Developmental Bilingual Versus Two-Way Immersion Language Education
U.S. Schooling Languages Other Than English:
Developmental Bilingual Versus Two-way Immersion Language Education
The term “bilingual” education is “neither a single uniform program nor a consistent
‘methodology’… Rather, it is an approach that encompasses a variety of program models”
(Ovando & Combs, 2012, p. 9). For some, the term “dual language” (DL) has replaced it— which, likewise, has a wide range of meanings. Depending on the source, the term DL sometimes is used to include developmental, also termed maintenance or late-exit, bilingual; heritage language—for indigenous groups; foreign language, also called one-way or full, immersion; and two-way immersion (TWI) education. This article will employ “DL” to identify
TWI and will …show more content…
only address the more traditional developmental bilingual (DB) versus a TWI language education.
Collier and Thomas review that English-only or merely remedial bilingual courses have not served the English language learning (ELL) student well (as cited in Espinosa, 2013), known for longitudinal DL studies, found a pattern of ELL students losing an ability to communicate in their first language, preferring only English, often developing communication problems with their extended families, and decreasing in academic achievement in English.
The U.S. DB education, well-known during the 1970s and 1980s, is for kindergarten through fifth, sometimes sixth, grades, but does not continue in middle or high school (Ovando
& Combs, 2012, p. 42). Program purposes and goals vary, yet, Baker notes, frequently, DB programs goals are explicitly for melding ELL (mainly immigrant and indigenous American) students into the common culture of the United States (as cited in Ovando & Combs, 2012, p. 9).
With increasing demands to communicate in more than one language in the near future, the British Council found its lack of multilingual citizens prepared for the future as “alarming”
(British Council, 2013). The United States mirrors this problem. Also, its 2008 census from the
National Center for Education Statistics revealed that 20% of grade school students between the ages of five and 17 speak a language other than English at home (as cited in Hsu, 2013). Though one of the TWI program goals is to gain mastery in speaking two languages, this is not the only goal. Lindholm-Leary defines that the goals of a TWI education, both for ELL and native
English-speaking (NES) students, are to achieve “high levels of bilingualism and bi-literacy, academic achievement, and cross-cultural competence” (as cited in Goldenberg et al, 2013).
How are these goals reached, and what is the typical TWI educational model? Canada’s
TWI model, created in the 1960s for French and English languages, is the prototype used for some of the TWI programs in the United States; it is called “the 90-10 model”. Since TWI education is for both ELL and NES students, both learn from one another. Ovando and Combs
(2012) explain that in DL, both ELL and NES groups stay together throughout the day and serve as peer tutors for each other” (p. 95). The other prevalent U.S. TWI model is the “50-50 model,”
“… in which half of the instructional time is in English and half of the instructional time is in the minority language for grades kindergarten through 12. In both the 90-10 and the 50-50 models, the appropriate percentage of instruction in each language is carefully planned. Lessons are never repeated or translated in the second language, but concepts taught in one language are reinforced across the two languages in a spiraling curriculum” (Ovando & Combs, 2012, p.43).
How is TWI education more advantageous than DB education? First, DB programs do not provide for NES students to gain lingual or literacy proficiency in a second language.
Second, DB education teaches English and the partnering language so that ELL students may academically stay with the NES students through fifth or sixth grade.
For students, the more complex achievement skills to be gained occur during middle and high school—at the age their
DB services end. When ELL students not in a TWI program need high school cognitive-level skills, Collier and Thomas report, “former ELL [students] begin to make less than one year’s progress each” (as cited in Espinosa, 2013). The achievement gap, thus, unfortunately widens for them each year they struggle through high school. But the DL program, Collier and Thomas describe, “…offers full rather than partial achievement gap closure at annual costs comparable with existing programs” (as cited in Espinosa, 2013).
TWI has additional benefits for the students, parents, and community. It engages parents to be actively involved with their child’s education, hence, more active parent-school partnerships, and fosters community inclusiveness and shared community growth among the
ELL and NES parents. These shared characteristics of sound DL programs have been realized in research results throughout the past decade (Shook & Schroeder, …show more content…
2013).
For NES students, the benefits are equally shared with their ELL classmates. Stated in the North Carolina educational conference in its plans to transform student performance and preparedness, for the students’ futures, school programs need to work on “building proficiency to be globally competitive for work” (State Board of Education, Public Schools of North Carolina,
2013).
Baker (2001) stated that a DL education also “leads to enhanced creativity and analytical thinking,” and “accelerated … instruction” (as cited in Thomas & Collier, 2003).
What do the NES and ELL students think? According to them, they were “very satisfied” with TWI and expressed greater interest in attending college (Cobb et al, 2006). As Collier and
Thomas report of language schooling in the United States, “Clearly dual language [TWI] education is a school reform whose time has come. It is a school model that even English-only advocates endorse, because it is an all-inclusive model for all students, and all student groups benefit from participating” (2004).
