LINGUIST List 12.3190

Mon Dec 24 2001

Review: Lindholm-Leary, Dual Language Education

Editor for this issue: Simin Karimi <siminlinguistlist.org>


What follows is another discussion note contributed to our Book Discussion Forum. We expect these discussions to be informal and interactive; and the author of the book discussed is cordially invited to join in.

If you are interested in leading a book discussion, look for books announced on LINGUIST as "available for discussion." (This means that the publisher has sent us a review copy.) Then contact Simin Karimi at siminlinguistlist.org or Terry Langendoen at terrylinguistlist.org.

Subscribe to Blackwell's LL+ at http://www.linguistlistplus.com/ and donate 20% of your subscription to LINGUIST! You get 30% off on Blackwells books, and free shipping and postage!


Directory

  • Dennis Malone, Review of Lindholm-Leary, 2001
  • linguistlist reviews, Review of Lindholm-Leary, 2001
  • linguistlist reviews, Review: Lindholm-Leary, 2001

    Message 1: Review of Lindholm-Leary, 2001

    Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 15:30:09 -0600
    From: Dennis Malone <dennis_malonesil.org>
    Subject: Review of Lindholm-Leary, 2001


    BOOK REVIEW Lindholm-Leary, Kathryn J. (2001) Dual Language Education. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. viii and 370 pages. Paperback ISBN 1-85359-531-4 (US$44.95). Hardcover ISBN 1- 85359-532-2 (US$99.95) [Prices cited from the Multilingual Matters website: http://www.multilingual-matters.com].

    REVIEWER Dennis L. Malone, Ph.D., International Literacy Consultant, SIL International

    PURPOSE Although considerable research is available that focuses on the pedagogy and outcomes of bilingual education programs, few studies have explored the forms and results of bilingual education programs in which native speakers of the two languages learn together in the same classrooms (a process known as dual language education or DLE). The purpose of Lindholm-Leary's book is to provide an overview of DLE programs and the effects of those programs on both majority- language and minority-language participants.

    By the author's definition, DLE programs "combine maintenance bilingual education and immersion education models in an integrated classroom composed of both language majority and language minority students with the goal of full bilingualism and biliteracy" (p. 1).

    ORGANIZATION AND SUMMARY OF CONTENT Lindholm-Leary does an admirable job of organizing and analyzing a large amount of diverse data relating to DLE programs. Following a brief Introduction, the author divides her material into four main sections:

    PART 1: Social and theoretical context of DLE programs (Ch. 1-3) PART 2: Classroom, administrative and familial contexts in DLE programs (Ch. 4-7) PART 3: Student outcomes in DLE programs (Ch. 8-13) PART 4: Conclusions and implications of DLE for language education programs (Ch. 14-15)

    In the book's Introduction, the author describes "three major forces that have created a surge of interest in various language education models" (p. 1). The three factors are, briefly: (1) the economic, social and political ramifications of globalization that have stimulated interest in high level multilingual communication proficiency; (2) a worldwide increase in immigration leading to concerns about the education needs of minority language students; and (3) a growing concern for the revitalization of indigenous languages that have been suppressed and/or neglected in the past.

    With respect to the first two of the factors, the author presents an excellent and persuasive argument for the potential of DLE programs to bring about the needed educational outcomes or at least to contribute significantly to their achievement. With respect to the third factor, readers are left more or less to themselves to identify the implications of the programs reported here for revitalization efforts in neglected minority languages.

    Although some readers may have particular interests in the data presented in PARTS 2 and 3, they will be wise to begin by reading through PART 1 where the author defines most of her shorthand references to program types (90:10, 80:20, 70:30,50:50, 90LO, 90HI, TBE, EO, FLES) and student designations (FEP, LEP, EB, SB).

    In PART 1, the author discusses issues of changing demographics in the U.S. and elsewhere that have resulted in large minority language populations and increased cultural diversity along with the education problems resulting from such changes.

    The political issues driving the English Only movement and California's Proposition 227 (the passage of which in 1997 effectively eliminated most of the support for the state's extensive bilingual education programs) are featured in Chapter 1. The author argues that, contrary to accusations by English-only adherents, bilingual education does work, and DLE programs appear to be its most effective form.

    Two basic models of DLE programs are also defined in Chapter 1. First, the 90:10 model, which refers to the use of the "target language (TL)" as medium of instruction 90 percent of the time and the societal language (e.g. English in the U.S.) for 10 percent of the time in kindergarten and grade 1, gradually changing to roughly 80:20 in grades 2 and 3, and then to around 50:50 in grades 4-6. The second DLE program type is called 50:50 because the TL (e.g., Spanish) is used 50 percent of the time, and the societal language is used 50 percent of the time. Throughout the remaining chapters variants of these two programs models are compared with each other and with other bilingual education programs that are not DLE (e.g., transitional bilingual education or English-only programs that involve only minority language students). According to the author, programs fitting the DLE definition have grown in number in the U.S. from 30 in 1987 to 261 in 1999.

    Chapter 2 provides a review of the literature on theoretical and conceptual models of language education. The review emphasizes the common traits of effective language education programs: strong leadership, a cohesive and supportive faculty, and clear articulation of the instructional program. The author also emphasizes the need for both groups of students (minority and majority) to be treated equitably.

