Two-Way Dual Language Bilingual Education for Equity: Lessons Learned

Abstract

Research has proven that two-way dual language bilingual education (DLBE) programs have closed the achievement gap for English learners since the first program was created in 1963 for Cuban refugees (Collier & Thomas, 2012; Baker & Wright, 2017). As DLBE programs increase across the United States, concern about gentrification has gained attention (Valdez et al., 2016). DLBE was created for English learners (ELs), but a desire for access among English-speaking families is growing (Palmer, 2010). The number of Midwest programs has increased with the creation of various state-level grants and funding streams. Even though equity for ELs is the purpose of dual language, barriers to achieving equity exist. This qualitative case study evaluation aimed to identify actions that support equity for ELs and barriers that schools face during implementation. The selected program was a high-needs school, and the district used additional funding outside of the state-level grant funding to provide professional development. The researcher completed a document analysis of the submitted grants, conducted interviews, analyzed interview data, and observed and analyzed subsequent data from classroom instruction, leadership meetings, and meetings with parents. Final analyses indicate that although the language policy demonstrated a purpose of equity, the English-dominant context of the community impeded this purpose. Elements of equity were evident during implementation. For instance, most educators placed in the program had EL backgrounds and desired a program for additive bilingualism. Overall, five barriers existed that align with previous research. First, there was a lack of focus on the third pillar of dual language: sociocultural competence. Second, the enrolled English-speaking students were among the higher-achieving student groups in that kindergarten class. Third, the program failed to elevate Spanish as a language of power. Fourth, the district provided little flexibility for needed change. Finally, difficulties existed in engaging Spanish-speaking parents. These findings have implications at both the state and the local levels. At the state level, targeted support for programs planning for dual language to address these potential barriers would be beneficial. At the district level, programs can learn from the barriers in this study and reinforce the created language policy and implementation actions to lead to a more equitable outcome.