Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet
icon backReturn to Entries

Lau v. Nichols, Enforcement Documents

Lau v. Nichols was a landmark federal court case filed in 1970 by parents of native Chinese-speaking students in San Francisco. The families argued that a lack of special support services for learning English violated their children's rights to an equal educational opportunity. In 1974, the Supreme Court found unanimously for the plaintiffs, finding that students who do not speak English are entitled to special accommodations under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. An important antecedent document in the case was a May 25, 1970, memorandum sent by the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) in the then-Department of Health, Education and Welfare (now the Department of Education) to school districts around the nation. That memorandum anticipated the ruling in Lau by several years. It outlined the special responsibilities of public schools toward these students. The “May 25th Memorandum,” as it is generally known, was not actually part of the Lau decision, but it was given higher visibility and status by that ruling.

The Lau decision and its effect on education policy have been much discussed among educators and school policymakers for more than 30 years. Important changes have taken place in the last 20 years, if not to the letter of the law in Lau, certainly to the tenor and vigor of enforcement efforts by the federal government. To fully understand the actual and potential impact of the Lau decision, it is useful to examine a number of supporting documents that trace the history of enforcement of the Lau ruling by the OCR. This entry reviews each of these documents briefly and relates them to the evolving interpretation and enforcement of Lau. Readers should be mindful that new rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court or actions by the Congress can affect the status of these policy documents later.

In chronological order, the pertinent documents to be reviewed here are the following:

  • The “Lau Remedies” issued by the OCR in 1975
  • The proposed Lau enforcement regulations published in the Federal Register in August 1980, as a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
  • Guidance and policy memorandum by the director of OCR issued in 1985
  • Policy Update on Schools' Obligations Toward National Origin Minority Students With Limited-English Proficiency, issued in 1991

The Lau Remedies, 1975

Following the Lau v. Nichols decision, the Lau Remedies were published in 1975 under the title “Task-Force Findings Specifying Remedies Available for Eliminating Past Educational Practices Ruled Unlawful Under Lau v. Nichols.” This document gave districts guidance regarding how to identify English language learners (ELLs), which types of programs ELLs should be placed in; existing criteria, and standards for teacher qualifications. Moreover, the Remedies stated that when students' civil rights were violated, bilingual education should be implemented (they did not, however, require bilingual education in all cases). The Remedies found three types of programs suitable for ELLs: (1) bilingual/bicultural, (2) multilingual/multicultural, and (3) transitional bilingual education (TBE).

The Remedies are organized into nine sections: (1) Identification of Student's Primary or Home Language, (2) Diagnostic/Prescriptive Approach (identify the nature and extent of each student's educational needs and then prescribe an educational program utilizing the most effective teaching style), (3) Educational Program Selection, (4) Required and Elective Courses (must show that required and elective courses are not designed to have a discriminatory effect), (5) Instructional Personnel Requirements (instructional personnel must be linguistically/culturally familiar with the backgrounds of the students to be affected), (6) Racial/Ethnic Isolation or Identifiability of Schools and Classes (not educationally necessary nor legally permissible to create racially/ethnically identifiable schools to respond to student language characteristics), (7) Notification to Parents of Students Whose Primary or Home Language Is Other Than English (districts have the responsibility to notify parents of students identified as ELLs), (8) Evaluation (plans must include both a product result; and process evaluation-periodic evaluation throughout implementation), and (9) Bilingual/Bicultural Program (a program which utilizes the student's native language and cultural factors in instructing, maintaining, and further developing all the necessary skills in the student's native language and culture while introducing, maintaining, and developing all the necessary skills in the second language, English).

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Read next

More like this

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

close

Have you created a personal profile? Login or create a profile so that you can save clips, playlists and searches

close
close
close Signed In to profile You are signed in as:
close
Logged in Institution Institution