    Chapter 3 describes specific design and implementation features of successful language education models (particularly DLE programs). The discussion includes a persuasive argument for beginning literacy instruction in the target (minority) language.

    In PART 2, the author provides valuable information on the various contexts of DLE programs, including the demographic and educational characteristics of the schools involved in her study (Ch. 4), the range of teachers' perceptions of administrative and parental support, their own participation in the planning program, and the degree to which students in both groups (minority language and societal language) were treated equitably (Ch. 5), the kind and (linguistic) quality of "teacher talk" in the classroom (Ch. 6), and the various influences on parent attitudes toward and involvement in DLE programs (Ch. 7).

    The last two chapters are of particular interest. Chapter 6 adds more empirical evidence to reports in recent research on trends in "teacher talk" (i.e., the teachers' oral use of language with students in the classroom context). The author argues that the plethora of cognitively low-level linguistic structures in teachers' interactions with students, corporately and individually, need to be addressed in any language education program that aims at high levels of bilingual proficiency.

    Chapter 7 provides an analysis of parent attitudes toward the DLE programs in which their children participate. This, according to the author, has been a "missing link" in language education research to date. Of particular interest is the finding that parents of kindergarten students are the population segment that is most satisfied with DLE programs, followed by parents of students in grades 6-8. The least satisfied were parents of grades 3-5 students. In 90:10 DLE programs, reading in the societal (majority) language (e.g., English) does not begin until Grade 3. Thus, at that point, parents who are concerned that their children are falling behind other children in English-only classrooms have no evidence to assuage their fears. By grade 6, however, the students' success in transferring target language literacy skills to the societal language has become apparent. Thomas and Collier's (1997) longitudinal study also demonstrates that the positive affects of dual language programs are not clear until the later primary grades. Their research explains the differences in parent satisfaction over the K-8 spectrum of DLE.

    IN PART 3, the author turns her attention to student outcomes, providing a detailed discussion of student samples and data collection techniques from her study (Chapter 8). She collected comparative data on several thousand students with respect to their ethnic and economic background, oral language proficiency and academic language/ reading achievement. She includes longitudinal data on 149 students over a period of 5 years in in four 90:10-type DLE program.

    She then uses comparative data on student oral proficiency outcomes in their DLE program languages, which were primarily Spanish and English (Chapter 9). One key finding here is that achieving bilingual proficiency in both Spanish and English is more likely to occur in a 90:10 DLE program than a 50:50 one.

    In addition to oral proficiency, the author examines reading and language achievement in both the L1 and the L2 (Chapter 10), demonstrating an important correlation between bilingual proficiency and students' scores in reading achievement (p. 232).

    In Chapter 11, the author compares standardized tests of reading achievement with alternative forms of evaluation (primarily portfolio assessment). The author argues that the two forms of assessment are more complementary than competitive, each assessing different aspects of the same reading process.

    The author also discusses DLE students' performance with respect to subjects other than language education: mathematics, science and social studies (Chapter 12). Again, the students in the DLE programs are generally able to perform as well as or better than their non-DLE counterparts.

    Chapter 13 concludes PART 3 with a discussion of students' attitudes and motivations as these affect the learning environment. The implications here are that ethnic minority students in DLE programs experience increased perception of academic competence and "global self-worth," approximating that of middle- and upper-class students in English-as- medium-of-instruction programs (p. 287).

    In PART 4, the author summarizes her findings and conclusions and discusses their implications for language education programs. She concludes that DLE programs are effective in helping students attain levels of bilingualism, biliteracy and academic achievement that are at or above grade level for both language minority and language majority students (Chapter 14). These results are consistent irrespective of students' ethnic, socioeconomic and/or linguistic backgrounds. Teachers and parents both express positive attitudes toward the programs.

    In the book's final chapter the author presents a detailed summary of key implications of her research, distilling her final analysis into three general conclusions: (1) DLE programs can be effective in promoting high levels of language proficiency, increased academic achievement and positive student attitudes; (2) DLE teachers clearly enjoy teaching in the DLE programs; and (3) parents demonstrate their satisfaction with DLE programs by recommending them to other parents (p. 330). Within the context of Lindholm- Leary's careful data collection, analysis, and interpretation, those are warranted assertions.

    A CRITICAL EVALUATION Lindholm-Leary provides her readers with a useful and timely assessment of dual language education. The book is useful because the author has taken care to present as comprehensive a picture of DLE programs as possible without becoming tedious. The book is timely because her detailed description and analysis of DLE programs follow closely on the heels of major research studies (August & Hakuta, 1997; Thomas and Collier, 1997; Christian, Montone, Lindholm & Carranza, 1997; Cloud, Genesee and Hamayan, 2000) which argue strongly that DLE programs are the most effective form of minority language education in terms of minority student achievement in English.

    The author provides a well-reasoned historical and theoretical case for dual language education. In the process she adds another chapter to the sad account of how easily political opponents can use hearsay and innuendo to discredit substantive empirical research supporting the promotion of effective bilingual education programs (e.g., California's Proposition 227).

