Us Language Education Policy

Front 1

"no-policy policy"

Back 1

A laissez-faire liberal market attitude that establishes no official language but in effect allows the linguistic group with the most power to dominate and set policy. An absence of strong legal protections.

Front 2

Meyer v. Nebraska (1923)

Back 2

Reversed the conviction of a teacher deemed guilty of educating children in a language other than English, which was illegal in Nebraska at the time. Law was declared in violation of the 14th amendment (individual liberty).

Front 3

Farrington v. Tokushige (1927)

Back 3

Court struck down a law in Hawaii that required English to be the medium of instruction, which had outlawed private foreign language schools.

Front 4

Lau v. Nichols (1974)

Back 4

Stated that schools must accommodate English language learners.

Front 5

Equal Education Opportunities Act (1974)

Back 5

Required schools to develop programs for English language learners.

Front 6

Castaneda v. Pickard (1981)

Back 6

Clarified the EEOA.
Established a 3-part requirement for bilingual programs:
1. Program must be based on sound educational theory.
2. Program must be implemented effectively with appropriate resources.
3. Program must be proven effective at surmounting language barriers.

Front 7

Bilingual Education Act (1968-1994)

Back 7

Provided funding for research on bilingual ed and bilingual programs. Cited the importance of L1 instruction for English language learners.

Front 8

Rubio v. Turner Unified School District (Kansas, 1983)

Back 8

Student suspended for speaking Spanish at school. Court found no law guaranteeing right to speak a foreign language at a public school.

Front 9

Proposition 227 (California, 1998)

Back 9

Banned bilingual education as unequal. Substituted with sheltered English immersion, where nearly all instruction takes place in English.

Front 10

No Child Left Behind (2002)

Back 10

Legislation emphasizing English proficiency. Renamed BEA the "English language acquisition, language enhancement, and academic achievement act."

Front 11

Horne v. Flores (Arizona, 2009)

Back 11

In 2001, Arizona was prohibited from funding English Language Learning programs. In 2009, the court cancelled this order, but with strong dissent. Although many argued that now the court could take action to protect linguistic minorities, it has not done so.

Front 12

Disincentive to learn English

Back 12

In sheltered immersion bilingual programs, students are mainstreamed as soon as they reach a certain level of English proficiency. At this point, L1 instruction stops and the student is no longer protected by this law.

Front 13

Neoliberalism

Back 13

Argues that supranational organizations (such as the IMF, the World Bank, and the UN) replace state governments as holders of power.

Front 14

Market efficiency and English

Back 14

Global English (as a lingua franca) is "economically optimal" because it facilitates communication and trade. BUT this is true only when language is defined solely as a means of communication. Other values (cultural, historical, and aesthetic) are not counted in market terms. Neither is the desire of future generations to preserve a language.

Front 15

Globalization of English

Back 15

Larger than linguistic imperialism, the expansion of English also includes covert power structures that provide both top-down (institutional requirements) and bottom-up (individual benefits) incentives/pressures to learn English. Bordieu describes globalization as "a policy aiming to universalize particular interests...to extend to the entire world the economic and cultural model that favors these powers most, while simultaneously presenting it as a norm, a requirement, a fatality, a universal destiny" (2001).

Front 16

Lingua franca subsidies

Back 16

Native speakers of English do not have to invest in learning the global lingua franca and can use that time/energy in other ways. Therefore learners of English should have that education subsidized and, possibly, be compensated for the time/energy they are unable to spend on other things (a negative externality).

Front 17

Policy suggestions

Back 17

1. Multilingualism is a global norm and should be institutionalized.
2. Additive language education should be practiced.
3. Individual positive language rights should be respected.