Academic achievement and Language
Gains of students in the Dual
Language (Two-Way Immersion)
Program in Arlington Public Schools
Marleny Perdomo: Foreign Language Specialist
Arlington Public Schools, Arlington, VA
Minority Student Achievement Network (MSAN) 2008
Madison, WI June 25, 2008
Ser bilingüe abre
nuevos mundos
Being bilingual opens you
to new worlds
Defining Two-Way
Immersion Education
Two-way immersion (TWI) programs
integrate language minority and language
majority students for all or most of the
day, and provide content instruction and
literacy instruction to all students in both
languages.
Immersion schools offer more than just two
languages ….we want to develop each child’s full
potential, a lifelong love of learning, fluency in
both Spanish and English, and an appreciation for
the global community.
Growth of Two-Way
Immersion Education
Possible Motivations for the
Growth of Two-Way
Immersion Education
Documented success of the model through large-scale
research projects (Lindholm-Leary, 2001; Thomas &
Collier, 1997, 2002) and several small-scale studies (e.g.,
Cazabon, Nicoladis & Lambert, 1998)
2. Low academic performance and high drop-out rate
among Hispanic students in the United States
3. Global economy—increasing interest in developing
multilingualism and multiculturalism in the United
States
1.
Benefits of Bilingualism
Positive effect on
intellectual growth
 Enriches mental
development
 More flexibility in thinking
 Greater sensitivity to
language
 Develop better listening
skills for learning other
languages





Improves understanding
of native language
Chance to communicate
with others
Understand and
appreciate others
Job opportunities (CAL)
Common Misconceptions about
Bilingualism
All bilingual programs are effective
If the school program is not rich and challenging – the
benefit may be minimal
 Raising bilingual kids delays all language acquisition
In the early years, it may result in slightly delayed verbal
abilities
 Bilingualism happens at school
The decision to raise a bilingual/multilingual child is a
life long commitment
 Students with severe mental retardation may not
benefit from bilingual education

Dual Language Programs
Criteria for Success-Overview
-Kathryn Lyndholm-Leary






Focus on instruction
Quality language
curriculum
Amount of language use
Additive bilingual
environment
Maintaining classroom
balance
Positive classroom
interaction-best practices




Qualified personnel
Home-school
collaboration
Effective
communication among
stakeholders
Established evaluation
process
Arlington Public Schools (APS)
Two-Way Immersion Program Overview
Total student population in Arlington:
18,779 students
 Total Immersion Population: 1,209 students
 Two elementary, one middle, one high
school
 Immersion Program coordinated through
Foreign Language Office

APS TWI Program Design
Two-Way Program Model
 Balanced groups of students: Spanishdominant and English-dominant
 50% of instructional time dedicated to
each language
 Literacy instruction in each language is
provided

APS- Program Design, Continued
Kinder-5th grade
 50% of the “academic day” in Spanish
 Specials (art, music, & PE) in English & Spanish
 50/50 make up of students in each class
 Spanish: Math, Science & Spanish Language Arts
 English: Social Studies & English Language Arts
Grades 6-8
 3 class periods in Spanish (Spanish, Science, Social Studies)
High School
 Spanish courses (I and II) specifically designed for Immersion
students
 IB and Fluent Speakers courses are alternatives
APS-TWI Program
Entrance criteria
None – based on where student lives
 After 2nd grade, English-only speakers admitted
if they meet specific language proficiency criteria
 Kindergarten is based on lottery, but priority
categories exist

Francis Scott Key Elementary School
Started as program within school in 1986
 Key became an all-Immersion school in
September of 1995
 Principal: Marjorie L. Myers
 Total student population: 591

1998
 Total Enrollment
K-5 544
 Ethnic %
– Hispanic - 59%
– White - 35%
– Black 6%
– Asian 0%
 Free and Reduced
Lunch - 53%
 Mobility - high
2/1/2008
 Total Enrollment
pK-5 591
 Ethnic %
– Hispanic -265-44.8%
– White – 269-45.5%
– Black 30- 5.0%
– Asian 18 - 3.0%
 Free and Reduced
Lunch - 34.8%
 Mobility - high
Claremont Immersion
Elementary School
Claremont Immersion ES
A second all-Immersion school, Claremont
opened in 2004
 Modeled after Key Elementary School
 Principal: Cintia Z. Johnson
 Current Claremont Population: 408
students