    A few incidental aspects of the author's presentation warrant questioning.

    First, in her discussion of literacy instruction (pp. 90- 92), the author notes that a trend toward whole language reading programs coincided with the dual language programs she was studying. She asserts that "this whole language movement and the DLE program are confounded" making it impossible to know whether reading achievement was a result of the literacy methodology or the DLE program. However, it seems to this reviewer that regardless of the literacy methodology (whole language, phonics, basal readers), reading achievement could never be exclusively attributed to the "DLE program" since it is the nature of literacy instruction to affect reading achievement.

    Lindholm-Leary (citing Wong Fillmore's 1985 research) emphasizes that "effective bilingual teachers tailor their verbal interactions according to the level of each student's language proficiency" (p. 124). However, neither of the two studies of "teacher-talk" featured in Chapter 6 report on the degree to which the language of the teachers' utterances was tailored to the language proficiency of the student. Thus, the percentages of teachers' instructional utterances (p. 131) do not indicate whether or not those utterances were appropriate to the learners' language level.

    >From time to time, the author's interpretation of findings is regrettably muted. For example, in Chapter 9, reporting on a comparison of bilingual education program types with respect to oral language proficiency in the L2 (English), the score for the transitional bilingual education program (a non-DLE program) outscored all the DLE program types in English language proficiency (p. 190). It would be helpful in a case like this to offer a more detailed explanation. Is this an "early-exit TBE" program or a "late-exit TBE" program. If it is an "early-exit" program (i.e., 1 or 2 years), then this finding is exactly the kind that opponents of maintenance bilingual education will use to discredit the longer, more expensive, more effective programs. Fortunately, in this example, the results are somewhat problematic since the TBE participants are rated as "94%" English-proficient in kindergarten in a program that requires students to be limited-English-proficiency (LEP) for enrollment (p. 194).

    With respect to the author's interpretation of her research findings, my only reservation is with her tendency to over- use the modifier "clearly" (e.g., the term is used 3 times in a description of assessment results that are not all that clear, pp. 243-244). Considered against the whole of Lindholm-Leary's argument, however, this a not particularly serious fault.

    All in all, the author's presentation of her data and analysis is straightforward and persuasive. Her study provides the field of bilingual education with a much-needed analysis of program models that feature language education seriously aimed at bilingual, biliterate proficiency. As the author states in her final chapter: "The realities of living in multicultural communities and an ever-shrinking global community with a variety of languages requires training students with high levels of multilingual and multicultural competencies" (p.310). This volume presents a convincing argument for the provision of more human and material resources for expanding and adapting dual language education programs to the diverse multilingual settings in today's world.

    REFERENCES Adams, M. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    August, D. & Hakuta, K. (1997). Improving schooling for language-minority children: A research agenda. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Christian, D., Montone, C., Lindholm, L. & Carranza, I. (1997). Profiles in two-way bilingual education. McHenry, IL: Delta Systems.

    Cloud, N., Genesee, F., & Hamayan, E. (2000). Dual language instruction. Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle.

    Katz, L. & Frost, R. (1992) The reading process is different for different orthographies: The orthographic depth hypothesis. Haskins Laboratories Studies Report on Speech Research, SH 111/112, 147-160.

    Thomas, W. & Collier, V. (1997). School effectiveness for language minority students. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.

    Wong Fillmore, L. (1985). When does teacher talk work as input? In S.M. Gass & C.G. Maddens (eds.), Input in Second language Acquisition, pp. 17-50. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

    BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Dennis Malone earned a Ph.D. in Education at Indiana University and currently works as an International Literacy Consultant with SIL International in the Asia Area. His research interests are mother tongue education, sociolinguistics (especially language maintenance and revitalization issues) and literacy studies in general. He has extensive experience in ethnic minority education in Asia and the Pacific. He is currently serving as visiting lecturer at Mahidol University-Salaya (Bangkok), advising on several mother tongue education projects in the Asia Area, and consulting with the Ministry of Education and Training (Vietnam), on a pilot project on ethnic minority primary education.


    Message 2: Review of Lindholm-Leary, 2001

    Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 09:53:35 -0500 (EST)
    From: linguistlist reviews <reviewslinguistlist.org>
    Subject: Review of Lindholm-Leary, 2001


    Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 15:30:09 -0600 From: Dennis Malone <dennis_malonesil.org> Subject: Review of Lindholm-Leary, 2001

    BOOK REVIEW Lindholm-Leary, Kathryn J. (2001) Dual Language Education. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. viii and 370 pages. Paperback ISBN 1-85359-531-4 (US$44.95). Hardcover ISBN 1- 85359-532-2 (US$99.95) [Prices cited from the Multilingual Matters website: http://www.multilingual-matters.com].

    REVIEWER Dennis L. Malone, Ph.D., International Literacy Consultant, SIL International

    PURPOSE Although considerable research is available that focuses on the pedagogy and outcomes of bilingual education programs, few studies have explored the forms and results of bilingual education programs in which native speakers of the two languages learn together in the same classrooms (a process known as dual language education or DLE). The purpose of Lindholm-Leary's book is to provide an overview of DLE programs and the effects of those programs on both majority- language and minority-language participants.