References
British Council (2013, November 20). Report shows deficit in the languages the UK needs most.
Retrieved from http://www.britishcouncil.org/organisation/press/report-shows-deficitlanguages-uk-needs-most
Cobb, B., Vega, D., & Kronauge, C. (2006). Effects of an elementary dual language immersion school program on junior high school achievement. Middle Grades Research
Journal,
9(1), 27-47. Retrieved from http://eweb.psdschools.org/documentlibrary/downloads/Research_and_Evaluation/PSDRelated_Research_Reports/PeerReviewed_Publications/Effects%20of%20an%20Elementary%20Dual%20Language%20 Immersion_School_Program_on_Junior_High_School_Achievement.pdf
Collier, V. P. & Thomas, W. P. (2004). The astounding effectiveness of dual language education for all. NABE Journal of Research and Practice, 2(1), 1-20. Retrieved from http://njrp.tamu.edu/2004/PDFs/Collier.pdf Espinosa, L. (2013, August 13). Challenging common myths about dual language learners, an update to the seminal 2008 report. New York, NY: Foundation for Child Development,
PreK-3rd. Retrieved from http://fcd-us.org/resources/prek-3rd-challenging-commonmyths-about-dual-language-learners-update-seminal-2008-report
Goldenberg, C., Hicks, J., & Lit, I. (2013). Dual language learners: Effective instruction in early childhood. American Educator, (summer). Retrieved from http://www.aft.org/newspubs/periodicals/ae/summer2013/index.cfm Hsu, C. (2013). Policy brief: Define accountability for dual language education. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/4583033/Policy_Brief_Define_Accountability_for_Dual_Lang uage_Education
Ovando, C. & Combs, M. (2012). Bilingual and ESL classrooms: Teaching in multicultural contexts (5th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Shook, M.V. & Schroeder, S. (2013). Bilingual two-way immersion programs benefit academic achievement. Bilingual Research Journal. 36(1), 167–186. doi:10.5294/laclil.2012.5.2.7
State Board of Education. Public Schools of North Carolina. North Carolina Department of
Public Instruction. (2013). North Carolina dual language: Ongoing research findings by
Fasciano, H. North Carolina: Collaborative Conference for Student Achievement,
Engaging North Carolina in transforming 21 st century teaching and learning.
Thomas, W. P. & Collier, V. P. (2003, October). The multiple benefits of dual language.
Educational Leadership: Teaching All Students. 61(2), 61-64. Retrieved from
http://www.thomasandcollier.com/publications.html
Developmental Bilingual Versus Two-way Immersion Language Education
The term “bilingual” education is “neither a single uniform program nor a consistent
‘methodology’… Rather, it is an approach that encompasses a variety of program models”
(Ovando & Combs, 2012, p. 9). For some, the term “dual language” (DL) has replaced it— which, likewise, has a wide range of meanings. Depending on the source, the term DL sometimes is used to include developmental, also termed maintenance or late-exit, bilingual; heritage language—for indigenous groups; foreign language, also called one-way or full, immersion; and two-way immersion (TWI) education. This article will employ “DL” to identify
TWI and will …show more content…
only address the more traditional developmental bilingual (DB) versus a TWI language education.
Collier and Thomas review that English-only or merely remedial bilingual courses have not served the English language learning (ELL) student well (as cited in Espinosa, 2013), known for longitudinal DL studies, found a pattern of ELL students losing an ability to communicate in their first language, preferring only English, often developing communication problems with their extended families, and decreasing in academic achievement in English.
The U.S. DB education, well-known during the 1970s and 1980s, is for kindergarten through fifth, sometimes sixth, grades, but does not continue in middle or high school (Ovando
& Combs, 2012, p. 42). Program purposes and goals vary, yet, Baker notes, frequently, DB programs goals are explicitly for melding ELL (mainly immigrant and indigenous American) students into the common culture of the United States (as cited in Ovando & Combs, 2012, p. 9).
With increasing demands to communicate in more than one language in the near future, the British Council found its lack of multilingual citizens prepared for the future as “alarming”
(British Council, 2013). The United States mirrors this problem. Also, its 2008 census from the
National Center for Education Statistics revealed that 20% of grade school students between the ages of five and 17 speak a language other than English at home (as cited in Hsu, 2013). Though one of the TWI program goals is to gain mastery in speaking two languages, this is not the only goal. Lindholm-Leary defines that the goals of a TWI education, both for ELL and native
English-speaking (NES) students, are to achieve “high levels of bilingualism and bi-literacy, academic achievement, and cross-cultural competence” (as cited in Goldenberg et al, 2013).
