Dual Language Education: Answers to Questions from the Field Barbara Kennedy & José Medina, Center for Applied Linguistics

Home , Dual language, Language education

September 2017 Dual Language Education: Answers to Questions From the Field Barbara Kennedy & José Medina, Center for Applied Linguistics

Dual language education refers to programs that provide grade-level content and literacy instruction to all students through two languages—English and a partner language. In one-way dual language programs, the partner language is the native language of all of the students in the class. In two-way programs, approximately half the students are native speakers of the partner language and the other half are native speakers of English. Dual language programs typically begin in kindergarten or first grade and continue for a minimum of 5 years and have the goals of promoting bilingualism and biliteracy, high levels of academic achievement, and cross-cultural competence. An ideal dual language program would serve students from kindergarten through Grade 12, but the vast majority are implemented in elementary schools. For English learners, dual language programs offer a positive alternative to monolingual English instruction (also known as English immersion) and transi- tional bilingual education, which often do not provide the support English learners need to achieve academically and graduate at the same rates as their English-fluent peers (de Jong, 2014; Genesee, Lindholm-Leary, Saunders, & Christian, 2005; Lind- holm-Leary & Genesee, 2014). English learner participation in dual language education is associated with improved academic (Valentino & Reardon, 2014), linguistic, and emotional outcomes (Lindholm-Leary & Borsato, 2001). In addition to closing the achievement gap for English learners (Thomas & Collier, 2012), dual language education provides opportunities for all students to gain valuable multilingual and cross-cultural skills that prepare them to thrive in today’s global world. Key features of effective dual language programs include provision of (a) literacy instruction in the partner language and in English (once introduced) for the duration of the program; (b) content instruction in both program languages over the course of the program; (c) instruction in the partner language for a minimum of 50% of instructional time; (d) curriculum and instructional materials in the partner language that are linguistically and culturally appropriate; (e) professional development for administrators, teachers, and family and community members specific to dual language education; and (f) assessments in the partner language. The authors of this brief travel across the country providing professional development, technical assistance, and job-embedded support for dual language educators and administrators. This brief was written to respond to some of the most frequently asked questions they encounter from the field. These include questions about program structure, assessment and accountability, curriculum and instruction,

Center for Applied Linguistics • 4646 40th St. NW • Washington, DC 20016-1859 • 202-362-0700 • www.cal.org Basic Dual Language Program Model Types* Language K 1 2 3 4 5

50:50 Program Model: Literacy instruction is Partner language 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% provided in the two program languages at all grade levels and for the duration of the program. English 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%

90% 80% 70% 60% Initial literacy 90:10 or 80:20 Program Model: Partner language 50% 50% instruction is provided in the partner language and continues for the duration of the program. 80% 70% 60% 50% Literacy instruction in English is introduced in Grades 2, 3, or 4 and continues alongside the 10% 20% 30% 40% partner language for the duration of the program. English 50% 50% 20% 30% 40% 50%

*In addition to the basic models illustrated here, some programs allocate language in kindergarten as 70:30 or 60:40, with a gradual increase in time devoted to instruction in English until achieving a balance of 50:50, typically around Grade 3 or 4. Figure 1. Commonly adopted approaches to allocating instructional time in the two languages used in a dual language program.

