Lau vs. Nicholas was a 1974 court case held in San Francisco, or "Chinatown", California. This case was brought forth by Chinese American students against school officials due to the lack of opportunities and instruction for them to learn the English language. According to the PBS summary, out of the 2,800 Chinese students in the school only 1000 of them had support learning English. Therefore, 1,800 students were left just to figure out how to make it through school without speaking, reading, or writing the language in which instruction was given. The students and parents in this situation claimed that they were not being provided equal education opportunities and therefore, they stated they were not being given their 14th amendment rights.
However, the Court of Appeals actually disagreed and stated "every student brings to his or her educational career different advantages and disadvantages based on social, economic, and cultural background, which are factors created separately from the school system" (Summary of Lau vs. Nichols).
After a petition was signed, the Supreme Court stepped into. They stated that based on the California Education Code simply providing textbooks, teachers, and a curriculum is not enough; it doesn't guarantee equality of treatment. This California Education Code stated that students must master English in order to graduate and it even states English is the basic language of the school. Based on these facts, it was obvious that this matter was far beyond just having advantages and disadvantages. The Justice of the court delivered his opinion in 1974.
Under the Civil Rights Act of 1965, one cannot discriminate based on race, color, or origin in a program receiving federal financial assistance. Therefore, the Supreme Court found that the school system must provide the opportunity to gain the same education regardless of race, color, or origin. They believed that language, rather than being a disadvantage, is actually so closely related to origin, and discriminating against origin is clearly against the act. It was also said that not understanding the main language of the school is clearly closes students' off from any meaningful education. In the end, Lau vs. Nichols did not actually establish a specific Bilingual program, but it did however push schools towards developing equal education opportunities for all students.
Lau Remedies
Following the court's ruling, the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights created the Lau Remedies. According to Wright (2010), the Lau Remedies were established for:
(1) identifying and evaluating national-origin-minority students' English-language skills (2) determining appropriate instructional treatments (3) deciding when LEP students were ready for mainstream classes (4) determining the professional standards to be met by teachers of language-minority children
How does this impact TEACHERS?
Lau vs. Nicholas ensured that teachers cannot just sit back and watch those who cannot speak English fall behind. As a result of this court case, teachers are not allowed to just provide all students with the same instruction; they must provide the extra resources, help, or even classes for those who need practice learning the English language.
How does this impact STUDENTS?
Before Lau vs. Nichols non-English speaking students were just expected to make it. They were thrown into an environment that they did not understand, and they were not given opportunities to learn the language they needed in order to properly gain an education. This case ruled that schools can no longer do this to these students; schools must provide a way for these students to learn the language. Due to this case, students are now given the opportunity to make it past the language barrier. For English learning students, Lau vs. Nichols was a step towards equal education.
How does this impact EDUCATION?
As mentioned, Lau vs. Nichols was just one step in the right direction. This case ruled that schools must do something to help those with limited English. However, this particular case did not set up an actual plan/program for schools to follow. No specific English language program was created. This case did however bring the issue to the surface and it made it known that schools must provide adequate learning opportunities for English language learners. Although there are still unfortunate cases where students are not receiving the proper education, Lau vs. Nichols was still an extremely important step in the education of English language learners. To read more on challenges still faced forty years later, click here.
Wright, W. (2010). Landmark Court Rulings Regarding English Language Learners | ELL Topics from A-Z | Colorín Colorado. Retrieved June 21, 2015, from http://www.colorincolorado.org/article/49704/
Table of Contents
What was Lau vs. Nichols?
Lau vs. Nicholas was a 1974 court case held in San Francisco, or "Chinatown", California. This case was brought forth by Chinese American students against school officials due to the lack of opportunities and instruction for them to learn the English language. According to the PBS summary, out of the 2,800 Chinese students in the school only 1000 of them had support learning English. Therefore, 1,800 students were left just to figure out how to make it through school without speaking, reading, or writing the language in which instruction was given. The students and parents in this situation claimed that they were not being provided equal education opportunities and therefore, they stated they were not being given their 14th amendment rights.
