Discrimination at Elementary School Registration

[Humusluvr]

DCSS: International Student Center DeKalb County Schools

and the students in question don't need ANY of those services, because they ARENT FOREIGN.

 

[Perky]

So they do an evaluation to see if ESL classes are appropriate. If they are not, then the children don't have to take the class.

That's all that's going on here.

There is no discrimination.

I tend to agree with Geekess on this. I don't see this as discrimination at all. If the child doesn't need ESL services, then he will place out as a result of his test score. Or, if he doesn't place out, the parents can decline services. It actually seems more diligent than discriminatory. It also seems that there is lots of confusion about what ESL means.

OP does not give any indication of the mother's fluency in English. If the mother is not fluent, and she was the primary caretaker, then most likely the children learned some Japanese at an early age. Even if they did not, if the mother isn't fluent, then it's entirely possible that the children's command of English is not at the level it should be to be successful in school. In that case, they may qualify for ESL services. At any rate, federal guidelines require screening of students who have been significantly exposed to another language, even if they don't speak it.

The 'foreign' designation is never used in my neck of the woods. Many of my students are ELLs. Some of them, and their parents, are US-born citizens. Some are not. However, when any student is registered, the parent completes a home-language survey. If any other language besides English is spoken in the home, the child takes the ACCESS test. Even if the child doesn't speak the other language. I suspect that the parent in this case completed the survey indicating that Japanese is also spoken in the home.

One more thing.... I can't think of a single negative consequence of receiving ESL services or being labelled as an ELL. Students receive the same academic content as they would otherwise. They're tested yearly to measure progress with the goal of placing out. The only difference is that they may be in an ESL classroom with a teacher who uses ESL instructional strategies (which, in the opinion of many educators, benefit any and all students), or they may be part of a push-in or pull-out program. Those programs provide small group instruction using ESL strategies. Again, same content.

 

[Zigner]

... separate priority list...

What does this mean? What priority list? Priority for what?

 

[Humusluvr]

From the original post

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Georgia,US

Our friends are facing discrimination when trying to register their son for kindergarten based on their ethnicity. The husband is a US citizen, born in the US, and the wife is originally from the Japan. All their children are born in the US.

The school board in Dekalb County, Georgia is forcing them to register their children as international students, who get placed in a separate priority list, because they are "exposed to another culture at home" since the mother is not a from the US.

The kids only speak English at home, and have no second language.

What is the best way to oppose this?

I tend to agree with Geekess on this. I don't see this as discrimination at all. If the child doesn't need ESL services, then he will place out as a result of his test score. Or, if he doesn't place out, the parents can decline services. It actually seems more diligent than discriminatory. It also seems that there is lots of confusion about what ESL means.

The children speak English. NO second language. Which implies the mother doesn't speak Japanese at home. They have NO second language.

OP does not give any indication of the mother's fluency in English. If the mother is not fluent, and she was the primary caretaker, then most likely the children learned some Japanese at an early age. Even if they did not, if the mother isn't fluent, then it's entirely possible that the children's command of English is not at the level it should be to be successful in school. In that case, they may qualify for ESL services. At any rate, federal guidelines require screening of students who have been significantly exposed to another language, even if they don't speak it.]

That's not how the original post reads.

One more thing.... I can't think of a single negative consequence of receiving ESL services or being labelled as an ELL. Students receive the same academic content as they would otherwise. They're tested yearly to measure progress with the goal of placing out. The only difference is that they may be in an ESL classroom with a teacher who uses ESL instructional strategies (which, in the opinion of many educators, benefit any and all students), or they may be part of a push-in or pull-out program. Those programs provide small group instruction using ESL strategies. Again, same content.

Maybe your program is different than the one I worked in, but ELL's are not exposed to the same amount of content as regular students, due to the fact the teacher has to go slower, repeat, use less complicated words, give the student time to look words up, etc. If these students we are talking about have NO second language, they will be harmed by the program.

I hate to keep reiterating that I believe the school was discriminatory, based on what the OP posted, but I guess until they come back, we won't know.