teacher quality and professional development, and Pillar Two: A clearly defined language alloca- family and community involvement. The brief con- tion plan supports high academic achievement in cludes with a list of recommended readings to sup- both program languages by specifying what con- port program leaders and teachers as they design, tent instruction is provided in each of the two pro- implement, and support dual language education gram languages. Careful attention must be paid to programs in their communities. ensure that all content areas are taught in each of the languages during the course of the program. How does the structure of a dual language Pillar Three: Cross-cultural competence is de- program support the goals of bilingualism fined as the ability of each person to see the cul- and biliteracy, high academic achievement tural differences in others as valuable assets rather in both program languages, and cross- than as obstacles to overcome (Lindsey, Robins, & cultural competence? Terrell, 2009). This is often the forgotten pillar in There are two basic but highly important decision dual language programs, but it is extremely import- points in dual language program design: the alloca- ant because students, parents, and teachers must be tion of instructional time in each program language given the tools to engage in conversations about and the determination of which content areas are equity and social justice. A program structure that to be taught in each program language at each grade elevates the partner language and culture and builds level. Figure 1 illustrates commonly adopted ap- in opportunities for culture education for teachers, proaches to allocating instructional time in the two students, and families is needed to meet this goal. languages in effective dual language programs. A clearly delineated dual language program How does the accountability movement structure supports the three pillars of dual language impact instruction and assessment in dual education: bilingualism and biliteracy, high academ- language programs? ic achievement in both program languages, and There are a number of accountability challenges sociocultural competence (Howard et al., in press). for dual language programs. The first is the inap- Pillar One: To achieve the goal of bilingualism propriateness for English learners of most English- and biliteracy, dual language programs should ex- language assessment measures, which are normed plicitly plan for and allot sufficient time to the deliv- with native English speakers. The second is the ery of literacy instruction in both program languag- dearth of literacy and content assessments available es. Literacy instruction in the partner language must in the partner languages. Lindholm-Leary (2012) be based on approaches that are authentic to that notes a third accountability challenge, specific to language. Furthermore, coordination of literacy in- dual language programs: Because of the extensive struction across the two program languages is cru- use of the partner language in the early grades, stu- cial to achievement of a program’s biliteracy goals. dents in these grades typically score below their 2 peers in mainstream English programs. Although darin and Russian are extremely limited, leaving this deficit disappears by the later grades, the early schools to develop curricula on their own. The lack discrepancy can result in pressure from administra- of authentic, rigorous, and clearly articulated cur- tors to use more English in the early grades, which ricula in partner languages threatens to undermine can have serious implications for the effectiveness the success of dual language programs, which are of the program. Another concern is assessment aimed at developing equally high levels of language load and fatigue, as students in dual language pro- and literacy in both program languages. grams typically participate in the same assessments In the absence of readily available multi as their monolingual English peers in addition to lingual curricula, it is important that dual language assessments in the partner language. Testing stu- programs develop a curriculum that matches their dents in two languages is also costly and uses time program model, local standards, and assessments. that might otherwise be used for instruction. Duguay, Massoud, Tabaku, Himmel, and Sugarman In response to the assessment challenges (2013) offer recommendations for integrating lan- faced in dual language programs, Escamilla (2000) guage and literacy development for English learners suggested that assessment consider how the two into CCSS-aligned content instruction delivered in program languages function individually, as well as English. Nonetheless, a gap remains in the devel- how the two interact. This allows for more effec- opment of authentic, standards-based curricula to tive assessment of students’ academic progress in guide the teaching of content, language, and litera- both languages. Escamilla’s current work focuses on cy in partner languages other than Spanish. developing assessments for emergent bilinguals that Another curriculum challenge facing dual lan- include both formative and summative approaches guage educators is deciding when to use English to evaluating growth in reading and writing and thus for instruction and when to use the partner lan- monitor students’ progress on a “trajectory towards guage. It is neither necessary nor feasible to teach biliteracy” (Escamilla, Hopewell, Butvilofsky, Sol all content concepts in both languages. Thus, it is tero-González, Ruiz-Figueroa, & Escamilla, 2014). important to develop a detailed curriculum map that demarks which standards or units are taught in How does the current focus on standards- each program language. Programs frequently opt based curricula impact dual language to teach specific content areas in the partner lan- education? What are some recommended guage for one grade level or span of grade levels, approaches when designing dual language then switch to English to deliver that content at curricula? the next grade level(s). To address time constraints Holding all students accountable for high levels of inherent in teaching content in two program lan- academic achievement, regardless of their socio guages while also devoting instructional time to economic, linguistic, ethnic, racial, and cultural language development in the two languages, ex- backgrounds, has been a hallmark of education in perts recommend a dual language curriculum orga- the United States for over 15 years (No Child Left nized around thematic units that integrate language Behind Act, 2002). To this end, many school dis- and content across the curriculum and afford stu- tricts have adopted the Common Core State Stan- dents ample opportunities to practice and apply dards (CCSS) in math and English language arts as vocabulary and grammatical structures in a variety the basis for developing rigorous curricula that pro- of instructional settings. mote college and career readiness. Dual language Finally, it is important to view with caution programs are no exception. The challenge they face commercially available curriculum products in lan- is in identifying a standards-based curriculum in guages other than English. Major textbook publish- the partner language that aligns in terms of rigor, ers frequently rely on translated rather than authentic scope, and focus with Common Core standards texts, and, as a result, these products may not provide while authentically reflecting the unique features of the linguistically and culturally authentic literacy ex- the partner language, culture, and literacy practic- periences that dual language students need in order es. While adaptations of the Common Core stan- to develop bilingualism, biliteracy, and cross-cultural dards are currently available in Spanish (see http:// competence. Furthermore, many products available commoncore-espanol.com/), curriculum options for teaching initial literacy in Spanish are modeled for less prevalent program languages such as Man- after English-language products and may emphasize 3 approaches and practices that are not appropriate While the separation of program languages for early Spanish literacy development. Awareness provides numerous benefits to students in dual of how teaching reading in Spanish is different from language classrooms, strict and inflexible adher- teaching reading in English is needed so that educa- ence to the practice has come under some crit- tors can adequately assess the quality of commercial icism. Research indicates that emergent bilingual products. The same holds true for teachers using learners experience positive effects when provid- other partner languages. ed opportunities to compare and contrast their In conclusion, program success is depen- two languages (Dressler, Carlo, Snow, August, & dent on the degree to which students receive high- White, 2011; Jiménez, García, & Pearson, 1996; quality instruction based on standards-based cur- Nagy, García, Durgunoglu, & Hancin-Bhatt, ricula in the partner language as well as in English, 1993). Cross-linguistic comparison promotes the with no watering down of the curriculum when it transfer of skills and contributes to the develop- is delivered in the partner language. Ideally, curric- ment of metalinguistic awareness, defined as the ulum in dual language programs follows thematic ability to identify, analyze, and manipulate linguis- units and incorporates linguistically and culturally tic forms (Koda & Zehler, 2008). In programs that appropriate resources that develop both language uphold a strict separation of languages, however, and content knowledge as well as cross-cultural opportunities to engage in cross-linguistic com- competence. parison are limited. Therefore, practitioners have developed sys- What does the current research on dual tems for providing students strategic opportunities language education say about the strict to engage in cross-linguistic comparison to pro- separation of languages? mote metalinguistic awareness. Most notable A long-held tenet of dual language education has among these approaches are the practices of been the strict separation of program languages student-initiated bridging and the teacher-planned (Howard, Sugarman, Christian, Lindholm-Leary, “Bridge” (Beeman & Urow, 2012). Teachers who & Rogers, 2007). A policy of strict language sep- adopt these approaches continue to deliver content aration carves out space for language and literacy instruction in a clearly designated language for the development in the partner language, provides am- bulk of a unit, but they also build in targeted bridg- ple opportunity to engage in extended discourse in ing activities that encourage