How are these goals reached, and what is the typical TWI educational model? Canada’s
TWI model, created in the 1960s for French and English languages, is the prototype used for some of the TWI programs in the United States; it is called “the 90-10 model”. Since TWI education is for both ELL and NES students, both learn from one another. Ovando and Combs
(2012) explain that in DL, both ELL and NES groups stay together throughout the day and serve as peer tutors for each other” (p. 95). The other prevalent U.S. TWI model is the “50-50 model,”
“… in which half of the instructional time is in English and half of the instructional time is in the minority language for grades kindergarten through 12. In both the 90-10 and the 50-50 models, the appropriate percentage of instruction in each language is carefully planned. Lessons are never repeated or translated in the second language, but concepts taught in one language are reinforced across the two languages in a spiraling curriculum” (Ovando & Combs, 2012, p.43).
How is TWI education more advantageous than DB education? First, DB programs do not provide for NES students to gain lingual or literacy proficiency in a second language.
Second, DB education teaches English and the partnering language so that ELL students may academically stay with the NES students through fifth or sixth grade.
For students, the more complex achievement skills to be gained occur during middle and high school—at the age their
DB services end. When ELL students not in a TWI program need high school cognitive-level skills, Collier and Thomas report, “former ELL [students] begin to make less than one year’s progress each” (as cited in Espinosa, 2013). The achievement gap, thus, unfortunately widens for them each year they struggle through high school. But the DL program, Collier and Thomas describe, “…offers full rather than partial achievement gap closure at annual costs comparable with existing programs” (as cited in Espinosa, 2013).
TWI has additional benefits for the students, parents, and community. It engages parents to be actively involved with their child’s education, hence, more active parent-school partnerships, and fosters community inclusiveness and shared community growth among the
ELL and NES parents. These shared characteristics of sound DL programs have been realized in research results throughout the past decade (Shook & Schroeder, …show more content…
2013).
For NES students, the benefits are equally shared with their ELL classmates. Stated in the North Carolina educational conference in its plans to transform student performance and preparedness, for the students’ futures, school programs need to work on “building proficiency to be globally competitive for work” (State Board of Education, Public Schools of North Carolina,
2013).
Baker (2001) stated that a DL education also “leads to enhanced creativity and analytical thinking,” and “accelerated … instruction” (as cited in Thomas & Collier, 2003).
What do the NES and ELL students think? According to them, they were “very satisfied” with TWI and expressed greater interest in attending college (Cobb et al, 2006). As Collier and
Thomas report of language schooling in the United States, “Clearly dual language [TWI] education is a school reform whose time has come. It is a school model that even English-only advocates endorse, because it is an all-inclusive model for all students, and all student groups benefit from participating” (2004).
References
British Council (2013, November 20). Report shows deficit in the languages the UK needs most.
Retrieved from http://www.britishcouncil.org/organisation/press/report-shows-deficitlanguages-uk-needs-most
Cobb, B., Vega, D., & Kronauge, C. (2006). Effects of an elementary dual language immersion school program on junior high school achievement. Middle Grades Research
Journal,
9(1), 27-47. Retrieved from http://eweb.psdschools.org/documentlibrary/downloads/Research_and_Evaluation/PSDRelated_Research_Reports/PeerReviewed_Publications/Effects%20of%20an%20Elementary%20Dual%20Language%20 Immersion_School_Program_on_Junior_High_School_Achievement.pdf
Collier, V. P. & Thomas, W. P. (2004). The astounding effectiveness of dual language education for all. NABE Journal of Research and Practice, 2(1), 1-20. Retrieved from http://njrp.tamu.edu/2004/PDFs/Collier.pdf Espinosa, L. (2013, August 13). Challenging common myths about dual language learners, an update to the seminal 2008 report. New York, NY: Foundation for Child Development,
PreK-3rd. Retrieved from http://fcd-us.org/resources/prek-3rd-challenging-commonmyths-about-dual-language-learners-update-seminal-2008-report
Goldenberg, C., Hicks, J., & Lit, I. (2013). Dual language learners: Effective instruction in early childhood. American Educator, (summer). Retrieved from http://www.aft.org/newspubs/periodicals/ae/summer2013/index.cfm Hsu, C. (2013). Policy brief: Define accountability for dual language education. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/4583033/Policy_Brief_Define_Accountability_for_Dual_Lang uage_Education
Ovando, C. & Combs, M. (2012). Bilingual and ESL classrooms: Teaching in multicultural contexts (5th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Shook, M.V. & Schroeder, S. (2013). Bilingual two-way immersion programs benefit academic achievement. Bilingual Research Journal. 36(1), 167–186. doi:10.5294/laclil.2012.5.2.7
State Board of Education. Public Schools of North Carolina. North Carolina Department of
Public Instruction. (2013). North Carolina dual language: Ongoing research findings by
Fasciano, H. North Carolina: Collaborative Conference for Student Achievement,
Engaging North Carolina in transforming 21 st century teaching and learning.
Thomas, W. P. & Collier, V. P. (2003, October). The multiple benefits of dual language.
Educational Leadership: Teaching All Students. 61(2), 61-64. Retrieved from
http://www.thomasandcollier.com/publications.html