    By the author's definition, DLE programs "combine maintenance bilingual education and immersion education models in an integrated classroom composed of both language majority and language minority students with the goal of full bilingualism and biliteracy" (p. 1).

    ORGANIZATION AND SUMMARY OF CONTENT Lindholm-Leary does an admirable job of organizing and analyzing a large amount of diverse data relating to DLE programs. Following a brief Introduction, the author divides her material into four main sections:

    PART 1: Social and theoretical context of DLE programs (Ch. 1-3) PART 2: Classroom, administrative and familial contexts in DLE programs (Ch. 4-7) PART 3: Student outcomes in DLE programs (Ch. 8-13) PART 4: Conclusions and implications of DLE for language education programs (Ch. 14-15)

    In the book's Introduction, the author describes "three major forces that have created a surge of interest in various language education models" (p. 1). The three factors are, briefly: (1) the economic, social and political ramifications of globalization that have stimulated interest in high level multilingual communication proficiency; (2) a worldwide increase in immigration leading to concerns about the education needs of minority language students; and (3) a growing concern for the revitalization of indigenous languages that have been suppressed and/or neglected in the past.

    With respect to the first two of the factors, the author presents an excellent and persuasive argument for the potential of DLE programs to bring about the needed educational outcomes or at least to contribute significantly to their achievement. With respect to the third factor, readers are left more or less to themselves to identify the implications of the programs reported here for revitalization efforts in neglected minority languages.

    Although some readers may have particular interests in the data presented in PARTS 2 and 3, they will be wise to begin by reading through PART 1 where the author defines most of her shorthand references to program types (90:10, 80:20, 70:30,50:50, 90LO, 90HI, TBE, EO, FLES) and student designations (FEP, LEP, EB, SB).

    In PART 1, the author discusses issues of changing demographics in the U.S. and elsewhere that have resulted in large minority language populations and increased cultural diversity along with the education problems resulting from such changes.

    The political issues driving the English Only movement and California's Proposition 227 (the passage of which in 1997 effectively eliminated most of the support for the state's extensive bilingual education programs) are featured in Chapter 1. The author argues that, contrary to accusations by English-only adherents, bilingual education does work, and DLE programs appear to be its most effective form.

    Two basic models of DLE programs are also defined in Chapter 1. First, the 90:10 model, which refers to the use of the "target language (TL)" as medium of instruction 90 percent of the time and the societal language (e.g. English in the U.S.) for 10 percent of the time in kindergarten and grade 1, gradually changing to roughly 80:20 in grades 2 and 3, and then to around 50:50 in grades 4-6. The second DLE program type is called 50:50 because the TL (e.g., Spanish) is used 50 percent of the time, and the societal language is used 50 percent of the time. Throughout the remaining chapters variants of these two programs models are compared with each other and with other bilingual education programs that are not DLE (e.g., transitional bilingual education or English-only programs that involve only minority language students). According to the author, programs fitting the DLE definition have grown in number in the U.S. from 30 in 1987 to 261 in 1999.

    Chapter 2 provides a review of the literature on theoretical and conceptual models of language education. The review emphasizes the common traits of effective language education programs: strong leadership, a cohesive and supportive faculty, and clear articulation of the instructional program. The author also emphasizes the need for both groups of students (minority and majority) to be treated equitably.

    Chapter 3 describes specific design and implementation features of successful language education models (particularly DLE programs). The discussion includes a persuasive argument for beginning literacy instruction in the target (minority) language.

    In PART 2, the author provides valuable information on the various contexts of DLE programs, including the demographic and educational characteristics of the schools involved in her study (Ch. 4), the range of teachers' perceptions of administrative and parental support, their own participation in the planning program, and the degree to which students in both groups (minority language and societal language) were treated equitably (Ch. 5), the kind and (linguistic) quality of "teacher talk" in the classroom (Ch. 6), and the various influences on parent attitudes toward and involvement in DLE programs (Ch. 7).

    The last two chapters are of particular interest. Chapter 6 adds more empirical evidence to reports in recent research on trends in "teacher talk" (i.e., the teachers' oral use of language with students in the classroom context). The author argues that the plethora of cognitively low-level linguistic structures in teachers' interactions with students, corporately and individually, need to be addressed in any language education program that aims at high levels of bilingual proficiency.

    Chapter 7 provides an analysis of parent attitudes toward the DLE programs in which their children participate. This, according to the author, has been a "missing link" in language education research to date. Of particular interest is the finding that parents of kindergarten students are the population segment that is most satisfied with DLE programs, followed by parents of students in grades 6-8. The least satisfied were parents of grades 3-5 students. In 90:10 DLE programs, reading in the societal (majority) language (e.g., English) does not begin until Grade 3. Thus, at that point, parents who are concerned that their children are falling behind other children in English-only classrooms have no evidence to assuage their fears. By grade 6, however, the students' success in transferring target language literacy skills to the societal language has become apparent. Thomas and Collier's (1997) longitudinal study also demonstrates that the positive affects of dual language programs are not clear until the later primary grades. Their research explains the differences in parent satisfaction over the K-8 spectrum of DLE.