Gunston Middle School
Wakefield HS
Proficiency Goals
Immersion Goals for Spanish proficiency




End of 3rd grade: Junior Novice Mid
End of 5th grade: Junior Intermediate Low
End of 8th grade: Junior Advanced Low
9th – 12th grade: Advanced Low to Advanced High
Proficiency expectations for elementary and middle school are based on the Center for
Applied Linguistics' COPE and SOPA rating scale, 2003
Proficiency expectations for High School are based on American Council on the
Teaching of Foreign languages (ACTFL) performance guidelines, 1999.
Research Findings
Academic Achievement
• Both NSS and NES in TWI programs perform as well or
better than their peers in other types of programs, on
both English and Spanish standardized achievement
tests.
• Within TWI programs, native speakers tend to
outperform second-language learners, such that NES
tend to score higher on English achievement tests and
NSS tend to score higher on Spanish achievement tests.
• There is some indication of transfer of content
knowledge, as students were sometimes instructed in
one language and assessed in the other, and still
demonstrated grade-appropriate mastery of the
content.
Research Findings
Language and Literacy
• Spanish speakers tend to be more balanced bilinguals
than English speakers.
• Students rated as balanced bilinguals with high levels
of proficiency in both languages tend to outperform
other students.
• There is some indication of transfer of literacy skills
across languages when orthographies are similar.
Research Findings
Integration of Language Minority and
Language Majority Students
• Merely grouping students together does not promote
collaboration in and of itself.
• Students are helped by working together in integrated
settings. Second language learners acquire vocabulary
and syntax, while the native speakers gain greater
metalinguistic awareness through their language
brokering activities.
• There seem to be differences in peer interaction during
Spanish instructional time and English instructional
time, both in terms of focus and language use.
How have we measured success of
the TWI Program?





Studies conducted by outside evaluators (CAL)
Satisfaction surveys conducted at the district
level
Program evaluation conducted in 2004
SOL data compiled and analyzed through Office
of Planning and Evaluation
Program recognition at local and national level
Evaluation Tools
1) Program Implementation
 Teacher focus group and teacher survey
2) Language Assessments
 The Woodcock Johnson Language Battery-Revised
 The Simulated Oral Proficiency Assessment (SOPA)
3) Academic Achievement
 Unadjusted data from the Virginia Standards of Learning
assessments (SOL) for all subjects, grades 3, 5 and 8
3) Stakeholder Satisfaction
 Teacher, Student and Parent satisfaction questionnaires
Measuring Success of Students in the
Two-Way Immersion Program
1) Academic Performance as
measured by the Virginia Standards
of Learning Assessment (SOL)
Grade 3, Reading, ELL Results
% passing
Grade 3 Reading
ELL
100
80
60
40
20
0
80
63 59
2002
44
56
2003
Immersion
48
2004
60 62
2005
Non-Immersion
78 76
53
2006
62
2007
Grade 5, Reading, ELL Results
% passing
Grade 5 Reading
ELL
100
80
60
40
20
0
60
74 77
79 77
72
2003
2004
2005
2006
69
2002
83
72
80
69
48
Immersion
Non-Immersion
2007
Grade 8, Reading, ELLs
% passing
Grade 8 Reading
ELL
100
80
60
40
20
0
84
67
45
2002
65
58
43
2003
Immersion
88
83
55
59
57
58
2004
2005
2006
2007
Non-Immersion
Grade 3, Reading, ENS Results
% passing
Grade 3 Reading
Native English Speakers
100
80
60
40
20
0
94
86
2002
92
83
2003
Immersion
82
90 85
94 92
93 89
2004
2005
2006
2007
95
Non-Immersion
Grade 5, Reading, ENS Results
% passing
Grade 5 Reading
Native English Speakers
100
80
60
40
20
0
97 89
96 91
98 91
92 90
96 94
96 91
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Immersion
Non-Immersion
Grade 8, Reading, ENS Results
% passing
Grade 8 Reading
Native English Speakers
100
80
60
40
20
0
94 79
10080
10084
2002
2003
2004
Immersion
95 86 100 88
95 88
2005
2007
Non-Immersion
2006
Grades 3, 5 & 8- Math, ELL Results
100
80
60
40
20
0
76
54
2002
64
83
75
55
2003
79
56
2004
Immersion
Grade 5 Math
ELL
2005
67
82
81
2006
% passing
% passing
Grade 3 Math
ELL
59
2007
% passing
70
60
2002
86
75 70
78
2003
2004
Immersion
96
62
64 57
2005
2006
Non-Immersion
72
67
63
95
60
2007
77
65
71 70
2004
2005
71
55
69
77
40
2002
2003
Immersion
Non-Immersion
Grade 8 Math
ELL
100
80
60
40
20
0
100
80
60
40
20
0
Non-Immersion
2006
2007
Grades 3, 5 & 8- Math, ENS Results
100
80
60
40
20
0
Grade 5 Math
Native English Speakers
92 90
94 89
98 94
95 93
98 96
100 93
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Immersion
% passing
100 81
2002
87
94
100
100 86
96 81
100 86
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
94
Immersion
Non-Immersion
100
80
60
40
20
0
97 84
88 83
93 86
97
88
90 91
93 92
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Immersion
Non-Immersion
Grade 8 Math
Native English Speakers
100
80
60
40
20
0
% passing
% passing
Grade 3 Math
Native English Speakers
Non-Immersion
Measuring Success of Students in the
Two-Way Immersion Program
2) Language Gains as measured by
the Simulated Oral Proficiency
Assessment (SOPA) and the
Woodcock Johnson Language
Assessment (WLPB-R)
SOPA-English Oral Proficiency Results
GRADE 3
EnglishSpanishdominant
dominant
(n=35)
(n=31)
Oral Fluency
Grammar
Vocabulary
GRADE 5
EnglishSpanishdominant dominant
(n=27)
(n=32)
GRADE 8
English- Spanishdominant dominant
(n=9)
(n=17)


















