CHILDREN WITH LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY

Many school districts educate children with limited English proficiency. A wide variety of language groups are involved. AFT recognizes the importance of providing special language programs, and we agree with the Supreme Court's view that children should not be plunged into classrooms without special help.

In 1974, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Lau vs. Nichols that failure to take positive steps to assist children of limited English proficiency constituted a violation of those students' civil rights. The court made it clear that a school district must provide access to equal educational opportunity for limited English proficiency students and indicated here were various kinds of programs that could satisfy this requirement. The Lau decision required no specific models that state and local education agencies must follow.

The AFT believes school districts should be free to choose their approaches or to develop new ones based upon the unique needs of their school populations.

RESOLVED, that the AFT support:

• compliance with Lau vs. Nichols.  The federal government should allow local school districts to employ a variety of bilingual/ESL education programs to meet the needs of children with limited English proficiency;

• the enforcement of federal laws. But, the federal government should not impose curricula or methods of instructions upon local school districts; and

• the position that the first goal of a bilingual/ESL program for Limited English Proficiency (LEP) students should be the earliest possible acquisition of English language skills, while allowing the student to maintain progress in all subject areas as English language skills are being acquired.

In carrying out these policies, we urge that school districts:

• place students in bilingual/ESL programs only after appropriate assessment. They should be assessed annually thereafter and placed in regular school programs when an adequate and appropriate level of English proficiency has been attained;

• obtain parental permission prior to placement in a bilingual/ESL education program; and

• use only bilingual/ESL personnel who are certified and licensed in substantive instructional areas (e.g., elementary education, special education, social studies, art, science and mathematics or as support personnel) and possess ancillary qualifications in bilingual/ESL education. Inservice training programs should be available to assist currently employed personnel to meet these requirements.

We also urge that the federal government and states:

• fully fund to local school districts any mandated programs;

• increase the amount of funds available not only for bilingual/ESL education but also for research and inservice training related to bilingual/ESL education; and

• use paraprofessionals and educational assistants to enhance the teacher's ability to provide appropriate instruction to students. While it is recognized that paraprofessionals and educational assistants also independently conduct bilingual/ESL programs (i.e., those that reach out to parents), they should not be asked or used to replace teachers.