As far as the private schools are concerned they are free to make their own decisions, however, the schools, including the public schools, that receive the Federal funding are bound to abide by the government rules and regulations.
The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution declares (in part),
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; or deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
There have been enough numbers of court rulings (United States v. Texas (1971, 1981), Serna v. Portales (1974), Aspira v. New York (1975), Rios v. Reed (1978), San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez (1973), Flores v. Arizona(2000) , Williams v. California (settled in 2004), Otero v. Mesa County Valley School District (1980), Keyes v. School District No. 1(1983), Gomez v. Illinois State Board of Education (1987), and Bushwick Parents Organization v. Mills , to name a few) in favor of the Bilingual Education.
A couple rulings that have served as landmark are rulings that maintain Bilingual edification culture are The Lau v. Nichols (1974) rulings that formed the basis of rulings in many other cases and was also embed in to the federal laws as EEOA – the Equal Educational Opportunities Act (1974). Sec 1703(f).
The same was reinstated in the Castañeda standard [that covered two cases Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978) and Alexander v. Sandoval (2001).] that the schools must act to endorse the requirements of the ELLs as it is essentially the law and schools must participate in shaping the sufficiency of the programs for betterment of the ELLs.
Thus, literally it is impossible to ignore ELLs and practically out of question to eliminate their admission. On the contrary, the law encourages the schools find the requirements of the ELLs, and to provide sufficient resources to fulfill their requirements in letting them emerge as the equals.
While the cases have not been able to help courts determine which is the best module to educate the ELLs, it has become crystal clear that the law states that
Any curriculum that is employed for ELLs, irrespective of the language of education and irrespective of the models employed, must ensure the two prominent outcomes:
1. To educate the ELLs to be proficient in English Language (Schools need to instruct the ELLs in English as they need to be prepared for fluency in English to be successful in class and in life) and
2. To educate the academic concepts (at the same time they must even learn the other subjects as language arts, science, math, music, social studies, physical education and art,
Well of course, they bring in better amount of the grant to the schools, but apart from the grant, there are a few other features as well that the ELLs bring along with them.
- A teaching challenge,
- Better education resources,
- Diverse culture,
- Different languages,
- Various talents,
- Assorted perspectives,
All in all the amalgamation of ELLs gives the schools a chance to enrich the
diversity, the education culture, and the entire society.
In return, they need some additional time and better teaching standards. For schools that can bridge that challenging gap, the ELLs can prove to be quite a boon. However, educating the ELLs is no less challenging.