Coeditors’ introduction: Ensuring the success of dual language programs through alignment of research, policy, and practice

A growing body of research shows that dual language programs, both one-way and two-way models, are effective in closing achievement gaps between English Learners (ELs) and their non-EL peers (Thomas and Collier 2002; August and Shanahan 2006) and between ELs who participate in these programs and those who do not (Steele, et al., 2017). The articles in this issue of the Bilingual Research Journal (Volume 41, Number 3) add to this body of knowledge and emphasize the importance of fidelity of implementation of a shared program vision and adherence to pedagogical practices known to be effective for English Learners. However, contributing authors caution that dissonance between research, policy, and practice can make it difficult to achieve the goals of bilingualism and biliteracy, cross-cultural competence, and high academic achievement.

Bilingualism and biliteracy

In effective dual language programs, English and the partner language are valued equally, and students have equitable access to instruction in the native language and in English. Yet educators often encounter barriers to implementing this principle with fidelity, including an overreliance on accountability assessments conducted only in English and strict language separation policies.

Language of assessment

Because federal law does not mandate regular assessment of native language proficiency and academic achievement, few states recommend—or provide—assessments in the native language to monitor progress toward achieving the goal of bilingualism and biliteracy (U.S. Department of Education, 2015). When teachers believe that evaluations of students and their own job performance will be driven by results of English testing, they tend to decrease the amount of L1 instruction and increase English use to help ensure higher test results. The net result is that instead of prioritizing the goals of bilingualism and biliteracy, acquiring English proficiency and passing standardized tests in English become de facto program goals (Babino & Stewart/this issue). Shifts away from the language equity principle run counter to research documenting that L1 oral language proficiency, L1 literacy achievement, and the amount of prior schooling in a student’s native language are strong predictors of achievement in English (August & Shanahan, 2006; Genesee, Lindholm-Leary, Saunders, & Christian, 2006; Goldenberg, 2008). To ensure that ELs meet the goal of bilingualism and biliteracy, state and local education agencies must develop policies requiring assessment of student progress in both English and the partner language and make assessment instruments and procedures routinely available to assess progress toward mastery of language and content standards in L1.

Language separation policies

Many dual language programs implement strict language separation policies that contradict the natural second-language acquisition process and authentic bilingual communication (Ramírez, Sembiante, & deOliveira/this issue). Such policies also serve to delegitimatize students’ home languages and communication styles. Increasingly, research calls attention to the role of translanguaging in language development and language use (García, Johnson, & Seltzer, 2016). Translanguaging refers to how individuals use all the linguistic resources available to them, with no artificial separation of languages, as they develop their bilingualism and engage with academic content. When teachers use translanguaging pedagogies, they provide students greater access to the curriculum and foster creativity and critical thinking (Babino & Stewart/this issue; Henderson & Ingram/this issue; Fine/this issue). Thus, to advance the goals of bilingualism and biliteracy, teachers must have access to professional development that helps them understand translanguaging and when and how to use translanguaging pedagogy in the process of ensuring that students achieve native-like proficiency in English and the partner language.

Cultural competence

English Learners need multiple opportunities to develop their personal identities and to understand and appreciate cultural differences (U.S. Department of Education, Office of English Language Acquisition, 2015). To that end, teachers should use a variety of strategies, across the curriculum, to promote the sociocultural competence of their students (Howard et al., 2018). This includes, for example, using multiethnic curricular materials, integrating students’s cultural values in the teaching-learning process, and engaging students in activities that promote social justice (Howard et al., 2018). Leung, Uchikoshi, and Tong (this issue) recommend that teachers provide opportunities for students to discuss their language ideologies and that they allow students to explore their history and heritage as a way of contextualizing how language relates to their identity(ies).

Cultural competence is also advanced by providing parents explicit information about dual language education, including the rationale for native language instruction and how L1 development supports development of English proficiency. Flores (this issue) stresses that parents can support cross-cultural competence through rich interactions in L1 and by sharing their funds of knowledge through consejos, stories, and personal experiences as a way to ensure that students stay connected to their familial, cultural, and linguistic roots.

