 study by the Brookings Institute showed population growth in the 100 largest U.S. cities to be “substantial” during the 1990 - 2000 period. • Were it not for the influx of Hispanics, the population of these cities would have declined. Source: Latino Growth in Metropolitan America: Changing Patterns, New Locations
U.S. Population in Metropolitan Areas In 2000, 69% of the entire U.S. population lived in the nation’s 100 largest metropolitan areas Source: Latino Growth in Metropolitan America: Changing Patterns, New Locations
Metropolitan Areas with the Largest Hispanic Population Number of Latinos Percent of Total Pop. Latino Growth (1980-2000) Los Angeles 4,242,213 45% 105% New York 2,339,836 25% 60% Chicago 1,416,584 17% 143% Miami 1,291,737 57% 123% Houston 1,248,586 30% 211% Riverside/San Bern. 1,228,962 38% 324% Orange County 875,579 31% 206% Phoenix 817,012 25% 261% San Antonio 816,037 51% 67% Dallas 810,499 23% 324% Total 15,087,045 31% 130% Source: Latino Growth in Metropolitan America: Changing Patterns, New Locations
Hispanic “Hypergrowth” Areas Source: Latino Growth in Metropolitan America: Changing Patterns, New Locations
Latinos in the Suburbs Suburbs accounted for 61% of the overall growth of the Hispanic population during that same decade. A majority of Hispanics, 54% now reside in U.S. suburban areas. Source: Latino Growth in Metropolitan America: Changing Patterns, New Locations
IDEA 97 Provisions for English Language Learners Limited English Proficient Students
LEP Students There are over 4.4 millionlimited English proficient students in the United States
Rapid Growth 30% growth since 1997
California Almost 1.5 million of these children reside in California
Texas Over 500,000 attend schools in the state of Texas
Florida Over 235,000 attend schools in the state of Florida
New York Almost 230,000 attend schools in the state of New York
LEP Growth in Other States Minnesota 67% Georgia 45% N. Carolina 45% Indiana 43% Arkansas 35% Idaho 34% Alabama 26%
Latinos in the U.S. see Education as the most important issue facing their community Source: Univision / Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates, Inc. & Edelman Worldwide
“Spend more on the public school system to increase teacher pay and reduce class size.” 78% of Hispanics feel the government should: Source: Univision / Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates, Inc. & Edelman Worldwide
Over 50% of Hispanics in the U.S. equate sending their children to college with achieving the American dream Source: Univision / Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates, Inc. & Edelman Worldwide
1920’s – 1960’s English immersion or "sink-or-swim" policies are the dominant method of instruction for language minority students. Few or no remedial services are available, and students are generally held at the same grade level until enough English is mastered to advance in subject areas.
1968 The Bilingual Education Act,Title VII of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1968: Establishes federal policy for bilingual education for economically disadvantaged language minority students; allocates funds for innovative programs; recognizes the unique educational disadvantages faced by non-English speaking students.
1974 Lau v. Nichols: Suit by Chinese parents in San Francisco leads to Supreme Court ruling that identical education does not constitute equal education under the Civil Rights Act. School districts must take "affirmative steps" to overcome educational barriers faced by non-English speakers. Congress passes the Equal Educational Opportunity Act, extending the Lau decision to all schools.
1978 Amendments to Title VII emphasize strictly transitional nature of native language instruction, expand eligibility to students who are limited English proficient (LEP), and permit enrollment of English-speaking students in bilingual programs.
Castañeda v. Pickard (1981) The U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling interpreted the Equal Education Opportunities Act of 1974 statement of "appropriate action" as requiring the meeting of three criteria: (1) programs must be based on "sound educational theory"; (2) they must be "implemented effectively" with adequate resources and personnel, and (3) after a trial period, the program must be evaluated as effective in overcoming language handicaps.
1982 Plyler v. Doe: Supreme court denies the state's right to exclude the children of illegal immigrants from public schools.
1988 Amendments to Title VII include increased funding to state education agencies, expanded funding for "special alternative" programs where only English is used, a three-year limit on participation in most Title VII programs, and the creation of fellowship programs for professional training.
1994 New provisions reinforce professional development programs, increase attention to language maintenance and foreign language instruction, improve research and evaluation at state and local level, supply additional funds for immigrant education, and allow participation of some private school students.
(1998) California’s Proposition 227 All minority language children will be placed in English language classrooms. Children who are limited English proficient will be taught through sheltered English immersion for a period not normally to exceed one year.
2002 Title III of the No Child Left Behind Act replaces Title VII in the reauthorization of the ESEA.
NABE Principles for ESEA Reauthorization • Ensure civil rights of LEP students to access school curriculum while learning English • Support a comprehensive approach to meeting needs of LEP students • Increase and target resources • No federal mandate limiting or prohibiting use of native language for instruction
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 • Public Law 107-110 • Signed into Law January 8, 2002 • Reauthorizes the ESEA for the next 6 years
Title III - Trigger • If funding (appropriations) level is under $650 million, the program remains competitive with few changes.
FY 2002 Formula $665 million (Total Appropriations) 43 million (Professional Development) 5 million (Native Americans) 3.3 million (Outlying Areas) 209 million (Current Grantees) $404.7 million (Total Left to Distribute to States) -
What Schools CAN Do • Implement Appropriate Curriculum • Inform Parents • Provide Resources to Meet Accountability • Professional Development • Work with IHEs • Adapt to Demographics
Section 330.19 (1) • As used in this part, the term native language, if used with reference to an individual of limited English proficiency, means the following: (1)The language normally used by that individual, or, in the case of a child, the language normally used by the parents of the child…
Section 330.19 (2) (2)In all direct contact with a child (including evaluation of the child), the language normally used by the child in the home or learning environment.
Section 300.345 Parent Participation • Use of interpreters or other action, as appropriate. The public agency shall take whatever action is necessary to ensure that the parent understands the proceedings at the IEP meeting, including arranging for an interpreter for parents with deafness or whose native language is other than English.