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

WHAT IS THE META CONSENT 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 En

glish 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 limited-English 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 language-

minority 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.