School... what are our rights?

Currently I’m researching Federal and State law with regard to English Language Learners. I am trying to become more educated so I can influence the services Daniel will receive from the school district. The district thus far has been quite consistent; he will be streamlined with 45 minutes a day of ESL. I don’t find this adequate so I will continue to research. I believe Daniel and others like him should receive some assistance and service in his primary language. Here are a couple of legal presidents:

"Today, education is…a principal instrument in awakening the child to cultural values, in preparing him (her) for later professional training, and in helping him (her) to adjust normally to his (her) environment. In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he (she) is denied the opportunity of an education."
--U.S. Supreme Court, 1954: Brown vs. The Board of Education

"No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits or otherwise be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance from the department of Health, Education and Welfare."
-- Title VI, Civil Rights Act, 1964

"No state shall deny equal educational opportunity to an individual on account of his or her race, color, sex, or national origin, by the failure of an educational agency to take appropriate action to overcome language barriers that impede equal participation by its students in its instructional programs." -- excerpt from the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974, 20 U.S.C. § 1703

The United States Department of Education Office for Civil Rights (OCR) has the responsibility for enforcing Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin in programs and activities that receive federal financial assistance.

Title VI has been interpreted by U. S. Federal Courts to prohibit denial of equal access to education because of a student’s limited proficiency in English. Thus Title VI protects those students whose English language skills are limited to the point that they cannot participate in, or benefit from, regular or special education school instructional programs.

During the late 1960s, OCR became aware that many school districts around the country made little or no provision for the education of students who were unable to understand English. In an attempt to resolve this problem, the former Department of Heath, Education and Welfare issued a memorandum, on 25 May 1979, to clarify Title VI requirements concerning the responsibility of school districts to provide equal education opportunity to English Language Learners (ELL).

The 25 May memorandum explained that Title VI is violated if:

1. Programs for students whose English is less than proficient are not designed to teach them English as soon as possible or operate as a dead end track.

"Where inability to speak and understand the English language excludes national origin-minority group children from effective participation in the educational program offered by a school district, the district must take affirmative steps to rectify the language deficiency in order to open its instructional program to these students."
-- 25 May memorandum

2. Parents whose English is limited do not receive notices and other information from schools in a language they can understand.

"School districts must have the responsibility to adequately notify national origin-minority group parents of school activities which are called to the attention of other parents. Such notice, in order to be adequate, may have to be provided in a language other than English."
-- 25 May memorandum

3. School districts cannot assign student to special education program solely on the grounds of the student’s inability to speak English.

"School districts must not assign national origin-minority group students to classes for the mentally retarded on the basis of criteria which essentially measure or evaluate English language skills: nor may school districts deny national origin-minority group children access to college preparatory courses on a basis directly related to the failure of the school system to inculcate English language skills."
-- 25 May memorandum

This means that districts must provide language instruction that is meaningful and gives non-English speaking students both the social and academic language skills they need to succeed academically and that districts must provide communication to the parents of such students in the language of the home.

In 1974 the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the 25 May memorandum as a valid interpretation of the requirement of Title VI in Lau vs. Nichols.

"Basic English Skills are at the very core of what…public schools teach. Imposition of a requirement that, before a child can effectively participate in the educational program, he must already have acquired those basic skills, is to make a mockery of public education."