The University School of Law’s Education Rights Institute celebrated its one year anniversary Monday with an event focusing on the impact of Title VI — a statute on nondiscrimination within public institutions — on American education since its legalization in 1964. The event consisted of two speaker panels and a speech from keynote speaker Catherine Lhamon, assistant secretary of Education for Civil Rights of the United States, to discuss issues of limited multilingual education for non-English speakers, the federal end to affirmative action and racial disparities in educational access.
According to a press release statement from Kimberly Robinson, ERI founder and professor of law and public affairs, the ERI was launched in October of 2023 with the goal of increasing educational access in the US for K-12 schools so that all students can enjoy the right to a high-quality education. ERI works to accomplish this goal by producing new research and scholarship, encouraging the effective implementation of federal non-discrimination legislation and increasing public awareness of educational inequalities by amplifying academic research.
According to Robinson, the ERI chose to commemorate the anniversary of Title VI because the statute’s purpose of minimizing educational discrimination aligns with the ERI’s own goals. As defined by the U.S. Department of Justice, Title VI is a statute of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin in programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance.
The event brought in a series of guest speakers ranging from University professors to founders of anti-discrimination organizations in two speaker panels. The first panel discussed modern forms of discrimination based on race and national origin such as monolingual education, excess teacher discipline to students of color and resource inequality among lower income districts.
The second panel focused on the meaning and impact of Title VI, as well as the impact of the 2023 Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College Supreme Court case — which effectively ended affirmative action in college admissions — on diversity and discrimination in education.
In the first panel, Chris Chang-Bacon, assistant professor in the School of Education and Human Development, said that linguistic obstacles in a multi-ethnic society are also a significant form of educational discrimination in the United States.
According to Chang-Bacon, the U.S. does not have an official language, yet the vast majority of American schools only offer classes in English. Chang-Bacon said that dual language programs — curricula in which students are taught core subjects such as science and history in two languages — offers a promising method of both teaching students another language while also teaching subjects in a language they understand.
“The idea of a monolingual USA is not only inaccurate, it's a myth that actively upholds white and monolingual supremacy. This idea of nativism — who belongs in a particular country — [as well as] language discrimination overlap with other forms of racism,” Chang-Bacon said. “Institutions, including our schools, must reflect a multilingual reality. We talk about preparing our kids for the real world — the real world is multilingual.”
In the second panel, Oscar Jimenez-Castellanos, University of Georgia professor and executive director of the Center for Latino Achievement and Success in Education, agreed that monolingual education presents a clear obstacle to educational access, but said that he is unsure as to whether dual language programs are the solution to this issue.
Jimenez-Castellanos stated that these dual language programs have become increasingly elitist and designed to help native English speakers learn other languages rather than the other way around.
“Dual language programs exist where all of us may live, [in] middle class and upper middle class communities,” Jimenez-Castellanos said. “They're implemented [in these areas] and they import the non-native English speakers to fill in some of the gaps to help native English speakers learn that second language.”
Conversely, the second panel focused on the many successes of Title VI in supporting diverse education policies by providing public schools with access to funds and resources based on their willingness to comply with non-discrimination regulation. According to Erica Frankenberg, professor of education and demography at Pennsylvania State University, Title VI mandates that public schools be able to prove that they can provide an equitable, non-discriminatory education in order to obtain federal funding.
However, according to Jin Hee Lee, director of strategic initiatives for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, opponents of affirmative action and similar programs have used non-discrimination legislation such as Title VI and the Equal Protection Clause to justify attacks against impactful DEI initiatives. According to Lee, in the wake of the SFFA v. Harvard ruling, anti-affirmative action legislation and extremist efforts to oppose DEI have widened the educational inequalities experienced by minority students and denied accessible programming designed to integrate students of color into predominantly white institutions.
“Because that decision was issued, there had been a lot of embrace and excitement among extremists to take that decision, run with it, and really challenge any efforts to address the barriers to all opportunity, let alone educational opportunity,” Lee said. “These extremists are really utilizing that language to make the case that what we're trying to achieve is diversity for the sake of diversity, and using race as a proxy [to justify] discrimination.”
Lhamon ended this event by presenting the many cases of education discrimination she encounters and challenges in her role with the Office of Civil Rights.
Lhamon listed a number of school districts in Utah, Texas and California in which she said students experience harassment, bullying and physical abuse for their race and national origin. According to Lhamon, these are the school districts that the OCR works with to make systemic changes and improve administrative responses to discrimination in order for these public institutions to maintain federal funding in accordance with Title VI mandates.
Lhamon ended her speech with a forward-looking message. According to Lhamon, even 60 years after the passing of Title VI, racial discrimination and inequity remains prevalent throughout the US education system. She said that despite this, progress is being made, and with action and hope, a brighter future of American education will ensue.
“The case resolutions I shared … reflect that equal opportunity in school is possible and achievable, and they also show the painful truth that discrimination proliferates without meaningful enforcement of laws,” Lhamon said. “We need laws directed specifically at eradicating discrimination [and] targeting civil injustice … I want all of you who are present to utilize your advocacy work to realize that possibility.”
Read More
From the archives: Nov. 25 – Dec. 1
By Emma Todd and Grace Franklin | 6 hours agoThe day before Thanksgiving in 1981, the University was gifted with its first snow of the year!
Top 10 Thanksgiving break moments
By Sam Saks | 7 hours agoWhether you’re spending break near or far, here are some of the most iconic moments destined to befall your Thanksgiving next week.
Student Council hears from Director of Diversity Education, talks parking fines
By Vyshnavi Tatta | YesterdayLaw Rep. Kasey Michaud introduced a bill encouraging students to donate food to local pantries by offering reductions in parking fees as an incentive.