Academic achievement

Results of meta-analyses and systematic literature reviews indicate that bilingual approaches produce more positive outcomes for ELs than ESL approaches (U.S. Department of Education, 2012). As indicated previously, dual language programs can close achievement gaps between ELs and non-ELs and between ELs enrolled in these programs and those who are not. For example, a recent study of ELs who were randomly assigned to immersion dual language programs or to a control group in the Portland (Oregon) Public Schools showed that ELs outperformed peers on the State’s reading tests in Grades 5 and 8, representing 7 months and 8 months of additional learning in these grades respectively. Research also shows that bilingual approaches are effective with a wide range of students, including economically disadvantaged youth, ELs at risk of academic failure, and ELs with disabilities (Genesee & Fortune, 2014). Wolsey, Clark, and Andrew (this issue) report positive effects of a bilingual approach with Deaf children. Overall, achievement data show that students with special needs who are enrolled in dual language programs score as well as, or better than, peers from similar backgrounds not receiving dual language instruction. Dual language program students reap the additional benefit of being bilingual and biliterate.

Equity in availability of instructional materials

Meeting the dual language program goal of high academic achievement requires access to authentic L1 instructional and related materials. However, because these are not routinely available, dual language teachers are forced to spend an inordinate amount of time locating or developing curricular materials to support native language instruction. Even when L1 texts are available for content area instruction, they oftentimes “mirror” translations of English texts. Ramírez, Sembiante, and deOliveira (this issue) found that translated science texts foregrounded the linguistic structures of English, which reduced the complexity of key concepts and ideas that were the focus of lessons and which, in turn, constrained the scientific knowledge acquired by ELs. Moreover, because the Spanish used in textbooks was not authentic (i.e., it reflected English discourse patterns), it was difficult for teachers and students to make meaningful cross-linguistic connections.

To meet the program goals of high academic achievement, program administrators must ensure availability of L1 instructional and related materials to support language, literacy, and content area instruction not only in dual language classrooms but schoolwide (e.g., in school libraries and computer labs). Students pursuing the Seal of Biliteracy must have access to appropriate sequences of study and timely assessments at reasonable costs (Davin & Heneike/this issue).

Aligning research, policy, and practice

Alignment of research, policy, and practice is critical to the success of dual language programs. Effective programs are characterized by a commitment to linguistic and cultural equity; high-quality, differentiated instruction to meet the diverse needs of students; assessment frameworks that monitor student progress in English and the partner language; equitable resource distribution; and meaningful engagement of families and communities in the teaching-learning process (Howard et al., 2018). The articles in this issue of the BRJ further our understanding of the characteristics of effective dual language programs but also speak to contradictions among research, policy, and practice in program implementation. They stress the importance of recognizing these contradictions and guarding against pressure to abandon what is known about best practices in the education of ELs. The three book reviews included in this issue provide invaluable resources to help educators understand how standards, high-stakes accountability, teacher evaluation, and political movements can create barriers to equitable learning opportunities for English Learners. They recommend strategies to counteract the negative effects of these barriers to ensure that ELs reap the benefits of dual language program participation—bilingualism, biliteracy, cultural competence, and high academic achievement.

In “ASL and English Bilingual Shared Book Reading: An Exploratory Intervention for Signing Deaf Children,” Ju-Lee A. Wolsey, M. Diane Clark, and Jean F. Andrew examine the effects of a Shared Reading intervention on children’s American Sign Language and English skills. Results of this study indicated improvements in receptive ASL skills, book reading, and the ability to draw and describe drawings in both languages. Growth in visual phonology was evident in children’s drawings, but no relationship between auditory phonology and English word identification was found. Results provide implications for early literacy instruction for students with deafness and discuss implications for future research.

Very little is known about the attitudes of younger Cantonese speakers and learners and their ideas about their bi/multilingual identities. Genevieve Leung, Yuuko Uchikoshi, and Rosina Tong report findings from focus group interviews with 14 fourth and fifth graders attending a Cantonese-English DLI school. In their article, “Learning Cantonese Will Help Us: Elementary School Students’ Perceptions of Dual Language Education,” they discuss participants’ beliefs about bi/multilingualism, students’ experiences with the DLI program, and their future aspirations for using Cantonese. Three main themes resulted from the focus groups: utilitarian and intrinsic ideologies, the need for contextualizing language learning, and student perceptions about their schooling experiences and building communicative repertoires. Students discussed languages as a resource, the role of Cantonese in Chinese American immigration history, and the tensions between Cantonese and other more “economically useful” languages like Mandarin. Results suggest a need for heightened attention to young learners’ language ideologies and better understanding of the complex ways learners see themselves as bi/multilingual individuals and their various intrinsic and instrumental perceptions of language learning and use.

