Is language a 'right' in U.S. education?: unpacking Castañeda's reach across federal, state, and district lines.

IF 1.4 2区 文学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Language Policy Pub Date : 2022-01-01 Epub Date: 2022-01-05 DOI:10.1007/s10993-021-09604-1
Maria R Coady, Brian Ankeny, Raisa Ankeny
{"title":"Is language a 'right' in U.S. education?: unpacking <i>Castañeda's</i> reach across federal, state, and district lines.","authors":"Maria R Coady,&nbsp;Brian Ankeny,&nbsp;Raisa Ankeny","doi":"10.1007/s10993-021-09604-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Castañeda v. Pickard</i> (648 F.2d 989, [5th Cir. 1981]) was a significant legal case in the history of educational policy for non-native English-speaking students in the United States. The case established a three prong 'test' for programs for those students, including the right for students to have an educational program based on sound educational theory; resources and personnel to properly implement the program; and evaluation of the effectiveness of the program. After 40 years of interpretation of the <i>Castañeda</i> case, the issue of language rights for non-native English speakers in United States public schools continues to be debated by scholars and interpreted through various legal statutes and case holdings. This article examines the <i>Castañeda</i> case and its recent interpretations in the literature as applied to non-native English-speaking students. We use a theoretical lens of orientations in language planning (Ruíz 1984) and language policy text as reported by Lo Bianco and Aliani (Language planning and student experiences: Intention, rhetoric, and implementation, Multilingual Matters, 2013). We then discuss the socio-historical context of the case and position it with respect to the 1974 seminal case of <i>Lau v. Nichols.</i> Using the state of Florida as an example, we next describe the complex language ecology of local and state language policies and how those relate to <i>Castañeda</i> and inhibit progress for bilingual students in Florida. We conclude with caution to academics and advocates who work on behalf of language minoritized students in the United States, with implications for international scholars.</p>","PeriodicalId":46781,"journal":{"name":"Language Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8728481/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language Policy","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-021-09604-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Castañeda v. Pickard (648 F.2d 989, [5th Cir. 1981]) was a significant legal case in the history of educational policy for non-native English-speaking students in the United States. The case established a three prong 'test' for programs for those students, including the right for students to have an educational program based on sound educational theory; resources and personnel to properly implement the program; and evaluation of the effectiveness of the program. After 40 years of interpretation of the Castañeda case, the issue of language rights for non-native English speakers in United States public schools continues to be debated by scholars and interpreted through various legal statutes and case holdings. This article examines the Castañeda case and its recent interpretations in the literature as applied to non-native English-speaking students. We use a theoretical lens of orientations in language planning (Ruíz 1984) and language policy text as reported by Lo Bianco and Aliani (Language planning and student experiences: Intention, rhetoric, and implementation, Multilingual Matters, 2013). We then discuss the socio-historical context of the case and position it with respect to the 1974 seminal case of Lau v. Nichols. Using the state of Florida as an example, we next describe the complex language ecology of local and state language policies and how those relate to Castañeda and inhibit progress for bilingual students in Florida. We conclude with caution to academics and advocates who work on behalf of language minoritized students in the United States, with implications for international scholars.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
语言是美国教育的“权利”吗?:拆解Castañeda在联邦、州和地区的影响力。
Castañeda诉皮卡德案(648 F.2d 989, [5th Cir. 1981])是美国非英语母语学生教育政策历史上的一个重要法律案例。该案件为这些学生的课程建立了一个三段式的“测试”,包括学生有权接受基于健全教育理论的教育课程;适当实施计划所需的资源和人员;以及对项目有效性的评估。在对Castañeda案件进行了40年的解释之后,美国公立学校中非英语母语人士的语言权利问题继续被学者们争论,并通过各种法律法规和案例进行解释。本文探讨了Castañeda案例及其在非英语母语学生中的最新解读。我们在语言规划(Ruíz 1984)和Lo Bianco和Aliani(《语言规划和学生体验:意图、修辞和实施》,Multilingual Matters, 2013)报告的语言政策文本中使用了取向的理论视角。然后,我们讨论了案件的社会历史背景,并将其与1974年开创性的劳诉尼科尔斯案相比较。以佛罗里达州为例,我们接下来描述了当地和州语言政策的复杂语言生态,以及这些政策如何与Castañeda相关,并抑制佛罗里达州双语学生的进步。我们对代表美国语言少数民族学生工作的学者和倡导者提出了谨慎的结论,对国际学者也有启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Language Policy
Language Policy Multiple-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
6.20%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Language Policy is highly relevant to scholars, students, specialists and policy-makers working in the fields of applied linguistics, language policy, sociolinguistics, and language teaching and learning. The journal aims to contribute to the field by publishing high-quality studies that build a sound theoretical understanding of the field of language policy and cover a range of cases, situations and regions worldwide. A distinguishing feature of this journal is its focus on various dimensions of language educational policy. Language education policy includes decisions about which languages are to be used as a medium of instruction and/or taught in schools, as well as analysis of these policies within their social, ethnic, religious, political, cultural and economic contexts. The journal aims to continue its tradition of bringing together solid scholarship on language policy and language education policy from around the world but also to expand its direction into new areas. The editors are very interested in papers that explore language policy not only at national levels but also at the institutional levels of schools, workplaces, families, health services, media and other entities. In particular, we welcome theoretical and empirical papers with sound qualitative or quantitative bases that critically explore how language policies are developed at local and regional levels, as well as on how they are enacted, contested and negotiated by the targets of that policy themselves. We seek papers on the above topics as they are researched and informed through interdisciplinary work within related fields such as education, anthropology, politics, linguistics, economics, law, history, ecology, and geography. We particularly are interested in papers from lesser-covered parts of the world of Africa and Asia. Specifically we encourage papers in the following areas: Detailed accounts of promoting and managing language (education) policy (who, what, why, and how) in local, institutional, national and global contexts. Research papers on the development, implementation and effects of language policies, including implications for minority and majority languages, endangered languages, lingua francas and linguistic human rights; Accounts of language policy development and implementation by governments and governmental agencies, non-governmental organizations and business enterprises, with a critical perspective (not only descriptive). Accounts of attempts made by ethnic, religious and minority groups to establish, resist, or modify language policies (language policies ''from below''); Theoretically and empirically informed papers addressing the enactment of language policy in public spaces, cyberspace and the broader language ecology (e.g., linguistic landscapes, sociocultural and ethnographic perspectives on language policy); Review pieces of theory or research that contribute broadly to our understanding of language policy, including of how individual interests and practices interact with policy. We also welcome proposals for special guest-edited thematic issues on any of the topics above, and short commentaries on topical issues in language policy or reactions to papers published in the journal.
期刊最新文献
Community-based and formal Chinese language education in urban California, 50 years after Lau v. Nichols Principal agency 50 years after the Lau decision: Building and sustaining bilingual education programs for Asian languages Reflections on Lau: A historical perspective English-medium teachers as policymakers through critical translingual literacy instruction Attitudes of Dalit students and teachers towards English: a language of Dalit emancipation?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1