Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHurley, Shana
dc.date.accessioned2022-02-10T16:16:58Z
dc.date.available2022-02-10T16:16:58Z
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13051/17934
dc.descriptionFlorence M. Kelley ’37 Family Law Prize V. Schultz To the student who demonstrates exceptional interest or achievement in the area of family law [Note: This prize is awarded on the selection of Family Law teachers: NeJaime and Schultz for a paper]en_US
dc.description.abstractLawmakers nationwide are trying to improve reading by embracing a scientific consensus regarding literacy acquisition and enacting robust regulatory regimes touching every part of the learning process. For most actors, “Right to Read” laws establish clear accountability rules and noncompliance remedies. However, students who are not provided with statutory reading entitlements have inconsistent or nonexistent remedies against their schools. As a result, states do not hold accountable educators using debunked instructional methods and schools failing to provide necessary interventions. And courts abstain from enforcing their entitlements based on anachronistic research and policy. This Note introduces the new literacy science and laws, arguing descriptively that Right to Read regimes are enforceable under an implied right of action or a statutory negligence claim. Nevertheless, it recommends that lawmakers enact a public enforcement scheme that would better serve the students most in need of support.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherYale Law & Policy Reviewen_US
dc.titleThe Remediless Reading Righten_US
rioxxterms.versionNAen_US
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_US
refterms.dateFOA2022-02-10T16:16:58Z
refterms.dateFirstOnline2021


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Hurley Remediless Reading Right.pdf
Size:
627.4Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record