students to connect that language, and serves to elevate the status of the content across the two program languages, the partner language. The practice also encourages compare and contrast linguistic features, and apply teachers to stick to the partner language and utilize content recently learned in one language through sheltering strategies rather than translation to make engagement in enrichment activities in the other input comprehensible, thus facilitating adoption of language. In this way, students are encouraged to the important role of the teacher as language model. access and leverage all their linguistic resources, re- In dual language classrooms, students are gardless of the identified language of the lesson, more likely to use English during partner language and to explore and celebrate the special gifts they instructional time than vice versa (Howard, Sugar- possess as emergent bilinguals. The insertion of man, & Christian, 2003). To reinforce use of the structured opportunities for connecting the two partner language, teachers often employ a special program languages marks an important enhance- signal or routine (e.g., put on a scarf or hat, lead ment to the traditional practice of strict separation a song, flip a sign) as a helpful reminder to young of languages. learners to use the partner language. Other strate- How are the professional development gies that encourage student use of the partner lan- needs of dual language educators similar to guage include recasting (restating student respons- and different from those of other teachers? es in the target language), providing a word bank or sentence stems, choral rehearsal of desired vocab- In dual language classrooms, educators are respon- ulary and grammatical structures, teaching children sible for teaching rigorous academic content in two to assist peers by functioning as language models, languages to a diverse population of students. Fur- and encouragement and positive reinforcement thermore, they need to engage emergent bilingual (Sugarman, 2012). children in critical thinking and problem-solving 4 activities that develop skills in cross-cultural com- What strategies do dual language petence. This daunting task requires a specialized program leaders use to recruit and retain educator skill set that goes beyond what general ed- appropriately qualified staff in the face of ucation teachers and teachers of English learners the bilingual teacher shortage? in monolingual English settings need to know and Given the long list of knowledge and skills required be able to do (Achugar & Pessoa, 2009; Guerre- of effective dual language teachers, program lead- ro & Guerrero, 2009; Menken & Antunez, 2001; ers often cite a shortage of qualified staff as a ma- Soto, 1991). Yet teacher preparation curricula in jor challenge for program success (Kennedy, 2013). the majority of university programs today focus on A targeted teacher recruiting plan is recommended general education pedagogical practices or, at best, to address this challenge (Howard et al., in press). on practices designed to meet the needs of English Schools and districts report utilizing a variety of learners in settings in which English is the language creative recruiting strategies, including these: of instruction, with a focus on sheltered English • Engaging in partnerships with local colleges techniques (Echevarría, Vogt, & Short, 2010) and and universities to create a pipeline of dual lan- culturally responsive pedagogy (Gay, 2010). While guage teacher talent such training is helpful, it does not sufficiently prepare aspiring dual language teachers to effectively • Tapping into local non-educator talent through serve in dual language settings. Therefore, it often implementation of “grow-your-own” teacher falls on the schools to provide targeted professional preparation programs or alternative routes to development to build up and enhance capacity of teacher certification their dual language teaching staff. • Implementing future teacher talent develop- Findings from research studies, most of ment programs that (a) encourage current bi- which looked specifically at programs using Span- lingual high school students to explore teach- ish as the partner language, indicate that profes- ing opportunities through high school course sional development for dual language teachers work, (b) support these students as they seek needs to target the following: a college teaching degree, and (c) recruit them • Development of academic language proficien- back to serve in district dual language class- cy in the partner language (Guerrero & Guer- rooms upon successful university graduation rero, 2009) • Providing incentives—including annual sti- • Understanding of linguistics and second lan- pends, hiring bonuses, or non-financial perks guage acquisition theory (Menken & Antunez, such as opportunities for conference travel— 2001) to prospective teacher candidates to lure them in geographic areas where competition for • Knowledge of the cultures associated with the teacher talent among programs is fierce partner language (Walton & Carlson, 1995) • Participating in recruiting fairs at regional and • Diversity awareness and skills in culturally re- national conferences sponsive teaching (Gay, 2010; Walton & Carl- son, 1995), including adoption of a non-deficit • Partnering with international