    IN PART 3, the author turns her attention to student outcomes, providing a detailed discussion of student samples and data collection techniques from her study (Chapter 8). She collected comparative data on several thousand students with respect to their ethnic and economic background, oral language proficiency and academic language/ reading achievement. She includes longitudinal data on 149 students over a period of 5 years in in four 90:10-type DLE program.

    She then uses comparative data on student oral proficiency outcomes in their DLE program languages, which were primarily Spanish and English (Chapter 9). One key finding here is that achieving bilingual proficiency in both Spanish and English is more likely to occur in a 90:10 DLE program than a 50:50 one.

    In addition to oral proficiency, the author examines reading and language achievement in both the L1 and the L2 (Chapter 10), demonstrating an important correlation between bilingual proficiency and students' scores in reading achievement (p. 232).

    In Chapter 11, the author compares standardized tests of reading achievement with alternative forms of evaluation (primarily portfolio assessment). The author argues that the two forms of assessment are more complementary than competitive, each assessing different aspects of the same reading process.

    The author also discusses DLE students' performance with respect to subjects other than language education: mathematics, science and social studies (Chapter 12). Again, the students in the DLE programs are generally able to perform as well as or better than their non-DLE counterparts.

    Chapter 13 concludes PART 3 with a discussion of students' attitudes and motivations as these affect the learning environment. The implications here are that ethnic minority students in DLE programs experience increased perception of academic competence and "global self-worth," approximating that of middle- and upper-class students in English-as- medium-of-instruction programs (p. 287).

    In PART 4, the author summarizes her findings and conclusions and discusses their implications for language education programs. She concludes that DLE programs are effective in helping students attain levels of bilingualism, biliteracy and academic achievement that are at or above grade level for both language minority and language majority students (Chapter 14). These results are consistent irrespective of students' ethnic, socioeconomic and/or linguistic backgrounds. Teachers and parents both express positive attitudes toward the programs.

    In the book's final chapter the author presents a detailed summary of key implications of her research, distilling her final analysis into three general conclusions: (1) DLE programs can be effective in promoting high levels of language proficiency, increased academic achievement and positive student attitudes; (2) DLE teachers clearly enjoy teaching in the DLE programs; and (3) parents demonstrate their satisfaction with DLE programs by recommending them to other parents (p. 330). Within the context of Lindholm- Leary's careful data collection, analysis, and interpretation, those are warranted assertions.

    A CRITICAL EVALUATION Lindholm-Leary provides her readers with a useful and timely assessment of dual language education. The book is useful because the author has taken care to present as comprehensive a picture of DLE programs as possible without becoming tedious. The book is timely because her detailed description and analysis of DLE programs follow closely on the heels of major research studies (August & Hakuta, 1997; Thomas and Collier, 1997; Christian, Montone, Lindholm & Carranza, 1997; Cloud, Genesee and Hamayan, 2000) which argue strongly that DLE programs are the most effective form of minority language education in terms of minority student achievement in English.

    The author provides a well-reasoned historical and theoretical case for dual language education. In the process she adds another chapter to the sad account of how easily political opponents can use hearsay and innuendo to discredit substantive empirical research supporting the promotion of effective bilingual education programs (e.g., California's Proposition 227).

    A few incidental aspects of the author's presentation warrant questioning.

    First, in her discussion of literacy instruction (pp. 90- 92), the author notes that a trend toward whole language reading programs coincided with the dual language programs she was studying. She asserts that "this whole language movement and the DLE program are confounded" making it impossible to know whether reading achievement was a result of the literacy methodology or the DLE program. However, it seems to this reviewer that regardless of the literacy methodology (whole language, phonics, basal readers), reading achievement could never be exclusively attributed to the "DLE program" since it is the nature of literacy instruction to affect reading achievement.

    Lindholm-Leary (citing Wong Fillmore's 1985 research) emphasizes that "effective bilingual teachers tailor their verbal interactions according to the level of each student's language proficiency" (p. 124). However, neither of the two studies of "teacher-talk" featured in Chapter 6 report on the degree to which the language of the teachers' utterances was tailored to the language proficiency of the student. Thus, the percentages of teachers' instructional utterances (p. 131) do not indicate whether or not those utterances were appropriate to the learners' language level.

    >From time to time, the author's interpretation of findings is regrettably muted. For example, in Chapter 9, reporting on a comparison of bilingual education program types with respect to oral language proficiency in the L2 (English), the score for the transitional bilingual education program (a non-DLE program) outscored all the DLE program types in English language proficiency (p. 190). It would be helpful in a case like this to offer a more detailed explanation. Is this an "early-exit TBE" program or a "late-exit TBE" program. If it is an "early-exit" program (i.e., 1 or 2 years), then this finding is exactly the kind that opponents of maintenance bilingual education will use to discredit the longer, more expensive, more effective programs. Fortunately, in this example, the results are somewhat problematic since the TBE participants are rated as "94%" English-proficient in kindergarten in a program that requires students to be limited-English-proficiency (LEP) for enrollment (p. 194).

    With respect to the author's interpretation of her research findings, my only reservation is with her tendency to over- use the modifier "clearly" (e.g., the term is used 3 times in a description of assessment results that are not all that clear, pp. 243-244). Considered against the whole of Lindholm-Leary's argument, however, this a not particularly serious fault.

