by David Safier
Here's something that distinguishes the left from the right. When we find something credible that contradicts what we've said before, we're likely to mention it instead of sweeping it under the rug or screaming it into oblivion.
In the past, I've written about studies saying English Immersion for ELL students, which is used in Arizona and a few other states, is less effective than bilingual ed, which is used in the majority of states.
Now comes a recent, very credible study out of Johns Hopkins University which says both approaches have more-or-less equal results. (The link is to a subscription only site. Here's the whole study if you're interested.)
This is the first randomized study of the two teaching methods. Earlier studies had to massage data out of existing programs. So this is the best study so far — though there's no such thing as a definitive study in education.
This has nothing to do with the 4 hour intensive ELL programs Tom Horne put into place, by the way. It's simply a question of whether the students are taught in a combination of English and their native languages (bilingual) or only in English (immersion).
And it looks like it's a wash in terms of which is more effective.
Discover more from Blog for Arizona
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Point well taken. The study was about the acquisition of reading and writing skills. Because of that, the jury is still out on other areas of the curriculum.
Remember, this isn’t a study about Arizona’s ridiculous law that ELL classes must be curriculum free. That’s not part of the study. It’s about similar courses of study, either conducted almost entirely in English or using a bilingual setting.
I would guess a bilingual approach would encourage more learning in non language-based areas, since teachers would be able to use students’ primary languages for instruction. But that’s only a guess.
You’re free to guess.
David;
Maybe “equally effective” for reading and language learning but what about everything else? I’m guessing learning of math, science and social science learning is not equal