Transcript Meta Consent Decree

META CONSENT DECREE
Cecilia Diaz
Student # 1380587
May 27, 2014
META
 What does META stand for?
•
•
•
•
M-Multicultural
E-Educational
T-Training and
A-Advocacy, Inc.
WHY META?
 In August 1990, a judge of the United States District Court,
Southern District of Florida, signed a Consent Decree giving the
court the power to enforce an agreement between the FLDOE and a
coalition of eight groups. LULAC v. Florida Department of Education
WHAT IS THE META
CONSENT DECREE?
 The Meta Consent Decree is: the state of Florida’s framework for
compliance with the following federal and state laws and
jurisprudence regarding the education of English language learner
students:
• Title VI and VII Civil Rights Act of 1964
• Office of Civil Rights Memorandum (Standards for Title VI
Compliance ) of May 25, 1970
• Requirements based on the the Supreme Court decision in Lau v.
Nichols, 1974
W H AT I S T H E M E TA C O N S E N T
DECREE? CONTINUED
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Equal Education Opportunities Act of 1974
Requirements of the Vocational Education Guidelines, 1979
Requirements based on the Fifth Circuit court decision in
Castaneda v. Pickard, 1981
Requirements based on the Supreme Court decision in Plyler v.
Doe, 1982
Americans with Disabilities Act (PL-94-142)
Florida Education Equity Act, 1984
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
META CONSENT DECREE
 The Consent Decree addresses the civil rights of ELL students, foremost,
among those their right to equal access education programs. In addressing these
rights, the Consent Decree provides a structure that ensures the delivery of the
comprehensible instruction to which ELL students are entitled.
 Florida's authority for the implementation of the Consent Decree is found in
Section 1003.56, F.S, English Language Instruction for Limited English Proficient
Students and Rules 6A-6.0900 to 6A-6.0909, F.A.C., Programs for Limited English
Proficient Students.
META CONSENT DECREE
 Section I-Identification & Assessment
 Section II- Equal Access to Appropriate Program
 Section III-Equal Access to Appropriate Categorical and Other
Programs for ELL Students
 Section IV-Personnel
 Section V-Monitoring Issues
 Section VI-Outcome Measures
SCENARIO
 Student A has arrived from the country of Thailand. He does not know
how to speak the English language. He was placed in a third grade
classroom because of the date on his birth certificate which, would have
placed him in the third grade. The El Paso, Texas School Board offers
student A, a desk, seat, books, a teacher, and the current third grade
curriculum. After two weeks of being at the school, the school sent a letter
home asking for proof of U.S. residency in order to continue registered at
the school. Does this violate the META Consent Decree? Why? Why not?
LANDMARK CASE-1
 Lau v. Nichols, 414 U.S. 563, 94 S.Ct. 786 (1974)
In Lau v. Nichols, the U.S.
Supreme Court ruled that the San Francisco school system violated the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 by denying non-English speaking students of Chinese
ancestry a meaningful opportunity to participate in the public educational
program. The decision stated that providing students the same desks, books,
teachers, and curriculum did not ensure that they received an equal educational
opportunity, particularly if the students did not speak English. If English is the
mainstream language of instruction, then measures have to be taken to ensure
that English is taught to students who do not speak English or are limitedEnglish proficient in order to provide equal access to educational
opportunities.
LANDMARK CASE-2
 Castaneda v. Pickard, 648F. 2d 989 (5th Cir. 1981) In Castaneda vs. Pickard, the U.S.
Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals set forth a three-part test to determine whether a school
district takes appropriate actions to overcome language barriers that confront languageminority students. Under this standard, a program for limited-English proficient students
is acceptable if:
 A program is based on educational theory that is recognized by experts in the field;
 The programs or practices used are reasonably calculated to effectively implement the
adopted theory; and
 The program successfully produces results that indicate that the language barriers are
being overcome.
LANDMARK CASE-3
 Plyler v. Doe , 457 U.S. 202 (1982) In 1982, the Supreme Court ruled in Plyler v.
Doe that public schools were prohibited from denying immigrant students access to
a public education. The Court stated that undocumented children have the same
right to a free public education as U.S. citizens and permanent residents.
Undocumented immigrant students are obligated, as are all other students, to attend
school until they reach the age mandated by state law.
 Public schools and school personnel are prohibited under Plyler from adopting
policies or taking actions that would deny students access to education based on
their immigration status.
FLORIDA STATUTES
NUMBERS
 Under Florida’s education accountability system, S.229.57(3)(b)7., F.S., requires
that all students participate in the statewide testing program, except as otherwise
prescribed by the Commissioner. Pursuant to the A+ Education Plan enacted in
1999, schools are now graded on the basis of letter grades (A-F). According to
DOE, all students’ test scores are included in a school’s grade, including limited
English proficient (LEP) students who have been in an ESOL program for more
than two years. LEP students who have been in ESOL programs for less than
two years are exempted from the testing requirements.
FLORIDA STATUTES
AND RULES
 Section 22&2001(2)(c), F.S. -- Educational Equity Act
 Section 229.57(3)(6)7., F.S. -- Test modification for LEP students
 Section 231.24, F.S. -- ESOL in-service points
 Section 233.058, F.S. -- English language instruction for LEP students
 Section 236.081(1)(c)4., F.S. -- Weighted funding for ESOL students 240,529(2), F.S. - ESOL requirements for state approved teacher prep programs
 Rule 6A. 4.0244, F.A.C. -- Teacher certification in ESOL
 Rule 6A. 6-0900, F.A.C. -- Programs/exemptions students specialization for LEP
students
EVALUATIVE INSTRUMENT
 Please get into six groups of four and discuss the following
questions:
•
•
•
•
•
•
What do the acronyms ESOL, ELL, and LEP stand for?
What is the META Consent Decree?
What came about with the META Consent Decree?
What does META stand for?
When is META applicable?
For whom was the META Consent Decree written for?
REFERENCES
 The Florida Consent Decree: A Summary. (n.d.). . Retrieved May 25, 2014, from
http://www.scps.k12.fl.us/Portals/46/Assets/PDF/
ESOLMETAConsentSummary.pdf
 Consent Decree Florida Department of Education. (n.d.). . Retrieved May 25,
2014, from http://www.fldoe.org/aala/cdpage2.asp
 The Protection of English Language Learners Under the Law. (n.d.). . Retrieved May
25, 2014, from http://esol.leeschools.net/eManual/meta/
META%20CONSENT%20PRESENTATION%202011-12.pdf
REFERENCES
 Lau v. Nichols, 414 U.S. 563, 94 S.Ct. 786 (1974)
 Castaneda v. Pickard, 648F. 2d 989 (5th Cir. 1981)
 Plyler v. Doe , 457 U.S. 202 (1982)
 Council for Lifelong Learning: English for Speakers of Other
Languages (ESOL) Fact Sheet. (2001, September 1). . Retrieved
May 25, 2014, from http://www.leg.state.fl.us/data/
publications/2002/house/reports/EdFactSheets/fact%20sheets/
English%20for%20Speakers%20of%20Other%20Languages.pdf
The End.
Thank you.