Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) Practice Test

What was the Supreme Court's ruling regarding non-English speaking students in the Lau v. Nichols case?

1. They do not have equal access to education with instructions only in English

2. Local educational administrations bear costs for limited-English-speaking children

3. Segregation of language-minority children disadvantages their education

4. Provision of ESL instruction is not mandatory for schools with few non-English-speaking students

The correct answer is: They do not have equal access to education with instructions only in English

The Supreme Court's ruling in the Lau v. Nichols case established that non-English speaking students must have equal access to education, which means they cannot be denied understanding and participation in the educational process simply because instruction is provided solely in English. This case emphasized that schools are obligated to take necessary steps to ensure that these students can understand the instruction and participate meaningfully in their education. The ruling underscored the importance of not just access to education in a general sense, but access that is meaningful and equitable. The decision is significant as it laid the groundwork for the requirement that educational institutions must provide appropriate language assistance services, making it clear that merely offering education is not sufficient if it is not accessible to all students.