Exam (elaborations)
CSET SPANISH SUBTEST IV EXAM/125 COMPLETE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
CSET SPANISH SUBTEST IV EXAM/125 COMPLETE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
[Show more]
Content preview
CSET SPANISH SUBTEST IV EXAM/125 COMPLETEQUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
14th Amendment - -to the U.S. Constitution; amendment ratified in 1868
after the Civil War, declares in part: "No State shall make or enforce any law
which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United
States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property,
without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the
equal protection of the laws." Many of the cases discussed in this section are
based on the ***due process and the equal protection clauses*** of the #
Amendment.
-Plessy v. Ferguson - -a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court issued
in 1896. It upheld the constitutionality of racial segregation laws for public
facilities as long as the segregated facilities were equal in quality - a doctrine
that came to be known as "separate but equal. Although the decision was
related to the segregation of African American students, in many parts of the
country Native American, Asian, and Hispanic students were also routinely
segregated. "
-Brown v. Board of Education - -REVERSAL of Plessy v. Ferguson; 58 years
later in 1954; Like Plessy, focused on the segregation of African American
students. But by ruling that states are responsible for providing "equal
educational opportunities" for all students made bilingual education for ELLs
more feasible.
-Independent School District v. Salvatierra, Alvarez v. Lemon Grove, and
Méndez v. Westminster School District - -Addresses Segregation A few lesser
known lower level cases concerning the segregation of Hispanic student
predate Brown.
-Independent School District v. Salvatierra (1930) - -Mexican American
parents in the small border town of Rio, Texas, brought suit against the
school district over segregation. The court sided with the school district that
argued the segregation was necessary to teach the students English. This
argument did not hold, however, for two similar cases in California: Alvarez
v. Lemon Grove (1931) and Méndez v. Westminster School District (1947).
The judge in Alvarez noted that segregation was not beneficial for the
students' English language development and the success of the Méndezcase
helped set the stage for Brown.
-Guey Heung Lee v. Johnson and Johnson v. San Francisco Unified School
District - -Addresses Segregation In some instances, desegregation efforts
made it more difficult. In San Francisco, for example, Chinese Americans
fought a desegregation order that would force students out of neighborhood
,schools that provided bilingual English Chinese programs for newcomer
Chinese ELL students. The Chinese community took the case to court in 1971
and it was appealed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in Johnson v. San
Francisco Unified School District. In 1974, the court ruled against the Chinese
community, declaring simply Brown applies to races.
-Meyers v. Nebraska - -The Right of Communities to Teach Their Native
Languages to Their Children In the early 1900s, German communities
typically ran their own private schools where students received instruction in
both German and English. Then, in 1919, Nebraska passed the Siman Act,
The state court ruled that the act could not prevent schools from providing
German language instruction outside of the hours of regular school study. In
response, the parochial schools taught German during an extended recess
period. Language restrictionist policymakers sought to close the loopholes in
the law and fined Robert Meyers $25 fine for teaching Bible stories to 10 yr
old children in German. The case, Meyers v. Nebraska(1923), went to
Supreme Court, which consolidated this case with similar cases from Ohio
and Idaho. Supreme Court struck down the states' restrictive legislation,
ruling that whereas state governments can legislate the language used for
instruction in schools, states may not pass laws that attempt to prevent
communities from offering private language classes outside of the regular
school system. Made it clear that the 14th Amendment provides protection
for language minorities, does not endorse it though.
-Siman Act 1919 Nebraska - -made it illegal for any school, public or private,
to provide any foreign language instruction to students below the 8th grade.
Associated with Meyers vs Nebraska.
-Farrington v. Tokushige - -The Right of Communities to Teach Their Native
Languages to Their Children Hawaii in 1927, the court offered further
protections of after-school community language programs after attempts by
education authorities to put restrictions on Japanese and Chinese heritage
language programs. Case essentially about parents' rights rather than
language rights; still signs of negative attitudes toward the "foreign
population." Indeed, Hawaii tried yet again to limit private foreign language
instruction. When the Chinese communities after World War II sought to
restart their private language schools, the state passed the "Act Regulating
the Teaching of Foreign Languages to Children." Part of the state's rationale
was the need to "protect children from the harm of learning a foreign
language." The Supreme Court ruled that prohibiting schools to teach in a
language other than English violates constitutional rights protected under
the Fifth Amendment
-Stainback v. Mo Hock Ke Kok Po - -The Right of Communities to Teach Their
Native Languages to Their Children (1947), the state court struck down the
statute, rejecting the state's claim and arguing that, at least for "the
, brightest" students, study of a foreign language can be beneficial. The case
was decided on the basis of Farrington and, once again, had more to do with
parents' rights in directing the education of their children than with language
rights. Despite agreement in the courts about the need for states to
Americanize minorities and their right to control the language used for
instruction in public schools, minority communities have a clear right to offer
private language classes in which their children can learn and maintain their
home languages. Thus, the common practice of language-minority
communities today in offering heritage language programs after school and
on weekends is protected by the U.S. Constitution.
-Xenophobia toward German and Japanese Americans during World War I
and World War II - -succeeded where attempts at language restrictive
legislation failed. When Germany and later Japan became war enemies of the
United States, the number of U.S. schools that provided instruction in these
languages dropped dramatically, largely because of fears by members of
these communities that such instruction would lead others to question their
loyalty to the United States
-Lau v. Nichols - -Equal Educational Opportunities for ELLs 1974 Supreme
Court case that resulted in perhaps the most important court decision
regarding the education of language minority students; brought forward by
Chinese American students in the San Francisco Unified School District who
were placed in mainstream classrooms despite their lack of proficiency in
English, and left to "sink or swim." The district had argued that it had done
nothing wrong, and that the Chinese American students received treatment
equal to that of other students. the responsibility to over- the responsibility
to overcome language barriers that impede full integration of students falls
on the school boards and not on the parents or children; otherwise, there is
no real access for these students to a meaningful
education
-Justice William Douglass - -Lou vs Nichols 1974, in writing the court's
opinion, strongly disagreed, arguing: Under these state imposed standards
there is no equality of treatment merely by providing students with the same
facilities, textbooks, teachers, and curriculum; for students who do not
understand English are effectively foreclosed from any meaningful
education.... We know that those who do not understand English are certain
to find their classroom experiences wholly incomprehensible and in no way
meaningful.
-Influence of Lau on federal Policy - -1974, After the court's decision, the
U.S. Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights created the Lau
Remedies. Whereas Title VII Bilingual Education Act regulations applied only
to funded programs, the Lau Remedies applied to all school districts and
functioned as de facto compliance standards. The Office of Civil Rights used
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller Victorious23. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for £8.14. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
73243 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy revision notes and other study material for 14 years now