Two-Way
Immersion
|
|
|
Two-way immersion is an enrichment model for both language majority and
language minority students. Two-way immersion programs provide instruction
to language minority and language majority students in both English and a
foreign language. The goal of two-way Immersion programs is for language
minority students to acquire proficiency in English while maintaining and
increasing proficiency in their primary language. In addition, English-only students gain proficiency in a
second language while maintaining high levels of academic achievement in
English.
Two-way immersion programs are not traditional bilingual programs.
In traditional bilingual educational programs language minority
students are given an educational ‘boost’ by using their primary
language to support the transition into English for one to three years.
This results in the loss of the primary language and is a deficit
or remedial model of instruction. Two-way immersion programs are a proven better method of
addressing the issues facing educating language minority students in
California today. They not
only provide an effective model of instruction for English learners, where
students achieve at or above academic achievement levels of their language
peers, but they also increase the number of English speaking students
proficient in a foreign language. Additional
benefits of two-way programs include appreciation of people from different
cultures and increased parent involvement. As our educational system
strives to educate all students to high standards, two-way immersion
programs offer great promise for the future. Research Evidence
Two-way immersion programs have been in existence for over
thirty years and a growing body of research indicates two-way immersion
programs are the most effective English language and foreign language
development programs. Based
on research evidence, Thomas and Collier (1997) concluded that
developmental two-way programs are more effective than traditional
bilingual programs and English as a Second Language (ESL) programs.
In addition, a study by Lindholm and Gavlek (1994) of four two-way
immersion schools found that by fifth or sixth grade 75% to 92% of English
learners were rated as fluent in English on the Student Oral Language
Observation Matrix and 67% to 100% of English speakers were rated as
fluent in the foreign language. When comparing language majority and
language minority students to peer norm groups not served in two-way
immersion programs, Mahrer and Christian (1993) concluded that students
(in two-way immersion programs) did as well or better than their fellow
students in other programs.
Students in two-way immersion schools thrive academically and
emerge from elementary school truly bilingual.
In California, examples of two schools implementing effective
two-way immersion programs include River Glen Elementary in San Jose and
Fiesta Gardens in San Mateo. River
Glen has been implementing two-way immersion for more than seven years and
has a 2002 state-wide Academic Performance Index (API) ranking of 6 and a
similar schools ranking of 7 on the . Fiesta
Gardens has been implementing two-way immersion for more than six years
and has a 2002 state-wide API ranking of 6 and a similar schools rank of
6. Resources for Implementation
Under the Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act (2002), No Child Left Behind, Title III funding
primarily focuses on moving limited English proficient students to English
fluency. The current language
and funding structure of Title III promotes the implementation of
innovative language programs by trading freedom for accountability. Title
III gives districts more flexibility in using bilingual funds in exchange
for effectively transitioning LEP students into English fluency and
improving their achievement. Under Title III the funding is available through performance
based grants to states and local districts with performance objectives for
improving English fluency and sanctions for poor performance. Language policies in the United States have varied over the
last century from a sink-or-swim policy to one of inclusion and
appreciation for the needs of English learners. However, the policies of the federal government have not been
comprehensive in nature. The
federal government has poured billions of dollars into bilingual education
with an emphasis on transition into English while also putting significant
amounts of money into ineffective foreign language programs at the middle
and high school level.
According
to Torres-Guzman (2002), indications are that language instruction alone
is not an indicator of program expense, but rather the extent to which
programs are supplementary or integrated in the school curriculum.
The author cites the most popular example, pullout English as
a Second Language (ESL) instruction as the most expensive option.
This option is has also been cited as the least effective program
design (Thomas & Collier, 1997).
The implementation of language programs that are both effective
for the learner and cost effective is imperative to receive Title III
funds. Expand
and Improve Two-way Immersion Programs In California, all English learners need to become
proficient in English while meeting state
standards across the curriculum. Research
indicates two-way immersion is the most effective model for doing so while
mastering a second language. Two-way
immersion programs create bilingual, bi-literate citizens with increased
awareness and tolerance of and for people of different cultures.
In addition, students from both language groups have higher
achievement levels than their peers in monolingual programs.
Two-way immersion programs can be made cost effective through the
use of Title III funds combined with additional state level funding for
second language learners. A policy is needed that would place a high priority on
using Title III funds to expand and promote proven and effective
educational practices associated with two-way language immersion programs.
Included in this policy would be the recruitment and training of
qualified teachers, professional development for current teachers, and
research into effective practices and school models of two-way immersion
programs. |
|
|
References Lindholm,
K. J. & Gavlek, K. (1994). California DBE projects: Project-wide
evaluation report, 1992-1993. San Jose, CA: Department of Education. Mahrer,
C. & Christian, D. (1993). A review of findings from two-way
bilingual education evaluation reports. Washington, D.C.: National
Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning. Reauthorization
Of The Elementary and Secondary Education Act.
(2002). No Child
Left Behind. Washington,
D.C.: Department of Education. Thomas,
W.P. & Collier, V. (1997).
School effectiveness for language minority students. NCBE Resource
Collection Series, 9. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for
Bilingual Education. Torres-Guzman,
M. (2002). Dual language programs: Key features and results.
Washington, D.C: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Send problems, comments or suggestions to: rpapalewis@csus.edu
California
State University, Sacramento
Educational
Leadership and Policy Studies
College of
Education
Updated: June 24, 2002