    All in all, the author's presentation of her data and analysis is straightforward and persuasive. Her study provides the field of bilingual education with a much-needed analysis of program models that feature language education seriously aimed at bilingual, biliterate proficiency. As the author states in her final chapter: "The realities of living in multicultural communities and an ever-shrinking global community with a variety of languages requires training students with high levels of multilingual and multicultural competencies" (p.310). This volume presents a convincing argument for the provision of more human and material resources for expanding and adapting dual language education programs to the diverse multilingual settings in today's world.

    REFERENCES Adams, M. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    August, D. & Hakuta, K. (1997). Improving schooling for language-minority children: A research agenda. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Christian, D., Montone, C., Lindholm, L. & Carranza, I. (1997). Profiles in two-way bilingual education. McHenry, IL: Delta Systems.

    Cloud, N., Genesee, F., & Hamayan, E. (2000). Dual language instruction. Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle.

    Katz, L. & Frost, R. (1992) The reading process is different for different orthographies: The orthographic depth hypothesis. Haskins Laboratories Studies Report on Speech Research, SH 111/112, 147-160.

    Thomas, W. & Collier, V. (1997). School effectiveness for language minority students. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.

    Wong Fillmore, L. (1985). When does teacher talk work as input? In S.M. Gass & C.G. Maddens (eds.), Input in Second language Acquisition, pp. 17-50. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

    BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Dennis Malone earned a Ph.D. in Education at Indiana University and currently works as an International Literacy Consultant with SIL International in the Asia Area. His research interests are mother tongue education, sociolinguistics (especially language maintenance and revitalization issues) and literacy studies in general. He has extensive experience in ethnic minority education in Asia and the Pacific. He is currently serving as visiting lecturer at Mahidol University-Salaya (Bangkok), advising on several mother tongue education projects in the Asia Area, and consulting with the Ministry of Education and Training (Vietnam), on a pilot project on ethnic minority primary education.


    Message 3: Review: Lindholm-Leary, 2001

    Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 10:08:35 -0500 (EST)
    From: linguistlist reviews <reviewslinguistlist.org>
    Subject: Review: Lindholm-Leary, 2001


    Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 15:30:09 -0600 From: Dennis Malone <dennis_malonesil.org> Subject: Review of Lindholm-Leary, 2001

    BOOK REVIEW Lindholm-Leary, Kathryn J. (2001) Dual Language Education. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. viii and 370 pages. Paperback ISBN 1-85359-531-4 (US$44.95). Hardcover ISBN 1- 85359-532-2 (US$99.95) [Prices cited from the Multilingual Matters website: http://www.multilingual-matters.com].

    REVIEWER Dennis L. Malone, Ph.D., International Literacy Consultant, SIL International

    PURPOSE Although considerable research is available that focuses on the pedagogy and outcomes of bilingual education programs, few studies have explored the forms and results of bilingual education programs in which native speakers of the two languages learn together in the same classrooms (a process known as dual language education or DLE). The purpose of Lindholm-Leary's book is to provide an overview of DLE programs and the effects of those programs on both majority- language and minority-language participants.

    By the author's definition, DLE programs "combine maintenance bilingual education and immersion education models in an integrated classroom composed of both language majority and language minority students with the goal of full bilingualism and biliteracy" (p. 1).

    ORGANIZATION AND SUMMARY OF CONTENT Lindholm-Leary does an admirable job of organizing and analyzing a large amount of diverse data relating to DLE programs. Following a brief Introduction, the author divides her material into four main sections:

    PART 1: Social and theoretical context of DLE programs (Ch. 1-3) PART 2: Classroom, administrative and familial contexts in DLE programs (Ch. 4-7) PART 3: Student outcomes in DLE programs (Ch. 8-13) PART 4: Conclusions and implications of DLE for language education programs (Ch. 14-15)

    In the book's Introduction, the author describes "three major forces that have created a surge of interest in various language education models" (p. 1). The three factors are, briefly: (1) the economic, social and political ramifications of globalization that have stimulated interest in high level multilingual communication proficiency; (2) a worldwide increase in immigration leading to concerns about the education needs of minority language students; and (3) a growing concern for the revitalization of indigenous languages that have been suppressed and/or neglected in the past.

    With respect to the first two of the factors, the author presents an excellent and persuasive argument for the potential of DLE programs to bring about the needed educational outcomes or at least to contribute significantly to their achievement. With respect to the third factor, readers are left more or less to themselves to identify the implications of the programs reported here for revitalization efforts in neglected minority languages.

    Although some readers may have particular interests in the data presented in PARTS 2 and 3, they will be wise to begin by reading through PART 1 where the author defines most of her shorthand references to program types (90:10, 80:20, 70:30,50:50, 90LO, 90HI, TBE, EO, FLES) and student designations (FEP, LEP, EB, SB).

    In PART 1, the author discusses issues of changing demographics in the U.S. and elsewhere that have resulted in large minority language populations and increased cultural diversity along with the education problems resulting from such changes.