organizations attitude toward bilinguals and bilingualism and agencies to recruit certified teachers from (Achugar & Pessoa, 2009; Soto, 1991) other countries to serve in U.S. schools • Effective multicultural parent communication • Conducting independent international searches and education strategies (Soto, 1991) (Kennedy, 2013) • Specially designed delivery of content in En- When recruiting teachers internationally, pro- glish, such as sheltered instruction techniques gram leaders need to plan and account for additional (Echevarría et al., 2010) challenges, including payment of legal fees for visas These recommendations for bilingual teacher and other requirements associated with the immi- preparation provide a solid foundation for design- gration process; provision of orientation guidance ing an effective professional development plan for for newly arrived international teachers to assist in dual language educators. the transition to life in the United States; accelerat- ed professional development opportunities to en- 5 sure that international candidates are familiar with Moreover, dual language educators must ac- the curriculum, instruction, and assessment practic- tively work to establish a climate that is truly in- es of U.S. schools; and cognizance of the likelihood clusive of all community members. Special care that short-term visa holders will leave and need to must be taken to recruit candidates for leadership be replaced at regular intervals, necessitating devel- committees and parent–teacher associations from opment of a long-term plan for orienting and train- among all parents, so that parents from both lan- ing a revolving pool of international teachers. De- guage groups are appropriately represented in all spite these considerable challenges, many programs activities and events. A welcoming front office staff rely on international recruiting as a viable strategy and cadre of teachers is correlated with increased for staffing their dual language schools with a lin- parent willingness to become an integral part of guistically and culturally diverse pool of teachers the school culture (Acosta-Hathaway, 2008). Pro- who enrich and strengthen their programs. gram leaders should take specific action to provide learning opportunities to parents in their native How do successful dual language programs language that focus on how best to support their promote family and community engagement? children’s participation in the dual language pro- Successful dual language program implementation gram (Unkenholz, 2007). Potential topics include must include a responsive infrastructure that en- dual language research, language acquisition, cross- courages families and the community to be actively cultural competence, curriculum, instructional engaged in school processes and that strengthens the strategies, assessments in the dual language class- school–family relationship (Howard et al., in press). room, and content–language integration method- Parents, including those whose children are English ologies used in the classroom. learners, must feel comfortable in the school set- It is imperative that dual language educators ting and be willing to participate in every aspect of embrace their role not only as instructional leaders the dual language program. Effective leaders make but also as advocates for each child, the child’s fam- parent education a priority and systematically plan ily, and the community they live in. This requires and implement activities that promote family and that every dual language educator be willing to go community engagement. Guerrero (2015), specifi- into the community and interact with family and cally addressing the need for Latino parents to be community members. Dual language program ed- given an opportunity to fully participate in the dual ucators strive to strengthen bonds with families by language education of their children, suggests that engaging in a variety of activities that may include program leaders do the following: meeting with parents in neighborhood centers rather than at school, conducting neighborhood walks • Recognize that families from different cultural throughout the school year, serving as a liaison backgrounds have varied perceptions of what to social service programs, and offering English school involvement entails and partner language classes for parents (includ- • Focus on creating a non-threatening and ing both parent groups in two-way dual language non-judgmental environment so that parents programs) as well as citizenship classes for those participate more comfortably in the education- working to gain full U.S. citizenship. Through this al process work, dual language programs can ensure that all • Host events such as family learning workshops stakeholders are active participants in the program that focus on dual language activities modeled and, more importantly, that they know how to ac- and explored in both program languages, and cess information and leverage resources to better multicultural events that serve to increase in- advocate for themselves and their families. clusivity and cross-cultural competence for all stakeholders What is the role of program leaders as dual language advocates and what is their • Disseminate information in both program lan- impact on effective implementation of dual guages through facilitation of meetings, fly- language