Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination against students on the basis of race, color, or national origin in programs receiving federal funds. Title VI and related case law prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in student admissions, student access to courses and programs, and student policies and their application, to name a few of the areas covered. Discrimination against national origin minorities on the basis of limited English skills is also prohibited by Title VI case law. Any institution or agency receiving federal funds is covered by Title VI. Most educational activities of a recipient agency or institution are covered, including activities or programs not in direct receipt of federal funds. It was the language of Title VI that provided the model for Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972.

Procedures for filing possible complaints regarding racial or ethnic discrimination are provided under the legislation. Such complaints may be filed with the Office for Civil Rights, Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20202, the regional Office for Civil Rights, or state departments of education.

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972

Title IX prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex against students and employees in educational programs and activities that receive federal funds. The Title IX regulation prohibits sex discrimination in such areas as:

Admissions to vocational, graduate, professional, and public undergraduate schools

Counseling and guidance tests, materials, and practices

Physical education and athletics

Vocational education programs

Student rules and policies

Extracurricular activities

Employment

Complaints of Title IX violations may be filed with the Office for Civil Rights, Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20202, the regional Office for Civil Rights, or state departments of education.

Guidelines for Eliminating Discrimination and Denial of Services on the Basis of Race, Color, National Origin, Sex, and Handicap in Vocational Education

The guidelines apply to the recipients of any federal financial assistance that offers or administer programs of vocational education or training. They derive from and provide supplemental guidance to Title VI, Title IX, Section 504, and the implementing departmental regulations.

Antidiscrimination laws can be viewed as continuing clarifications of human rights guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution and its various amendments.

Complaints of violations of this legislation may be filed with the Office for Civil Rights, Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20202, the regional Office for Civil Rights, or state departments of education.

The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment

The U.S. Constitution makes only one reference to equality. In the 14th Amendment the following clause appears:

"... nor shall any State...deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

This clause, known as the Equal Protection Clause, guarantees the equality of citizens and non citizens alike under the law. It became law in 1868, following the Civil War, and was designed to ensure that newly freed slaves not be discriminated against—that is, that no state would make or administer any law differently for those who had been slaves and those who had not. The 14th Amendment also makes clear that women and minorities are citizens. When the U.S. Constitution was first written, only White male landowners were considered citizens.

Brown vs. Board of Education

In Brown vs. Board of Education in 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court accepted the argument that segregation in schools was a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. It was essentially the same argument that had been made more than 50 years before in Plessy vs. Ferguson, but, for the first time, the court looked beyond the intent to discriminate, and founded its opinion on the harmful effects on Black children that resulted from separate educational facilities. As a result of these effects, the court declared that Black people were deprived of equal protection under the law. This decision marked a critical turning point in the Supreme Court's application of the Equal Protection Clause, and today we are still feeling the impact of the its mandate to desegregate schools "with all deliberate speed."

Civil Rights Act of 1964

Brown vs. Board of Education set a precedence, equal education has been a long time coming. Recognizing that school segregation was still an ugly and pervasive reality, Congress enacted the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to desegregate public schools.

The inclusion of the term "national origin" in the original version of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 stemmed from the Brown vs. Board of Education litigation that highlighted that many national origin students in nonsegregated settings were still not given equal educational opportunity.

Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 closely followed The Civil Rights Act of 1964 to provide funds for special programs for children from low-income families (Title 1) and for children with limited English proficiency (Title VII). The legislation intended to ensure equal opportunity for instruction and learning for all students.

Title VI and Title IX Court Decisions

Title VI and Title IX are very similar in how they affect educational activities and the types of discrimination they prohibit. The following examples are key court decisions based on these laws.

• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (P.L. 88-352) prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin against students of any school receiving federal assistance.
• In Lau vs. Nichols 1973, 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 limited-English-proficient in order to provide equal access to educational opportunities.
• Title IX of the Education Amendments of l972 (P.L. 92-318) prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex against students of any school receiving federal financial assistance.
• The case of Brenden vs. Minnesota State High School League (1972) clarified the rights of women to pursue equal athletic opportunities. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Peggy Brenden was being discriminated against because she was not allowed to try out for and play on the boys' tennis team when her school did not provide comparable athletic opportunities for girls.
• In Castenada vs. Pickard, 1981, the court set for a three-part test to determine whether a school district takes appropriate actions to overcome language barriers that confront language-minority students. The tests evaluate by calculating whether: (1) a program based on educational theory is recognized by experts, (2) programs are practices used are reasonably calculated to implement the adopted theory, and (3) the program successfully produces results that indicate that language barriers are being overcome.
• Plyer vs. Doe, 1982, the Supreme Court ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits states from denying a free public education to undocumented immigrant children regardless of their immigrant status. The court emphatically declared that school systems are not agents for enforcing immigration law, and determined that the burden that undocumented aliens may place on school districts is not an acceptable argument for excluding or denying educational service to any student.

The U.S. Supreme Court has decided that all children have a right to primary and secondary public education in the United States, regardless of their immigration status. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed in the 1982 case Plyler v. Doe that education is a basic right of all children. Because undocumented and other children have no control over their immigration status or presence in the United States, the Court held that all children are entitled to public education through the secondary level and that schools may not ask for immigration or Social Security documentation for enrollment.

Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1988

In 1988, after four years of debate, Congress enacted the Civil Rights Restoration Act (CRRA), which restores the originally intended scope of the four statutes already in place to protect minorities, women, the elderly, and the handicapped from federally subsidized discrimination. The act is in response to a 1984 Supreme Court decision, Grove City vs. Bell, in which the high court ruled that nondiscrimination laws applied only to specific programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance, not to an entire institution.

Goals 2000: Educate America Act

Global competition challenges the standards to which American students are held, and requires the ongoing, thoughtful review of American education. A historic effort to change the national educational emphasis from process to performance and from complacency to high expectations for all learners was initiated by the nation's 50 bipartisan governors in 1989 and codified in national legislation in the 1994 enactment of a new law, Goals 2000: Educate America Act.

The implementation of national goals reflects a nation that has embarked on a strategic effort to upgrade the quality and outcomes of education across the nation. The Educate America Act calls on states to set world-class standards for all students, and gives states wide latitude to fit legislative requirements within existing educational reform strategies. The goals provide the impetus for a competent American workforce because they require that a continued effort be made to unify and strengthen the nation's resolution to achieve the national education goals by the year 2000. Goals 2000 provides the basis for creating new vision in education and setting innovative expectations for children and society. Above all, the goals are articulated for every learner and citizen, not just a few elite or high achieving students. The eight goals are capsulated as follows:

 

Goal 1 – By the year 2000, all children in America will enter school ready to learn.

 

Goal 2 – The high school graduation rate will increase to at least 90 percent.

 

Goal 3 – Students will leave grades 4, 8, and 12 having demonstrated competency in English, mathematics, science, foreign languages, civics and government, economics, arts, history, and geography; every school in America will ensure that all students learn to use their minds well, and are prepared for citizenship and productive employment.

 

Goal 4 – Teachers will have the professional development they need to help students reach the other Goal.

 

Goal 5 – Students will be the first in the world in mathematics and science achievement.

 

Goal 6 – Every adult will be literate and possess skills to compete in the global economy and participate as citizens in American democracy.

 

Goal 7 – Schools will be free of drugs, violence, unauthorized guns, and alcohol and will offer disciplined environments of learning.

 

Goal 8 – Schools will promote partnerships with parents to increase their participation in their children's education.

