Articles

Dual Language/Two Way Immersion Language Programs

Are they a good alternative to traditional bilingual instruction?

by Kismet Oz, M.Ed. TESOL (Teaching English as a Second Language), an English Horizons teacher

Dual Language/Two Way Immersion Language Programs (to be referred to in this essay as DL), are based on the premise that instruction is provided in the language of the majority and minority students. This type of program is generally implemented from pre-K on, ideally with a a balance of 50/50 language instruction. Many programs use a phase-in system which emphasizes the minority language early on, and eventually reaches the 50/50 language balance. Such classes are usually comprised of half native speakers of English, and half native speakers of the minority language. (1) The most common minority language is currently Spanish, though other languages are represented in various programs around the country, such as Japanese, Korean, Cantonese and French. The goal is for students to achieve academic proficiency in both languages, and an appreciation for peer language students' cultures. This is what separates DL instruction from traditional bilingual instruction. "While the primary goal bilingual education has been to move children out of their first language into English as painlessly as possible, DL programs aim to build fluency and literacy in at least two languages." (Zars, 2001)(2)

Opponents of DL programs project their general opposition to bilingual education such as that bilingual education programs segregate language minorities, and are compensatory or based on a deficit model. They also feel that DL programs favor language majority children over language minority children, and that programs are too expensive or difficult to administer. (3) According to Jim Cummins (1999) (4), the bilingual education debate rages on many fronts, from the research community, to parents, to the media. The debate is especially negatively portrayed by the media, though the academic community, such as "applied linguists who have carried out research on language learning", have aligned themselves in favor of bilingual programs. Cummins comments that academics who are opposed to bilingual education, do not have a background in linguistics. (5) Bilingual education opponents have become "increasingly hostile" according to James Crawford of the Education Policy Studies Laboratory of Arizona State University. He states that, "substantial numbers of Americans who were once supportive of bilingual education...have moved into the English only camp", as have a number of politicians and journalists who "both reflect and influence public attitudes. (6) Opposition to bilingual education sometimes comes packaged as concern that language minority students are segregated, fail to learn English and have limited opportunities. Most of this type of thinking stems from a deficient understanding of what bilingual education can achieve and from a lack of information in general about how language is acquired, and literacy is achieved.

In spite of the highly charged and polarizing debate on bilingual education, dual language programs are emerging in the United States, in such demand in some communities, that schools are scrambling to initiate DL programs. Supporters of DL programs refute the claims of opponents to bilingual education based on evidence that they close the achievement gap in both languages, that knowledge and skills acquired in one language transfer to another language, and development in two languages enhances children's cognitive development. Furthermore, DL programs actually bring language majority and minority students together on an equal basis where language is viewed as a resource, not a disadvantage. Rather than being compensatory or based on a deficit model as some opponents claim, DL programs are specifically geared to afford all students with quality education where both languages have the opportunity to fully develop. Multiple studies disprove the claim that DL programs favor language majority children over language minority children. According to Torres-Guzman (2002) who cites no less than fourteen studies, the data shows that "both language majority and minority students outperform their norming peers in their first and second language by the upper elementary grades." (7)

The most comprehensive study to date by George Mason University's Wayne P. Thomas and Virginia P. Collier details the "effectiveness of different bilingual education models", showing that "the dual language model far outperforms all others". (8) Another significant finding of the study "shows that dual language students are more likely to graduate and enter college than their peers, and that they also test higher on nationally standardized tests." (9) This speaks highly in favor of dual language education as a new model for bilingual education. Dual language instruction can very well serve as a model for all education, according to Christie Chisolm (2005).(10) Dual language education promotes cultural awareness beyond a surface level. Both student language groups have the unique experience of being in each other's shoes while going through the process of learning a second language. This will promote empathy and understanding among students. In the DL environment, parents are more likely to be involved in their children's education, and they are invited to take part in various ways in the process.

Families are required to commit to keeping their child in a DL program for a set period of time. This facilitates effective language learning, but also helps build a community over time. The most successful programs are those where parents work in cooperation with administrators, particularly mainstream parents who "command power and resources that can be channeled into the operation of enrichment programs" (11), and who can generate community support. This point can not be understated. When taxpayers are willing to vote for tax increases for school programs, they have to be convinced that their children will benefit from those programs. The core political base in favor of DL programs may not necessarily be immigrant families as might be assumed. This is why pilot programs are important as fuel for gaining support for DL program expansion. Bilingual education opponents have advance the claim that DL programs are difficult to administer. It is true that any new program will have to go through the process of implementation, but when the program is in place, administrative issues will be no more or less difficult than for traditional education.

There are approximately 250 dual language schools in the United States according to the Center for Applied Linguistics. (12) Of those schools, the John Stanford International School in Seattle, has been recognized by two non-profit organizations as a national model, and has been called the most outstanding elementary school by the Asia Society, and by Goldman Sachs foundation which has also contributed generously to the school. Here math and science are instructed in Japanese or Spanish, and reading, writing and social studies are taught in English. (13) The Alicia Chacon School in El Paso, Texas has such a high demand for entry, that admission is by lottery. Student test scores are promising, with over 90% of students passing the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills Test by the 5th grade, and scores continuing to improve in subsequent years. (14) The Amigos Program in Cambridge, Massachusetts which instructs in 50% English / 50% Spanish students scored higher on the California Achievement Test than English controls. (15) These are just three among many dual language programs that stand out across the country.