    The political issues driving the English Only movement and California's Proposition 227 (the passage of which in 1997 effectively eliminated most of the support for the state's extensive bilingual education programs) are featured in Chapter 1. The author argues that, contrary to accusations by English-only adherents, bilingual education does work, and DLE programs appear to be its most effective form.

    Two basic models of DLE programs are also defined in Chapter 1. First, the 90:10 model, which refers to the use of the "target language (TL)" as medium of instruction 90 percent of the time and the societal language (e.g. English in the U.S.) for 10 percent of the time in kindergarten and grade 1, gradually changing to roughly 80:20 in grades 2 and 3, and then to around 50:50 in grades 4-6. The second DLE program type is called 50:50 because the TL (e.g., Spanish) is used 50 percent of the time, and the societal language is used 50 percent of the time. Throughout the remaining chapters variants of these two programs models are compared with each other and with other bilingual education programs that are not DLE (e.g., transitional bilingual education or English-only programs that involve only minority language students). According to the author, programs fitting the DLE definition have grown in number in the U.S. from 30 in 1987 to 261 in 1999.

    Chapter 2 provides a review of the literature on theoretical and conceptual models of language education. The review emphasizes the common traits of effective language education programs: strong leadership, a cohesive and supportive faculty, and clear articulation of the instructional program. The author also emphasizes the need for both groups of students (minority and majority) to be treated equitably.

    Chapter 3 describes specific design and implementation features of successful language education models (particularly DLE programs). The discussion includes a persuasive argument for beginning literacy instruction in the target (minority) language.

    In PART 2, the author provides valuable information on the various contexts of DLE programs, including the demographic and educational characteristics of the schools involved in her study (Ch. 4), the range of teachers' perceptions of administrative and parental support, their own participation in the planning program, and the degree to which students in both groups (minority language and societal language) were treated equitably (Ch. 5), the kind and (linguistic) quality of "teacher talk" in the classroom (Ch. 6), and the various influences on parent attitudes toward and involvement in DLE programs (Ch. 7).

    The last two chapters are of particular interest. Chapter 6 adds more empirical evidence to reports in recent research on trends in "teacher talk" (i.e., the teachers' oral use of language with students in the classroom context). The author argues that the plethora of cognitively low-level linguistic structures in teachers' interactions with students, corporately and individually, need to be addressed in any language education program that aims at high levels of bilingual proficiency.

    Chapter 7 provides an analysis of parent attitudes toward the DLE programs in which their children participate. This, according to the author, has been a "missing link" in language education research to date. Of particular interest is the finding that parents of kindergarten students are the population segment that is most satisfied with DLE programs, followed by parents of students in grades 6-8. The least satisfied were parents of grades 3-5 students. In 90:10 DLE programs, reading in the societal (majority) language (e.g., English) does not begin until Grade 3. Thus, at that point, parents who are concerned that their children are falling behind other children in English-only classrooms have no evidence to assuage their fears. By grade 6, however, the students' success in transferring target language literacy skills to the societal language has become apparent. Thomas and Collier's (1997) longitudinal study also demonstrates that the positive affects of dual language programs are not clear until the later primary grades. Their research explains the differences in parent satisfaction over the K-8 spectrum of DLE.

    IN PART 3, the author turns her attention to student outcomes, providing a detailed discussion of student samples and data collection techniques from her study (Chapter 8). She collected comparative data on several thousand students with respect to their ethnic and economic background, oral language proficiency and academic language/ reading achievement. She includes longitudinal data on 149 students over a period of 5 years in in four 90:10-type DLE program.

    She then uses comparative data on student oral proficiency outcomes in their DLE program languages, which were primarily Spanish and English (Chapter 9). One key finding here is that achieving bilingual proficiency in both Spanish and English is more likely to occur in a 90:10 DLE program than a 50:50 one.

    In addition to oral proficiency, the author examines reading and language achievement in both the L1 and the L2 (Chapter 10), demonstrating an important correlation between bilingual proficiency and students' scores in reading achievement (p. 232).

    In Chapter 11, the author compares standardized tests of reading achievement with alternative forms of evaluation (primarily portfolio assessment). The author argues that the two forms of assessment are more complementary than competitive, each assessing different aspects of the same reading process.

    The author also discusses DLE students' performance with respect to subjects other than language education: mathematics, science and social studies (Chapter 12). Again, the students in the DLE programs are generally able to perform as well as or better than their non-DLE counterparts.

    Chapter 13 concludes PART 3 with a discussion of students' attitudes and motivations as these affect the learning environment. The implications here are that ethnic minority students in DLE programs experience increased perception of academic competence and "global self-worth," approximating that of middle- and upper-class students in English-as- medium-of-instruction programs (p. 287).

    In PART 4, the author summarizes her findings and conclusions and discusses their implications for language education programs. She concludes that DLE programs are effective in helping students attain levels of bilingualism, biliteracy and academic achievement that are at or above grade level for both language minority and language majority students (Chapter 14). These results are consistent irrespective of students' ethnic, socioeconomic and/or linguistic backgrounds. Teachers and parents both express positive attitudes toward the programs.