 

[Zigner]

I hate to keep reiterating that I believe the school was discriminatory, based on what the OP posted, but I guess until they come back, we won't know.

Evaluating a student to determine if they are eligible for services is a far cry from discrimination.

 

[randolph76]

Evaluating a student to determine if they are eligible for services is a far cry from discrimination.

Yes, but the school was told that these kids don't need the services and for obvious reasons. The school may not be discriminating according law but they clearly are wrong to pursue International status when they know these kids don't need those services. Why would the school be pursuing it? It would seem to be because of their ethnicity. Discrimination? Maybe ... maybe not.

I personally, would still probably do something along the lines of LDiJ's suggested COA.

 

[Zigner]

The school may not be discriminating according law...

And, this is a legal forum. Thank you for understanding.

 

[Perky]

The children speak English. NO second language. Which implies the mother doesn't speak Japanese at home. They have NO second language.

I think I posted a circumstance in which ESL services may be justified even if the child does not speak a second language. I disagree that the implication is that the mother doesn't speak Japanese at home.

That's not how the original post reads.

That's not how it doesn't read either. OP was silent on mother's English language proficiency.

Maybe your program is different than the one I worked in, but ELL's are not exposed to the same amount of content as regular students, due to the fact the teacher has to go slower, repeat, use less complicated words, give the student time to look words up, etc. If these students we are talking about have NO second language, they will be harmed by the program.

I guess my program is vastly different from yours. As an ESL teacher, I use specific instructional strategies and provide instructional supports. Content is scaffolded and differentiated, but the content is the same and is delivered at the same pace. Instruction is not 'dumbed-down' and any program that takes that approach is doing a disservice to its students and not adhering to the requirements of Title III of NCLB.

I hate to keep reiterating that I believe the school was discriminatory, based on what the OP posted, but I guess until they come back, we won't know.

 

[Perky]

Yes, but the school was told that these kids don't need the services and for obvious reasons. The school may not be discriminating according law but they clearly are wrong to pursue International status when they know these kids don't need those services. Why would the school be pursuing it? It would seem to be because of their ethnicity. Discrimination? Maybe ... maybe not.

I personally, would still probably do something along the lines of LDiJ's suggested COA.

What obvious reasons? We're relying on a third party who tells us that the children don't have any English language needs. If the parents noted on the home-language survey that Japanese is spoken in the home, even if the children don't speak it, then the district is required to screen the child.

 

[Zigner]

To be clear, the school is not "pursuing" anything except screening for additional services. Nothing untoward or discriminatory about it.

 

[randolph76]

And, this is a legal forum. Thank you for understanding.

And I don't think this fits the legal definition for discrimination.

To be clear, the school is not "pursuing" anything except screening for additional services. Nothing untoward or discriminatory about it.

If that's all it is then fine. But if it ends up being different school curriculum is the problem. But that's probably jumping the gun.

What obvious reasons? We're relying on a third party who tells us that the children don't have any English language needs. If the parents noted on the home-language survey that Japanese is spoken in the home, even if the children don't speak it, then the district is required to screen the child.

I was assuming that the story OP said was accurate. Is that a national requirement or state?

 

[Perky]

OP's story may be accurate, but it's not complete.

It's a federal requirement.

 

[boomcrash]

The mother went to college, and is fluent in English, and speaks with a slight Japenese ( and southern accent.

The kids only speak English.

My question is what is the best method to oppose this?

 

[Perky]

The mother went to college, and is fluent in English, and speaks with a slight Japenese ( and southern accent.

The kids only speak English.

My question is what is the best method to oppose this?

None of this answers the question of how the home-language survey was completed. Depending on their answers to the survey, the testing may be required. If that's the case, then the child will either qualify for ESL services or not. If not, then the matter is resolved. If the child qualifies, the parents may decline services, and again the matter is resolved.

If the parents wish to complain about the process, they can go to the superintendent and/or the state board of ed.

 

[boomcrash]

Update:
The parents contacted the ESL center for testing today, and were turned away because the child does not qualify for test, meaning they are not international students and a language other then English is not spoken at home.

They will return for registration next week.