“‘Mister, you’re writing in Spanglish’: Fostering Spaces for Meaning-Making and Metalinguistic Connections Through Teacher Translanguaging Shifts in the Bilingual Classroom” examines how a third-grade bilingual teacher engaged in translanguaging shifts during instruction in response to students’ language performances. Kathryn I. Henderson and Mitch Ingram present pedagogical practices of translanguaging used intentionally by a teacher to facilitate access to academic content, to cultivate a classroom community, and to develop students’ metalinguistic awareness. The teacher’s own multilingual awareness fostered classroom spaces that allowed students to use translanguaging practices as a resource. This case study has implications for the role of teachers’ critical multilingual awareness within a translanguaging pedagogical framework.

It is crucial to understand how teachers can, and do, enact agency as language policy makers to create a dual language program that truly accomplishes its stated goals of bilingualism, biliteracy, and bicultural competence and mastery of grade-level content standards. In “Remodeling Dual Language Programs: Teachers Enact Agency as Critical Conscious Language Policy Makers,” Alexandra Babino and Mary Stewart present results of a case study of two DL programs within different schools involving 13 Spanish- and English-medium DL teachers. They focused on how these teachers perceived their agency through critical consciousness, acknowledged program tensions, and acted in remodeling their programs at the classroom level. The authors found that overall, participating teachers demonstrated a keen awareness of the hegemonic tensions ubiquitous to DL programs. Some teachers covertly remodeled their programs to meet students’ holistic needs. At the same time, they reported a lack of perceived agency in their role as language policy makers. The authors suggest that this nuanced understanding of collective agency provides a foundation to prepare DL teachers and administrators to jointly name tensions and act by openly remodeling DL programs to best serve their students.

Andres Ramírez, Sabrina Sembiante, and Luciana deOliveira conducted a comparative lexicogrammatical and logicosemantic systemic functional analysis of two third-grade science curricular units on the topic of “matter” written in Spanish. One of these curricular units, translated from an English textbook “mirror text,” is used in dual language programs (Spanish-English) in the United States; the other is used in regular elementary science for monolingual Spanish students in Latin American countries like Colombia and Venezuela. “Translated Science Textbooks in Dual Language Programs: A Comparative English-Spanish Functional Linguistic Analysis” presents a discussion of how standards-aligned textbooks contribute to the deskilling and disenfranchising of teachers that corresponds to a neoliberal agenda for education. This cross-linguistic analysis revealed that while the mirror-text reflected a knower-code structure preoccupied with the here and now and with building interpersonal affiliations, the authentic Spanish text was concerned with building knowledge codes related to global themes seeking to build disciplinary science knowledge. By foregrounding English structure and curricular pacing, the use of translated or mirror texts in dual language programs unintentionally—but effectively—served as a lexicogrammatical, semantic, and curricular “straightjacket” that prevented students and teachers from making potential key meaningful connections between languages.

The Seal of Biliteracy (SoBL) is a policy that recognizes biliterate high school graduates with an emblem placed on their diploma or transcript signifying proficiency in two or more languages. In their article, “The Seal of Biliteracy: Adding Students’ Voice to the Conversation,” Kristin J. Davin and Amy Jennifer Heineke give voice to 12th-grade linguistically diverse and English-dominant students in relation to their perceptions of bilingualism and biliteracy and the benefits of the SoBL. This mixed-method, multiple case study involved 215 seniors from three suburban high school districts in Illinois, with one school in each district selected as the focal school. Results showed that high school seniors saw the value of bilingualism, including enhanced postsecondary employment opportunities and earning college credit. Passing an assessment that validated their language abilities and earning the SoBL boosted students’ confidence. Interestingly, lack of confidence in world language skills was the most common barrier to earning the SoBL. Other barriers included lack of extended sequences of study, insufficient information and advertising, and the price and timing of language assessments. The authors recommend that local and state stakeholders enhance and advertise the postsecondary opportunities related to the SoBL, provide diverse and extended pathways for students to learn an array of languages, and that they streamline and extend the dissemination of information with particular attention to reaching linguistically diverse students.