programs? ers sent home, family learning workshops, and grade reporting to ensure that all parents are Educational leaders rarely receive guidance, pro- able to fully understand school expectations and fessional development, or mentoring that prepares norms them specifically for the role of dual language pro- 6 gram leader. Nonetheless, program leaders must aims to support leaders and practitioners in the embrace their role as advocates to ensure that the field as they plan for, implement, sustain, and ad- dual language program is viewed as an integral part vocate on behalf of dual language programming in of the school rather than as a mere appendage. their unique community settings. This is particularly important in schools in which dual language programming is implemented only Recommended Reading as a strand rather than school-wide. An inability Adelman Reyes, S. (2010). Teaching in two languages: A guide to take on this role, or a lack of understanding of for K-12 bilingual educators. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin. dual language programming and instructional best Combs, J., Edmondson, S., & Harris, S. (2013). The trust fac- practices, will result in ineffective program imple- tor: Strategies for school leaders. New York, NY: Routledge. mentation (Medina, 2015). Garcia, O. (2008). Bilingual education in the 21st century: A The Wallace Foundation (2011) identified the global perspective. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. ability of educational leaders to serve as strong Hamayan, E., Genesee, F., & Cloud, N. (2013). Dual lan- program advocates as a key factor in realizing the guage instruction from A to Z: Practical guidance for teachers educational improvement goals they set. In dual and administrators. Portsmouth, NH: Heinle & Heinle. language contexts, school leaders in particular must Harris, S., & Jenkins, S. (2013). Conflicts in culture: Strat- embrace their role as the driving force for school egies to understand and resolve the issues. Lanham, MD: success. Leaders of dual language schools must Rowman & Littlefield. stay abreast of current research and best practic- References es in dual language education. Furthermore, they must be skilled in explaining all aspects of dual Achugar, M., & Pessoa, S. (2009). Power and place: Lan- language programming and instruction to a variety guage attitudes towards Spanish in a bilingual academic community in Southwest Texas. Spanish in Context, of diverse stakeholders to build program support 6(2), 199-223. doi:10.1075/sic.6.2.03ach through understanding. Acosta-Hathaway, O. (2008). Ethnic minority parent involve- Dual language administrators must also con- ment and leadership in successful dual immersion programs tinuously advocate at the school and district levels (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dis- for financial and instructional resources that make sertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3351117) effective dual language program implementation Alanís, I., & Rodríguez, M. A. (2008). Sustaining a possible (Alanís & Rodríguez, 2008) and allocate dual language immersion program: Features of suc- those resources in ways that will allow program cess. Journal of Latinos and Education, 7(4), 305-319. goals and objectives to be met (Howard et al., in doi:10.1080/15348430802143378 press). Another important role of program leaders Beeman, K., & Urow, C. (2012). Teaching for biliteracy: is capacity building. By tapping into the pool of Strengthening bridges between languages. Philadelphia, PA: expertise that exists in teachers already serving in Caslon. dual language programs and helping them become de Jong, E. J. (2014). Foundations for multilingualism in educa- teacher leaders, program leaders build extended tion: From principles to practice. Philadelphia, PA: Caslon. systems of support and ensure program sustain- Dressler, C., Carlo, M., Snow, C., August, D., & White, ability over the long term. C. (2011). Spanish-speaking students’ use of cognate knowledge to infer the meaning of English words. Bi- lingualism: Language and Cognition, 14, 243-255. Conclusion Duguay, A., Massoud, L., Tabaku, L., Himmel, J., & This brief provides answers to commonly asked Sugarman, J. (2013). Implementing the Common Core for questions in the field about effective implemen- English learners: Responses to common questions. Washing- tation of dual language programs. The responses ton, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. draw from the research base as well as the authors’ Echevarría, J., Vogt, M. E., & Short, D. J. (2010) Making observations of effective practices in dual language content comprehensible for English learners: The SIOP model programs across the United States. The research (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. clearly indicates that dual language education is Escamilla, K. (2000). Bilingual means two: Assessment associated with increased levels of bilingualism issues, early literacy and Spanish-speaking children. and biliteracy and academic achievement among In A research symposium on high standards in reading for participants, including both English learners and students from diverse language groups: Research, practice, and policy (pp. 100–128). Washington, DC: Office of Bi- students who are fully fluent in English. The brief 7 lingual Education and Minority Languages Affairs. Cruz, CA: Center for Research on Education, Diver- Retrieved from http://www.ncela.ed.gov/files/rcd/ sity & Excellence. BE023774/Bilingual_Means_Two.pdf Lindholm-Leary, K. J., & Genesee, F. (2014). Student Escamilla, K., Hopewell, S., Butvilofsky, S., Soltero- outcomes in one-way, two-way, and indigenous lan- González, L., Ruiz-Figueroa, O., & Escamilla, M. guage immersion education. Journal of Immersion and (2014). Biliteracy from the start: Literacy squared in action. Content-Based Language Education, 2(2), 165-180. Philadelphia, PA: Caslon. Lindsey, R. B., Robins, K. N., & Terrell, R. D. (Eds.). Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, (2009). Cultural proficiency: A manual for school leaders (3rd and practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Genesee, F., Lindholm-Leary, K., Saunders, W., & Chris- Medina, J. (2015). Campus principals’ perceptions of how prin- tian, D. (2005). English language learners in U.S. cipal mentorship influenced their ability to lead a dual language schools: An overview of research findings. Journal of campus in one Texas school district (Doctoral dissertation). Education for Students Placed at Risk, 10, 363-385. Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Guerrero, C. (2015). Para que no se queden soñando: Percep- database. (UMI No. 3721283) tions of an administrator, parents, and teachers regarding paren- Menken, K., & Antunez, B. (2001). An overview of the tal involvement and the impact it has on academic achievement preparation and certification of teachers working with limited of English learners enrolled in a two-way immersion program English proficient (LEP) students. Retrieved from ERIC (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dis- database. (ED455231) sertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3716003) Nagy, W., García, G. E., Durgunoglu, A. Y., & Hancin- Guerrero, M. D., & Guerrero, M. C. (2009). El Bhatt, B. (1993). Spanish-English bilingal students’ (sub)desarrollo del español académico entre use of cognates in English reading. Journal of Reading los maestros bilingües: ¿Una cuestión de pod- Behavior, 25, 241-259. er? Journal of Latinos and Education, 8(1), 55-66. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110 doi:10.1080/15348430802466795 115 § 1425 (2002). Howard, E. R., Lindholm-Leary, K. J., Rogers, D., Soto, L. D. (1991). Teacher preparation and the linguis- Olague, N., Medina, J., Kennedy, B., Sugarman, J., & tically diverse young child. Education, 111(4), 487-490. Christian, D. (in press). Guiding principles for dual lan- Sugarman, J. S. (2012). Equity in Spanish/English dual language education (3rd. ed.). Washington, DC: Center for guage education: Practitioners’ perspectives (Unpublished Applied Linguistics. doctoral dissertation). University of Maryland, Col- Howard E. R, Sugarman, J., & Christian, D. (2003). Trends lege Park. in two-way immersion education: A review of the research. Thomas, W. P., & Collier, V. P. (2012). Dual language edu- Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. cation for a transformed world. Albuquerque, NM: Fuen- Howard, E. R., Sugarman, J., Christian, D., Lind- te Press. holm-Leary, K. J., & Rogers, D. (2007). Guiding prin- Unkenholz, C. (2007). Parent perceptions of parental in- ciples for dual language education (2nd ed.). Washington volvement and its relationship to student achievement in DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. Retrieved from minority and non-minority families living and not living in http://www.cal.org/twi/Guiding_Principles.pdf poverty (Doctoral dissertation). Available from Pro- Jiménez, R. T., García, G. E., & Pearson, P. D. (1996). Quest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. The reading strategies of bilingual Latina/o students 3272896) who are successful English readers: Opportunities Valentino, R. A., & Reardon, S. F. (2014). Effectiveness of four and obstacles. Reading Research Quarterly, 31, 90-112. instructional programs designed to serve English learners: Vari- Kennedy, B. H. (2013). A qualitative case study of the bilin- ation by ethnicity and initial English proficiency. Retrieved gual teacher shortage in one Texas school district (Doctoral from https://cepa.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/ dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations Valentino_Reardon_EL%20Programs_12_15_14. and Theses database. (UMI No. 3606445) pdf Koda, K., & Zehler, A. (Eds.). (2008). Learning to read across Wallace Foundation. (2011). The school principal as leader: languages: Cross-linguistic relationships in first- and second-lan- Guiding schools to better teaching and learning. Retrieved guage literacy development. New York, NY: Routledge. from http://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge- Lindholm-Leary, K. (2012). Success and challenges in center/Pages/The-School-Principal-as-Leader- dual language education. Theory Into Practice, 51(4), Guiding-Schools-to-Better-Teaching-and-Learning. 256–262. doi:10.1080/00405841.2012.726053 aspx Lindholm-Leary, K. J., & Borsato, G. (2001). Impact of Walton, P. H., & Carlson, R. (1995). Preparing for a two-way bilingual elementary programs on students’ attitudes more diverse student population. Thrust for Education- toward school and college (Research Rep. No. 10). Santa al Leadership, 24(5), 36.