Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Under Proposition 58, the public school systems will have the right to choose the way they see as appropriate for their students to learn English more swiftly. Students will now have the option to be taught in an English-only environment, or a bilingual environment, where a person of the student's native language teaches them English.
Profanity is often depicted in images by grawlixes, which substitute symbols for words.. Profanity, also known as swearing, cursing, or cussing, involves the use of notionally offensive words for a variety of purposes, including to demonstrate disrespect or negativity, to relieve pain, to express a strong emotion, as a grammatical intensifier or emphasis, or to express informality or ...
A San Luis Obispo County man broke out into a “profane tirade ... Under California’s sentencing laws, Guevara wouldn’t be eligible for parole for 430 years, meaning he will spend the rest of ...
Proposition 227 [2] was a California ballot proposition passed on the June 2, 1998, ballot. Proposition 227 was repealed by Proposition 58 on November 8, 2016. According to Ballotpedia, "Proposition 227 changed the way that "Limited English Proficient" (LEP) students are taught in California. Specifically, it
A 2018 study from the University of California, Irvine, maintains that Prop 47 was not a "driver" for recent upticks in crime, based upon comparison of data from 1970 to 2015, in New York, Nevada, Michigan and New Jersey, states that closely matched California's crime trends, but that "what the measure did do was cause less harm and suffering ...
The 1986 Proposition 63, titled Official State Language, was a proposition in the state of California on the November 4, 1986 ballot. The ballot initiative created Article III, Section 6 of the California Constitution and made English the official language of the state. The measure passed by a 46.5% margin.
On Monday, the De Pere School Board decided to not move forward with censuring the board president for allegedly disrespecting a fellow member.
A student's profanity-laced parody of a principal is hardly the same as a threat of a school shooting, and we are reluctant to try and craft a one-size fits all approach." In that case, the court held, it was not necessary to adopt any of the tests proposed in other circuits since the threatening nature of the speech satisfied all of them. [29]