The Effect of Language of Instruction on Comprehension of Conjunctions

The purpose of this research project was to determine if a bilingual explanation of conjunctions results in better comprehension than an explanation in English only for dual language learners reading an English language text. Participants included four bilingual third grade students from the communities of Longmont and Boulder, who attended English-language classrooms. The author created a research protocol to determine the participants’ comprehension of target conjunctions before and after instruction. The author taught the use of target conjunctions to the participants, with instruction for half of the conjunctions presented in English and half in Spanish. No consistent difference was found in participants’ performance on the post-test for conjunctions taught in Spanish as compared to those taught in English. The language of instruction appeared to have no effect on student performance

When Enough Isn\u27t Enough: Qualitative and Quantitative Assessments of Adequate Education in State Constitutions by State Supreme Courts

This article facilitates the education debate by directing the question of what having an adequate education means, and how state supreme courts are grappling with the issue. This article uses a study of case law from state supreme courts analyzing state constitutional requirements for education. Three themes emerge from this study of case law: state supreme courts are dealing with a choice between judicial restraint and interference; courts struggle with how much to consider funding as opposed to other issues; and courts are trying to define adequacy claims within the context of equity claims

Lost in the Maze of Appeals: The Eleventh Circuit\u27s Review of Decisions by the Board of Immigration Appeals

The Eleventh Circuit reviews decisions made by the Board of Immigration Appeals with a very lenient substantial evidence test that incorporates the idea of compulsion. In other words, the record must compel an opposite conclusion for a decision to be overturned as opposed to merely being unsupported by substantial evidence. This article details the job of the Board of Immigration Appeals, the types of claims it hears, and the types of review applied to it by the Eleventh Circuit. A study of 251 cases from 1990 through 2008 suggests that the Eleventh Circuit hardly ever overturns the Board of Immigration Appeals. This complex intersection of administrative and immigration law leaves aliens struggling for relief often lost in the maze of appeals

The Due Process Conundrum: Using Mathews v. Eldridge as a Standard for Private Hospitals Under the Health Care Quality Improvement Act

In response to growing litigation between doctors and hospitals and the recalcitrance of some hospitals to initiate proper peer review actions against incompetent or unprofessional doctors, Congress passed the Health Care Quality Immunity Act in 1986. HCQIA provided immunity for hospitals that engaged in peer review, presuming immunity from both federal and state law claims if the hospital had satisfied the statutory safeguards. One of these statutory requirements is “adequate notice and procedures” for the doctors at issue. It is abundantly clear in both the legislative history of HCQIA and the case law surrounding HCQIA immunity that section 11112(a)(3) was indicative of procedural due process protections for doctors. However, in analyzing immunity claims under HCQIA, courts have been reluctant to define or develop a rubric to evaluate whether the notice and hearing procedures provided for doctors are “adequate.” This could be alleviated by importing the rubric for appropriate procedural due process from the area of constitutional due process and Mathews v. Eldridge

Brokering Education: A Study of Charter Receipt, Renewal, and Revocation in Louisiana\u27s Charter Schools

The most fundamental part of a charter school is its charter, its governing document. This article traces the history of Louisiana\u27s charter system from its inception and walks through the legal process of obtaining and retaining a charter and what happens to cause a charter to be revoked. Louisiana provides for five types of charters via statute that have different avenues of funding and different legal requirements from the state. Louisiana provides an excellent case study for the process of chartering because of the recent boom of charter schools in the area; there are lessons to be learned both in what Louisiana does right and what it does wrong for other states wishing to navigate and build a process for charter schools

Rife with Latent Power: Exploring the Reach of the IRS to Determine Tax-Exempt Status According to Public Policy Rationale in an Era of Judicial Deference

Using the case of Bob Jones University v. United States as a springboard, this article contends that the IRS has the legal authority to revoke the 501(c)(3) tax-exempt statuses of any institution that the IRS deems to be in violation of public policy. The first step to such an expansion might be to apply to private, religious universities that practice discrimination in areas other than race (e.g. gender and sexual orientation). This article traces the background and analysis of the Supreme Court decision in Bob Jones and how the Court left the door open for the IRS to make other public policy decisions and also considers how judicial deference and Chevron analysis could facilitate the choices of the IRS to determine public policy and status of exemptions

No Right at All: Putting Consular Notification in Its Rightful Place after Medellin

This Article covers the history of consular notification and presentation in the U.S. federal and state courts and in the International Court of Justice. Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations provides that nation-states should notify detained foreign nationals of their right to contact their consulate about their detention. This Article argues that the U.S. Supreme Court, as matters of institutional responsibility and judicial economy, should have concluded that the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations does not contain an enforceable individual right. Moreover, no analog for this right has been found in American jurisprudence