In “Chicas Fuertes: Counterstories by Latinx Parents Raising Strong Girls,” Tracey T. Flores explores the narratives and experiences of four mothers and fathers who participated with their adolescent daughters, Grades 9 to 10, in a writers’ workshop, Somos Escritores/We are Writers. The workshop was a family engagement space that invited families to draw, write, and share stories from their lived experiences. Workshops were designed with and for Latin@ parents and their adolescent daughters to open space for the intergenerational exchange of stories and experiences within a political context that continuously and increasingly works to silence and control their voices and experiences. Drawing upon written narratives, interview transcripts, and ethnographic field notes, the author provides insights into the ways that participating parents are raising their daughters to be “chicas fuertes/strong girls.” Through the sharing of consejos, stories, and experiences, parents provided their daughters with strategies and tools to navigate their daily lives, including their personal, social, and academic worlds, while ensuring that they stay connected to their familial, cultural, and linguistic roots.

This issue of the BRJ also includes three book reviews. In the first, Caitlin Fine reviews Translanguaging With Multilingual Students: Learning From Classroom Moments, edited by Ofelia García and Tatiana Kleyn. This text discusses the theoretical base related to translanguaging and describes the City University of New York–New York State Initiative on Emergent Bilinguals (CUNY-NYSIEB). Six case studies, coauthored by public school teachers and researchers, detail how translanguaging is incorporated in their lesson designs as a pedagogical orientation and highlight ways in which translanguaging happens organically in teachers’ and students’ spontaneous moves. The case studies provide concrete examples of what translanguaging looks like in a variety of classroom contexts. The text discusses ways in which translanguaging education policy disrupts traditional ways of thinking about language policies in K–12 classrooms and outlines implications for teachers, teacher educators, administrators, and policy makers. The contributors highlight the theoretical framing and ideological shift required to understand translanguaging pedagogy and its implications for the education of English Learners.

Deena Gumina reviews Teaching for Equity in Complex Times: Negotiating Standards in a High Performing Bilingual School, by Jamy Stillman and Lauren Anderson (with John Luciano Beltramo, Kathryn S. Struthers, and Joyce Gómez-Najarro). The authors situate their work in the context of a two-year qualitative study of a California school’s implementation of the Common Core State Standards. They use Cultural Historical Activity Theory to examine the interconnections between standards, high-stakes accountability, teacher evaluation, and political movements that marginalize bilingual students. They found that the combination of high-stakes accountability, a push for continued and increased performance, and the use of pedagogy that was not appropriate for many English Learners caused teachers to lose sight of equitable student learning. Yet teachers were not cognizant of this, reporting instead that they were implementing rigorous academic standards and differentiating instruction to meet their students’ linguistic and cultural needs.

Transforming Educational Pathways for Chicana/o Students: A Critical Race Feminista Praxis, by Dolores Delgado Bernal and Enrique Alemán, Jr., is reviewed by Gabriel Rodríguez. The book describes the authors’ work with the Adelante program, a university-school-community partnership they cofounded based on a shared belief that all young people should be expected to attend college and that their preparation must emphasize intellectual development in relation to their racial and cultural identities and their communities. The authors document their successes and challenges in program implementation and reflect upon their identities and privileges vis-à-vis the students and their families, the community, and educators with whom they worked. They also provide insight into how a critical race feminista praxis can empower schools to reimagine how to build meaningful relationships with their students and families in ways that humanize them and build upon their funds of knowledge.

In sum, the articles and book reviews in this issue of the BRJ reinforce the principle that ELs need to be held to challenging language and content standards, but instruction must be linguistically and culturally responsive and differentiated to meet individual students’ strengths and needs. Only in this way will the goals of dual language programs—bilingualism and biliteracy, cultural competence, and high academic achievement—be achieved.