Inherent in the eight Goal is the premise that all students can learn. A more student-driven system has the potential to respond to student differences, unlike the curriculum-driven system that has been the norm of U.S. schools. Goals 2000 stresses how essential listening to and talking with students and people from diverse populations is to improving America's education. Therefore, hand-in-hand with achieving each goal is holding high expectations for every student, and the importance of responding to diversity and addressing multiple learning styles. The Educate America Act requires that educators manage the subtleties of prejudice and incorporate multicultural strategies into all curricula. Multicultural education will help both minority and dominant cultures become aware of each other's beliefs and assumptions, and will encourage open-mindedness and rich learning experiences that reflect a pluralistic culture and world.

The goals encourage improved instruction of minorities and Native Americans in all instructional opportunities and activities, and promote the application of technologies in every classroom. Writing, reading, listening, and speaking will be geared to better support bilingual students in school. The goals work to prevent sex-role stereotyping, and encourage girls and boys to equally explore learning by taking risks and becoming active learners through hands-on activities. Goals 2000: Educate America Act emphasizes that motivating students to learn is key if schools intend to successfully make the most effective use of instructional time. Therefore, student success depends on effective parent involvement in their children's educational lives as well as collaborative partnerships between schools and communities.

Improving America's Schools Act of 1994

Under the framework of the Goals 2000: Educate America Act, the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965 entitled Improving America's Schools Act of 1994 (IASA) marks a watershed in federal support for education. IASA provides a comprehensive overhaul of educational programs by restructuring them to ensure that all students acquire the skills and knowledge they will need in the 21st century. The reauthorized ESEA directly supports the states' Goals 2000 frameworks to meet state standards that are meant to ensure that each student meets such standards.

By encouraging educators to establish comprehensive solutions for schools and districts to meet students' needs that are aligned with reform efforts, schools and districts will receive increased support for technology, comprehensive technical assistance, and professional development. The IASA shifts the focus of federal education policy from compliance with federal requirements to emphasizing flexibility to improve teaching and learning as well as increased accountability for improved student achievement. The bill encourages grassroots reform efforts to flourish without federal control and alleviates paper work to allow educators more time and resources to better educate children. IASA promotes building-level decisionmaking to bolster partnerships for reform, and provides a waiver authority to relieve the requirements that impede improved performance. The act also provides resources that help link parents, communities, and schools.

The Improving America's Schools Act, or the reauthorized Amendments to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965, include the following titles:

 

Title I – Helping Disadvantaged Children Meet High Standards
Improving Basic Programs Operated by Local Educational Agencies
Even Start Family Literacy Program
Education Migratory Children
Education of Neglected and Delinquent Youth

 

Title II – Dwight D. Eisenhower Professional Development Program

 

Title III – Technology for Education
Technology for Education of All Students
Star Students

 

Title IV – Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities

 

Title V – Promoting Equity
Magnet School Assistance
Women's Educational Equity

 

Title VI – Innovative Education Program Strategies

 

Title VII – Bilingual Education, Language Enhancement, Language Acquisition Programs

 

Title VIII – Impact Aid

 

Title IX – Indian Education

 

Title X – Programs of National Significance
Fund for the Improvement of Education (FIE)
Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education Act
Public Charter Schools
Arts in Education Program
Civic Education Program

 

Title XI – Coordinated Services

 

Title XII – School Facilities Infrastructure Improvement Act

 

Title XIII – Support and Assistance Programs to Improve Education

 

Title XIV – General Provisions
To promote program integration, coordination, equal educational opportunity, flexibility, state and local discretion, efficiency, and improve accountability.

Title II of the Bill Amendments to the General Educational Provisions Act

The IASA affects the first comprehensive overhaul the the General Education Provisions Act (GEPA) by shortening and simplifying the stature, eliminating obsolete and unnecessary provisions, and increasing flexibility, reducing burdens, and enhancing equity.

Title III of the Bill Amendments of Other Acts

Amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) - Handicapped children under Chapter 1 Handicapped Program receive the same kind of services as those under IDEA and have the same rights and safeguards.

Amendment to the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance - Intended to ensure that homeless children and youth have access to a free and appropriate public education. The act requires states to revise their policies in order to eliminate barriers to enrollment, attendance, and success in school of homeless students.