Listening






Comp.
 denotes that students’ average score on SOPA sub-test meets or exceeds APS gradelevel expectations
SOPA-Spanish Oral Proficiency Results
GRADE 3
EnglishSpanishdominant dominant
(n=35)
(n=31)
Oral Fluency
Grammar
Vocabulary
Listening Comp.








GRADE 5
EnglishSpanishdominant dominant
(n=27)
(n=32)

GRADE 8
English- Spanishdominant dominant
(n=9)
(n=17)











denotes that students’ average score on SOPA sub-test meets or exceeds APS gradelevel expectations
WLPB-R-English Reading and Writing
Results
GRADE 3
EnglishSpanishdominant dominant
(n=35)
(n=31)
Passage Comp.
(Reading)
Proofing
Dictation
GRADE 5
EnglishSpanishdominant dominant
(n=27)
(n=32)
GRADE 8
English- Spanishdominant dominant
(n=9)
(n=17)
















English Basic





Writing
 denotes that students’ average score on WLPB-R sub-test meets or exceeds APS
grade-level expectations
WLPB-R-Spanish Reading
and Writing Results
GRADE 3
English- Spanishdominant dominant
(n=35)
(n=31)
Passage Comp.
(Reading)
Proofing
Dictation

GRADE 5
EnglishSpanishdominant dominant
(n=27)
(n=32)
GRADE 8
English- Spanishdominant dominant
(n=9)
(n=17)