However, the Court of Appeals actually disagreed and stated "every student brings to his or her educational career different advantages and disadvantages based on social, economic, and cultural background, which are factors created separately from the school system" (Summary of Lau vs. Nichols).
After a petition was signed, the Supreme Court stepped into. They stated that based on the California Education Code simply providing textbooks, teachers, and a curriculum is not enough; it doesn't guarantee equality of treatment. This California Education Code stated that students must master English in order to graduate and it even states English is the basic language of the school. Based on these facts, it was obvious that this matter was far beyond just having advantages and disadvantages. The Justice of the court delivered his opinion in 1974.
Under the Civil Rights Act of 1965, one cannot discriminate based on race, color, or origin in a program receiving federal financial assistance. Therefore, the Supreme Court found that the school system must provide the opportunity to gain the same education regardless of race, color, or origin. They believed that language, rather than being a disadvantage, is actually so closely related to origin, and discriminating against origin is clearly against the act. It was also said that not understanding the main language of the school is clearly closes students' off from any meaningful education. In the end, Lau vs. Nichols did not actually establish a specific Bilingual program, but it did however push schools towards developing equal education opportunities for all students.
Lau Remedies
Following the court's ruling, the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights created the Lau Remedies. According to Wright (2010), the Lau Remedies were established for:
(1) identifying and evaluating national-origin-minority students' English-language skills
(2) determining appropriate instructional treatments
(3) deciding when LEP students were ready for mainstream classes
(4) determining the professional standards to be met by teachers of language-minority children
How does this impact TEACHERS?
Lau vs. Nicholas ensured that teachers cannot just sit back and watch those who cannot speak English fall behind. As a result of this court case, teachers are not allowed to just provide all students with the same instruction; they must provide the extra resources, help, or even classes for those who need practice learning the English language.How does this impact STUDENTS?
Before Lau vs. Nichols non-English speaking students were just expected to make it. They were thrown into an environment that they did not understand, and they were not given opportunities to learn the language they needed in order to properly gain an education. This case ruled that schools can no longer do this to these students; schools must provide a way for these students to learn the language. Due to this case, students are now given the opportunity to make it past the language barrier. For English learning students, Lau vs. Nichols was a step towards equal education.How does this impact EDUCATION?
As mentioned, Lau vs. Nichols was just one step in the right direction. This case ruled that schools must do something to help those with limited English. However, this particular case did not set up an actual plan/program for schools to follow. No specific English language program was created. This case did however bring the issue to the surface and it made it known that schools must provide adequate learning opportunities for English language learners. Although there are still unfortunate cases where students are not receiving the proper education, Lau vs. Nichols was still an extremely important step in the education of English language learners. To read more on challenges still faced forty years later, click here.Watch to learn more!
Additional Resources
An indepth look at Lau vs. Nichols
Another informative YouTube video
References
KAI-HWA WANG, F. (n.d.). Forty Years Since Bilingual Education Ruling, Challenges Remain - NBC News. Retrieved June 21, 2015, from
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/forty-years-bilingual-education-ruling-challenges-remain-n200906
Lau v Nichols. (2013, October 27). Retrieved June 21, 2015, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1J8TXYZLdyM
Lau vs. Nichols Excerpts. (n.d.). Retrieved June 21, 2015, from http://www.languagepolicy.net/archives/lau.htm
SFUSD Bilingual Education Lau vs Nichols SFGTV San Francisco. (2007, June 22). Retrieved June 21, 2015, from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXhQrJ37gFE
Summary of Lau vs. Nichols. (n.d.). Retrieved June 18, 2015, from http://www-tc.pbs.org/beyondbrown/brownpdfs/launichols.pdf
Wright, W. (2010). Landmark Court Rulings Regarding English Language Learners | ELL Topics from A-Z | Colorín Colorado. Retrieved June 21, 2015,
from http://www.colorincolorado.org/article/49704/