According to the National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education, "dual language design follows consistent and clear linguistic, sociocultural, educational policies." (16) As mentioned previously, the primary linguistic goal of DL programs is for students to achieve language proficiency in both languages being taught. Considered an important aspect of such programs is that simultaneous translation is avoided as a rule. In addition, language is taught both formally and informally, and instruction is student centered." (17). In fact, the education philosophy that this model is based on, (i.e., learner centered and holistic), is being implemented in classrooms all over the country, not just in DL programs. As for claims that bilingual programs are more expensive, a commissioned study in California, cited by Ariza, et. al (2002) found that ESL pull-out programs are actually more expensive than bilingual programs. (18) This is reiterated by Chambers and Parrish (1992). They explain that although ESL pullout programs do not rely on native language instruction, they are still the most expensive because more teachers have to be hired to serve small groups of children. (19)

The Center for Applied Linguistics (CAL) has established criteria for Dual Language programs which places solid research behind program development. The CAL find that DL programs work best when "at least one third, but no more than two thirds of students in a dual language class are dominant in a language other than English. In addition, they advise that programs employ teachers who are truly fluent in a second language, "not just bilingual certified" which does not necessarily mean that they are capable of instructing in a second language. (20) The key is long term for DL programs, which the CAL recommends provide a minimum of four to six years of bilingual instruction to students participating in the program. (21). The department of Multicultural Education in Florida has established criteria for its DL schools that include keeping the two languages of instruction separate at all times, and keeping the teacher ratio at 1:26 when one teacher is instructing in two languages, and at 2:45 when there is a partner teacher for the minority language. (22) The National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning (23) has also published criteria for DL education developed by Lindholm (1990) which include facilitating positive interaction among students with cooperative learning strategies and that "the focus of instruction should be the same core academic curriculum that students in other programs experience." (24)

Besides political opposition to any form of bilingual education, there are other obstacles to the expansion of DL programs such as funding and staffing. Attrition is another concern which leads to a certain level of transiency, with students entering and leaving a program. There is a lack of programs that continue on through the secondary level which leads to a decline in target language proficiency. (25). There is also a need to diversify languages being taught. (26) Still, the most positive aspect is that the DL model answers critic's concerns about bilingual education by setting goals for academic proficiency for all students and integrating them into a multicultural environment rather than segregating students into "special programs". Dual language instruction also has the benefit of developing bilingual speakers of mainstream students who may not ordinarily have that opportunity.

This brings me to another compelling reason why dual language programs are needed in the United States. Besides the obvious reality of the influx of language minority students in school systems around the country, and the need to provide services to them, if we broaden the view and look at it from a global perspective, the United States is one of the few countries where bilingualism is the exception, not the norm as it is in many societies around the world. The global economy has changed the nature of boundaries and possibilities in the job market and in business. While it may seem safe to assume that English will be the obvious lingua franga, or intermediary language, this may not always be the case, nor should it be. According to an article in the Seattle Times, one in six U.S. jobs is tied to international trade. (27) To be competitive in the changing global economy, bilingualism or multilingualism is a necessity. Perhaps what is needed to rally support for dual language instruction is economic motivation.

Clearly, my opinion in favor of dual language instruction is not masked in this essay. This opinion has deepened based on my own experience during K-12 observation as part of this TESOL program where I spent 120 hours in various ESL pullout or sheltered ESL classes. What I observed in these ESL programs, even if they were bilingual, is that language minority students are segregated, and it is also apparent that there is no emphasis on the L1 of the minority students. Rather, the emphasis is on developing their English proficiency to the level of enabling them to mainstream with native speaking students, which negates the importance of L1 literacy and cultural identity. Dual language instruction may be the best way to address all the concerns on the issue of bilingual education, be it political opposition, or the inadequacy of traditional bilingual programs. With the added benefit of educating majority language students in a second language, and all that has to offer, it would not surprise me at all if Dual Lanuage/Two Way Immersion education became the norm, rather than the exception.

REFERENCES

[1] Two Way Bilingual Education Programs in Practice: A National and Local Perspective. ERIC Digest (1994) 12/94 retrieved on 5/4/05 from: http://www.ericdigests.org/1996-1/two.htm

[2] Zars, Belle, (2001). Two Languages, One Classroom: Dual Language Programs Go Both Ways. The Texas Observer, 11/9/2001 Retrieved 5/4/05 http://www.texasobserver.org/showForPrint.asp?IssueDate=11%2F9%2F2001&IssueFolder

[3] Torres-Guzman, M. (DiCerbo, P. Ed.) (2002). Dual Language Programs: Key Features and Results. Directions in Language Education, No. 14 National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.

