Education as a Path to Employment

Education…It Pays!

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).

Latinos: Demographic Trends

1945

1995

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. Latino Growth Source: Latino Growth in Metropolitan America: Changing Patterns, New Locations

2050

A 2001 study by the Brookings Institute showed population growth in the 100 largest U.S. cities to be “substantial” during the period. Were it not for the influx of Hispanics, the population of these cities would have declined. Latinos as a Force of Urban Renewal Source: Latino Growth in Metropolitan America: Changing Patterns, New Locations

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 U.S. Population in Metropolitan Areas

Los Angeles4,242,21345% 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 816,03751% 67% Dallas 810,499 23% 324% Total15,087,04531% 130% Metropolitan Areas with the Largest Hispanic Population Source: Latino Growth in Metropolitan America: Changing Patterns, New Locations Number of Latinos Percent of Total Pop. Latino Growth ( ) ( )

Metropolitan AreaNumber of Latinos% of Total Pop.Latino Growth ( ) Raleigh 72,5806%1180% Atlanta268,8517%995% Greensboro62,2105%962% Charlotte %932% Orlando271,62717%859% Las Vegas322,03821%753% Nashville 40,1393%630% Ft. Lauderdale271,65217%578 Sarasota 38,6827%538% Portland 42,4447%437% Greenville 26,1673%397% West Palm Beach140,67512%397% Washington, D.C.432,0039%346% Indianapolis42,9943%338% Minneapolis-St. Paul99,1213%331% Ft. Worth309,85118%328% Providence93,8688%325% Tulsa38,5705%303% Total2,750,5649%505% Hispanic “Hypergrowth” Areas Source: Latino Growth in Metropolitan America: Changing Patterns, New Locations

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 Latinos in the Suburbs

IDEA 97 Provisions for English Language Learners Limited English Proficient Students

LEP Students 4.4 million There are over 4.4 million limited English proficient students in the United States

30% 30% growth since 1997 Rapid Growth

Who are they?

California 1.5 million Almost 1.5 million of these children reside in California

Texas 500,000 Over 500,000 attend schools in the state of Texas

Florida 235,000 Over 235,000 attend schools in the state of Florida

New York 230,000 Almost 230,000 attend schools in the state of New York

Where are they?

LEP Growth in Other States Alabama26% Arkansas35% Georgia45% Indiana43% Idaho34% N. Carolina45% Minnesota67%

The American Dream

Education Latinos in the U.S. see Education as the most important issue facing their community Source: Univision / Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates, Inc. & Edelman Worldwide

78% 78% of Hispanics feel the government should: Source: Univision / Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates, Inc. & Edelman Worldwide “Spend more on the public school system to increase teacher pay and reduce class size.”

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

Education Law

Limited English Proficiency

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. 1920’s – 1960’s

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.1968

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.1974

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.1978

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. Castañeda v. Pickard (1981)

Plyler v. Doe: Supreme court denies the state's right to exclude the children of illegal immigrants from public schools.1982

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.1988

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.1994

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.(1998) California’s Proposition 227

Title III of the No Child Left Behind Act replaces Title VII in the reauthorization of the ESEA.2002

The No Child Left Behind Act

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 NABE Principles for ESEA Reauthorization

Public Law Signed into Law January 8, 2002 Reauthorizes the ESEA for the next 6 years The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001

Title III - Trigger If funding (appropriations) level is under $650 million, the program remains competitive with few changes.

FY 2002 Formula 665 $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) -

Implement Appropriate Curriculum Inform Parents Provide Resources to Meet Accountability Professional Development Work with IHEs Adapt to Demographics What Schools CAN Do

IDEA ‘97 Provisions for English Language Learners

Section (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 (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 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.

Section In the case of a child with limited English proficiency, consider the language needs of the child as those needs relate to the child’s IEP.

Section The public agency shall make reasonable efforts to ensure that parents understand, and are able to participate in, any group discussions relating to the educational placement of their child, including arranging for an interpreter for parents with deafness, or whose native language is other than English.

Section (1) (1) The notice required under paragraph (a) of this section must be- –(i) Written in language understandable to the general public; and (ii) Provided in the native language of the parent or other mode of communication used by the parent, unless it is clearly not feasible to do so.

Section (2) 2) If the native language or other mode of communication of the parent is not a written language, the public agency shall take steps to ensure- –(i) That the notice is translated orally or by other means to the parent in his or her native language or other mode of communication; (ii) That the parent understands the content of the notice; and –(iii) That there is written evidence that the requirements in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section have been met.

Section ) Tests and other evaluation materials used to assess a child under Part B of the Act- –(i) Are selected and administered so as not to be discriminatory on a racial or cultural basis; and (ii) Are provided and administered in the child's native language or other mode of communication, unless it is clearly not feasible to do so; and (2) Materials and procedures used to assess a child with limited English proficiency are selected and administered to ensure that they measure the extent to which the child has a disability and needs special education, rather than measuring the child's English language skills.

Section A child may not be determined to be eligible under this part if the determinant factor for that eligibility determination is: Lack of instruction in reading or math; or Limited English proficiency…