Spanish Basic
Writing
denotes that students’ average score on WLPB-R sub-test meets or exceeds APS
grade-level expectations
Measuring Success of Students in the
Two-Way Immersion Program
3) Program Implementation
Data Source: Satisfaction Surveys
and Focus Group
Program Implementation-Results
 Teachers
understand goals and are
committed to the program.
 Instructional
time in Spanish is less than
50% of day.
 Difficulty
maintaining 50/50 balance of
English dominant & Spanish dominant
students
•Separation of languages for instruction is not strictly maintained.
•Spanish curriculum lacks consistency.
Measuring Success of Students in the
Two-Way Immersion Program
4) Stakeholder Satisfaction
Data Source: Teacher, Parent and
Student Satisfaction Surveys and
Focus Group Report
How satisfied are the users and
clients?
Teachers are satisfied
 78%
with the model
 63% with materials
 56% with time for Spanish Language Arts
 46% with ways subjects are divided by language
 38% with professional development
 36% with mentoring for new teachers
Stakeholder Satisfaction
Students
Grade 5 - 72% like the program
Grade 8 - 13% like the program
Parents
95% of parents are satisfied with:
•overall instruction
•instruction in English, Spanish
•opportunities for parental involvement
72% are satisfied with options for continuation
Effective use of resources
Immersion Students
 Proficient
in Spanish AND
English
 SOL passing rates meet or
exceed non-immersion peer
group
 No additional cost to run
program
1) Implementation- Lessons learned
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
Implement consistently
Re-examine program model, adjust according to changes in
population, language proficiency, academic achievement
Create a long-term plan that responds to specific
recommendations from program evaluations
Keep the dialogue about Immersion alive (monthly
discussions between Immersion principals and central office)
Keep constant communication with other curricular areas
(Lang Arts Connection)
Partner with outside agencies (colleges, research institutions)
2) Language ProficiencyLessons learned
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
Address differences in achievement between
elementary and middle school (articulation)
Add or refine Spanish literacy component
Find assessment tools that measure gains in both
languages (NOELLA)
Provide training on the teaching of Spanish as a
first and a as second language
Align English and Spanish language arts instruction
Elevate the status of Spanish by promoting its use
among staff and students inside and outside the
school
4) Stakeholder Satisfaction
- Lessons learned
1)
2)
3)
4)
Keep parents informed and engaged
Respond to teachers’ needs and requests, include them
in the conversation about adjustments needed
Survey students to learn how they feel about the
program
Promote program, “toot your own horn”
What we have changed since our
2004 evaluation









Modified Spanish curriculum
Provided more Immersion-specific staff development
Provided more Spanish literacy staff development
Added time for Spanish instruction at the elementary level
Modified staff development for all teachers (SIOP, vocabularybuilding strategies, guided reading instruction, learning centers)
Aligned program with goals and expectations of the Modern
Language Spanish Program
Long-term plan is in line with specific recommendations from
program evaluation
Monthly discussions among Immersion principals
Constant communication with other curricular areas
Other lessons learned







Be prepared for changes in population that may offset
the ideal balance
Be prepared for changes in the language proficiency of
younger generations
Ensure a strong enough base (K level)
Set up pre-school classes that can feed into the
elementary program
Begin promoting MS and HS program early on
Connect with schools overseas (Escuela Americana
partnership) and with the community (OAS)
Advertise, recruit, promote, and…
Keep the dream alivestay
focused on language
Language instruction must be optimal
Bilingualism needs to be celebrated
Target language outcomes must be measured
against expected outcomes for students in
regular foreign language classroom
 Create incentive for students to stay in the
program (foreign language seal, high school
credit at MS level)
 Celebrate becoming bilingual!



TWI Web Resources

Main TWI page: http://www.cal.org/twi/
Includes links to:
– Directory of Two-Way Immersion Programs in the United
States
– TWI Bibliography
– A FAQ Sheet, which answers frequently asked questions
about TWI
– Publications and Resources
Additional TWI Resources

Calderón, M. & Minaya-Rowe, L. (2003). Designing and
Implementing a Dual Language Program: A Step by Step Guide.
Corwin Press.

Christian, Donna et als. Profiles in Two-Way Immersion Education.
(1997). CAL

Cloud, N., Genesee, F., and Hamayan, E. (2000). Dual Language
Instruction: A Handbook for Enriched Education. Boston, MA: Heinle
and Heinle.

Howard, E. & Christian, D. (2002). Two-Way Immersion 101: Designing
and Implementing Two-Way Immersion Programs at the Elementary
Level. Santa Cruz, CA and Washington, DC: Center for Research on
Education, Diversity, & Excellence (CREDE).
TWI Web Resources (continued)

Howard, E., Olague, N., & Rogers, D. (2003). The Dual Language
Program Planner: A Guide for Designing and Implementing Dual
Language Programs. Santa Cruz, CA and Washington, DC: Center
for Research on Education, Diversity, & Excellence (CREDE).

Johnson, Robert K. and Merril Swain. Immersion Education: International
Perspectives. Cambridge University Press.

Howard, E., Sugarman, J., and Christian, D. (in press). Trends in Two-Way
Immersion Education: A Review of the Research. Baltimore, MD: Center for
Research on Education of Students Placed at Risk (CRESPAR).

New Mexico Dual Language Program Standards 2003 (in press)
Todo por los niños…įNuestro
Futuro!