[4] Cummins, J., (1999). Research, Ethics, and Public Discourse: The Debate on Bilingual Education. Presentation at the National Conference of the American Association of Higher Education March 22, 1999 Washington D.C. retrieved on 5/4/05 http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/JWCRAWFORD/cummins.2.htm

[5] Cummins, J., (1999). Research, Ethics, and Public Discourse: The Debate on Bilingual Education. Presentation at the National Conference of the American Association of Higher Education March 22, 1999 Washington D.C. retrieved on 5/4/05 http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/JWCRAWFORD/cummins.2.htm

[6] Crawford, J., Hard Sell: Why is Bilingual Education So Unpopular with the American Public? Education Policy Studies Laboratory: Language Policy Research Unit - Arizona State University.

[7] Torres-Guzman, M. (DiCerbo, P. Ed.) (2002). Dual Language Programs: Key Features and Results. Directions in Language Education, No. 14 National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.

[8] Collier, V. & Thomas, W. (2004). The Astounding Effectiveness of Dual Language Education for All. NABE Journal of Research and Practice, 2:1 Winter, 04

[9] Collier, V. & Thomas, W. (2004). The Astounding Effectiveness of Dual Language Education for All. NABE Journal of Research and Practice, 2:1 Winter, 04

[10] Chisholm, C., (2005) Get Smarty: Dual language education gains momentum at APS
http://www.alibi.com/editorial/section_display.php?di=2005-03-03&scn=feature#11058 retrieved 5/7/05

[11] Torres-Guzman, M. (DiCerbo, P. Ed.) (2002). Dual Language Programs: Key Features and Results. Directions in Language Education, No. 14 National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.

[12] Lee, Alexa, (2001) Dual Language Education: Who Benefits? CNNFYI.com retrieved 5/4/2005 from http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com/2001/fyi/news/06/04/bilingual.education/

[13] Bhatt, Sanjay, (2004). Dual Language School Lauded as a National Model. The Seattle Times Wed. Nov. 17, 2004 retrieved on 5/4/05 from http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/PrintStory.pl?document_id=2002091980&zsection

[14] Zars, Belle, (2001). Two Languages, One Classroom: Dual Language Programs Go Both Ways. The Texas Observer, 11/9/2001 Retrieved 5/4/05 http://www.texasobserver.org/showForPrint.asp?IssueDate=11%2F9%2F2001&IssueFolder

[15] Two Way Bilingual Education Programs in Practice: A National and Local Perspective. ERIC Digest (1994) 12/94 retrieved on 5/4/05 from: http://www.ericdigests.org/1996-1/two.htm

[16] Torres-Guzman, M. (DiCerbo, P. Ed.) (2002). Dual Language Programs: Key Features and Results. Directions in Language Education, No. 14 National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.

[17] Torres-Guzman, M. (DiCerbo, P. Ed.) (2002). Dual Language Programs: Key Features and Results. Directions in Language Education, No. 14 National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.

[18] Ariza, E., Morales-Jones, C., Yahya, N., Zainuddin, H., (2002). Theories and issues in teaching English as a second language with a K-12 focus. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co.

[19] Chambers, J. & Parrish, T. (1992) Meeting the challenge of diversity: An evaluation of programs for pupils with limited proficiency in English (Volume 4). Cost of programs and services for LEP students. Berkeley, CA: BW Associates

[20] Zars, Belle, (2001). Two Languages, One Classroom: Dual Language Programs Go Both Ways. The Texas Observer, 11/9/2001 Retrieved 5/4/05 http://www.texasobserver.org/showForPrint.asp?IssueDate=11%2F9%2F2001&IssueFolder

[21] Romero, Anna. A., (1999). Two-Way Bilingual Programs: The Demand for a Multilingual Workforce. IDRA Newsletter, May 1999 retrieved 5/4/05 from http://www.idra.org/Newslttr/1999/May/Anna.htm

[22] Presenting Dual Language in Palm Beach County Department of Multicultural Education retrieved 5/4/05 from http://www.palmbeach.k12.fl.us/Multicultural/MulticulturalNew/Dual.htm

[23] Christian, Donna, (1994) Two Way Bilingual Education: Students Learning Through Two Languages. National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning. Education Practice Report:12

[24] Lindholm, K. (1990) Criteria for Succes in Two-Way Bilingual Education. Bilingual Education: Issues and Strategies. A Padilla,
H. Fairchild and C. Valdez (eds.) Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications

[25] Two Way Bilingual Education Programs in Practice: A National and Local Perspective. ERIC Digest (1994) 12/94 retrieved on 5/4/05 from: http://www.ericdigests.org/1996-1/two.htm

[26] Christian, Donna, (1994) Two Way Bilingual Education: Students Learning Through Two Languages. National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning. Education Practice Report:12

[27] Bhatt, Sanjay, (2004). Dual Language School Lauded as a National Model. The Seattle Times Wed. Nov. 17, 2004 retrieved on 5/4/05 from http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/PrintStory.pl?document_id=2002091980&zsection

English Horizons Online ESL Classes, English Classes and Programs