    In the book's final chapter the author presents a detailed summary of key implications of her research, distilling her final analysis into three general conclusions: (1) DLE programs can be effective in promoting high levels of language proficiency, increased academic achievement and positive student attitudes; (2) DLE teachers clearly enjoy teaching in the DLE programs; and (3) parents demonstrate their satisfaction with DLE programs by recommending them to other parents (p. 330). Within the context of Lindholm- Leary's careful data collection, analysis, and interpretation, those are warranted assertions.

    A CRITICAL EVALUATION Lindholm-Leary provides her readers with a useful and timely assessment of dual language education. The book is useful because the author has taken care to present as comprehensive a picture of DLE programs as possible without becoming tedious. The book is timely because her detailed description and analysis of DLE programs follow closely on the heels of major research studies (August & Hakuta, 1997; Thomas and Collier, 1997; Christian, Montone, Lindholm & Carranza, 1997; Cloud, Genesee and Hamayan, 2000) which argue strongly that DLE programs are the most effective form of minority language education in terms of minority student achievement in English.

    The author provides a well-reasoned historical and theoretical case for dual language education. In the process she adds another chapter to the sad account of how easily political opponents can use hearsay and innuendo to discredit substantive empirical research supporting the promotion of effective bilingual education programs (e.g., California's Proposition 227).

    A few incidental aspects of the author's presentation warrant questioning.

    First, in her discussion of literacy instruction (pp. 90- 92), the author notes that a trend toward whole language reading programs coincided with the dual language programs she was studying. She asserts that "this whole language movement and the DLE program are confounded" making it impossible to know whether reading achievement was a result of the literacy methodology or the DLE program. However, it seems to this reviewer that regardless of the literacy methodology (whole language, phonics, basal readers), reading achievement could never be exclusively attributed to the "DLE program" since it is the nature of literacy instruction to affect reading achievement.

    Lindholm-Leary (citing Wong Fillmore's 1985 research) emphasizes that "effective bilingual teachers tailor their verbal interactions according to the level of each student's language proficiency" (p. 124). However, neither of the two studies of "teacher-talk" featured in Chapter 6 report on the degree to which the language of the teachers' utterances was tailored to the language proficiency of the student. Thus, the percentages of teachers' instructional utterances (p. 131) do not indicate whether or not those utterances were appropriate to the learners' language level.

    >From time to time, the author's interpretation of findings is regrettably muted. For example, in Chapter 9, reporting on a comparison of bilingual education program types with respect to oral language proficiency in the L2 (English), the score for the transitional bilingual education program (a non-DLE program) outscored all the DLE program types in English language proficiency (p. 190). It would be helpful in a case like this to offer a more detailed explanation. Is this an "early-exit TBE" program or a "late-exit TBE" program. If it is an "early-exit" program (i.e., 1 or 2 years), then this finding is exactly the kind that opponents of maintenance bilingual education will use to discredit the longer, more expensive, more effective programs. Fortunately, in this example, the results are somewhat problematic since the TBE participants are rated as "94%" English-proficient in kindergarten in a program that requires students to be limited-English-proficiency (LEP) for enrollment (p. 194).

    With respect to the author's interpretation of her research findings, my only reservation is with her tendency to over- use the modifier "clearly" (e.g., the term is used 3 times in a description of assessment results that are not all that clear, pp. 243-244). Considered against the whole of Lindholm-Leary's argument, however, this a not particularly serious fault.

    All in all, the author's presentation of her data and analysis is straightforward and persuasive. Her study provides the field of bilingual education with a much-needed analysis of program models that feature language education seriously aimed at bilingual, biliterate proficiency. As the author states in her final chapter: "The realities of living in multicultural communities and an ever-shrinking global community with a variety of languages requires training students with high levels of multilingual and multicultural competencies" (p.310). This volume presents a convincing argument for the provision of more human and material resources for expanding and adapting dual language education programs to the diverse multilingual settings in today's world.

    REFERENCES Adams, M. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    August, D. & Hakuta, K. (1997). Improving schooling for language-minority children: A research agenda. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Christian, D., Montone, C., Lindholm, L. & Carranza, I. (1997). Profiles in two-way bilingual education. McHenry, IL: Delta Systems.

    Cloud, N., Genesee, F., & Hamayan, E. (2000). Dual language instruction. Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle.

    Katz, L. & Frost, R. (1992) The reading process is different for different orthographies: The orthographic depth hypothesis. Haskins Laboratories Studies Report on Speech Research, SH 111/112, 147-160.

    Thomas, W. & Collier, V. (1997). School effectiveness for language minority students. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.

    Wong Fillmore, L. (1985). When does teacher talk work as input? In S.M. Gass & C.G. Maddens (eds.), Input in Second language Acquisition, pp. 17-50. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

    BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Dennis Malone earned a Ph.D. in Education at Indiana University and currently works as an International Literacy Consultant with SIL International in the Asia Area. His research interests are mother tongue education, sociolinguistics (especially language maintenance and revitalization issues) and literacy studies in general. He has extensive experience in ethnic minority education in Asia and the Pacific. He is currently serving as visiting lecturer at Mahidol University-Salaya (Bangkok), advising on several mother tongue education projects in the Asia Area, and consulting with the Ministry of Education and Training (Vietnam), on a pilot project on ethnic minority primary education.