Bilingual Education

More than four million children in American public schools have limited English proficiency (LEP).

This number has doubled over the last decade and represents nearly ten percent of total public school enrollment.1 The rapidly-changing demographics of our public schools have created a critical need for ways to help LEP children achieve academic success.

Misinterpretations of the structure and goals of bilingual education hinder LEP students’ progress.

Bilingual education struggles with the misconception that it requires the isolation of children in native language classes or keeps students from learning English. Rather, bilingual services involve a rigorous curriculum geared toward helping students achieve the same levels of success as their English-fluent peers.

There are three types of bilingual education programs: transitional, developmental and two-way bilingual.

Transitional or early-exit bilingual education—Most bilingual programs in the United States follow this model, which emphasizes English language development and academic learning. Native language instruction is used to facilitate English development and to keep    students from falling behind in their subject matter studies while they learn English. Students are typically enrolled in these programs for three years.
Developmental or late-exit bilingual education—Programs that use this model are increasingly popular and emphasize the development of full bilingualism (oral fluency plus high levels of literacy in English and a second language) and academic learning. Students are typically enrolled in these programs for five or more years.
Two-way bilingual education or dual immersion—This model allows LEP students and native English-speaking students to acquire each other’s languages in a bilingual environment that highlights collaborative learning and a challenging curriculum. The goal is to help both groups meet high academic standards and develop fluent bilingualism and full literacy in two languages. Students are typically enrolled in these programs for five or more years.2

States should promote bilingual education programs that increase student achievement.

Schools should provide transitional, developmental or bilingual programs that are best designed to meet local students’ needs. To ensure success, educators must be fully involved in the development and implementation of such programs and should be adequately compensated for extra training time.

The federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law leaves LEP students behind.

As a group, LEP students score far below native English-speaking students on standardized tests.3 Standardized tests—which essentially judge both subject mastery and language skills—are especially challenging. Under NCLB, schools with a high percentage of LEP students compare unfavorably to schools with fewer LEP students—regardless of teacher ability. Schools with more LEP students are also at a disadvantage in reaching NCLB’s targets for “adequate yearly progress” (AYP) on standardized tests and may be unfairly labeled as failing schools.

States are fighting back against NCLB’s inflexible treatment of LEP students.

Last year, over 25 percent of schools nationwide failed to meet their AYP targets—many because LEP students’ scores lagged behind. Under great pressure from state lawmakers and educators, the U.S. Department of Education modified its regulations to partially accommodate LEP students by allowing them to delay tests for one year. States may also give NCLB tests in an LEP student’s native language—but only ten do so. Even those states that offer native language tests do so only in reading—not math—and are primarily limited to Spanish speakers.4

A new national study finds that bilingual education works.

The 2006 report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth, a two-year study funded by the U.S. Department of Education, declared that there is “clear evidence” that bilingual education is the best approach for English-learners.5

Endnotes

Education Week, “English-Language Learners,” 2006.
James Crawford, “Bilingual Education,” Issues in U.S. Language Policy, 1998.
Jamel Abedi and Ron Dietel, “Challenges in the No Child Left Behind Act for English Language Learners,” National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing, Winter 2004.
Mary Ann Zehr, “‘No Child’ Effect on English-Learners Mulled,” Education Week, March 1, 2006.
National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth, Developing Literacy in Second-Language Learners: A Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Youth, 2006.

Updates