Steele, Jennifer L.; Slater, Robert O.; Zamarro, Gema; Miller, Trey; Li, Jennifer; Burkhauser, Susan; Bacon, Michael (2017). American Educational Research Journal v54 n1 suppl p282S-306S. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED577026
Reviewed: December 2022
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for Dual language programs.
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Reading |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
-3 Years |
Full sample, Grade 5 (3 years before end of intervention in Grade 8);
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
|
|
|
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Reading |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
English learners, Grade 8;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Reading |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Native English speakers, Grade 8;
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
|
||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Reading |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample, Grade 8;
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
|
||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Reading |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
-3 Years |
Native English speakers, Grade 5 (3 years before end of intervention in Grade 8);
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
|
||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Reading |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
-5 Years |
English learners, Grade 3 (5 years before end of intervention in Grade 8);
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Reading |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
-2 Years |
Full sample, Grade 6 (2 years before end of intervention in Grade 8);
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Reading |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
-5 Years |
Native English speakers, Grade 3 (5 years before end of intervention in Grade 8);
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Reading |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
-5 Years |
Full sample, Grade 3 (5 years before end of intervention in Grade 8);
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Reading |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
-4 Years |
Full sample, Grade 4 (4 years before end of intervention in Grade 8);
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Reading |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
-1 Years |
Full sample, Grade 7 (1 year before end of intervention in Grade 8);
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Reading |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
-3 Years |
English learners, Grade 5 (3 years before end of intervention in Grade 8);
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Mathematics |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
-3 Years |
Full sample, Grade 5 (3 years before end of intervention in Grade 8);
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Mathematics |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Native English speakers, Grade 8;
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
|
||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Mathematics |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
-3 Years |
Native English speakers, Grade 5 (3 years before end of intervention in Grade 8);
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Mathematics |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample, Grade 8;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Mathematics |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
-4 Years |
Full sample, Grade 4 (4 years before end of intervention in Grade 8);
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Mathematics |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
-5 Years |
English learners, Grade 3 (5 years before end of intervention in Grade 8);
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Mathematics |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
-2 Years |
Full sample, Grade 6 (2 years before end of intervention in Grade 8);
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Mathematics |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
-5 Years |
Full sample, Grade 3 (5 years before end of intervention in Grade 8);
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Mathematics |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
-1 Years |
Full sample, Grade 7 (1 year before end of intervention in Grade 8);
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Mathematics |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
-5 Years |
Native English speakers, Grade 3 (5 years before end of intervention in Grade 8);
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Mathematics |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
-3 Years |
English learners, Grade 5 (3 years before end of intervention in Grade 8);
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Mathematics |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
English learners, Grade 8;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Science |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
-3 Years |
Full sample, Grade 5 (3 years before end of intervention in Grade 8);
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Science |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Native English speakers, Grade 8;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Science |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample, Grade 8;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Science |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
-3 Years |
Native English speakers, Grade 5 (3 years before end of intervention in Grade 8);
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Science |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
-3 Years |
English learners, Grade 5 (3 years before end of intervention in Grade 8);
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Oregon Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) -Science |
Dual language programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
English learners, Grade 8;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Asian | 14% | |
| Black | 6% | |
| Other or unknown | 26% | |
| White | 54% |
| Hispanic | 17% | |
| Other or unknown | 83% |
| Free or reduced price lunch (FRPL) | 26% | |
| No FRPL | 74% |
The study focused on students participating in dual language programs (DLPs) in elementary and middle schools in Portland Public Schools, an urban school district in Oregon.
In each of 7 years, families of kindergarten students applied for a spot in a dual language program through a lottery. They were either offered a spot in a dual language program or a spot in a traditional kindergarten. In total across the 7 years, 864 kindergarten students who applied to the lottery were offered a spot in a dual language program and 1,082 students were not offered a spot and formed the comparison group. A total of 1,625 kindergarten students were included in the study and followed through grade 8. This review focuses on the results for grade 5 at the end of elementary school. The main analytic sample included 846 students who were in the lottery between the fall of 2004 and 2008 (these students are those that reached grade 5 by the end of the study). The results for the smaller sample in grade 8 are considered supplemental given that fewer students reached grade 8 by the end of the study. Approximately 53% of the kindergarten students were female, 26% were eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 13% were identified as English learners, and 4% percent were identified as needing special education services. Approximately 54% were White, 14% were Asian, 6% were Black, and 26% were other or unknown race. Seventeen percent were Hispanic or Latino.
The intervention group included 11 elementary schools and 6 middle schools in which DLPs were implemented. There were two DLP models: a 50/50 one-way model and a 90/10 two-way model. Three elementary schools and 3 middle schools implemented the 50/50 one-way model. Eight elementary schools and 3 middle schools implemented the 90/10 two-way model. In the one-way DLP model, most students were native English speakers. In grades kindergarten through 5, half the instruction was offered in the partner language and half in English. This one-way model was implemented in Japanese, Mandarin, or Spanish. In the two-way model, about half the students were native English speakers, and the other half were speakers of the partner language. The percentage of instruction in the partner language was 90% in kindergarten and decreased 10 percentage points each year, until reaching 50% in grades 4 and 5. In grades kindergarten through 3, 75 to 100% of mathematics instruction, 56 to 100% of language arts instruction, and almost 100% of social studies instruction was provided in the partner language. In grades 4 and 5, 25% of mathematics instruction, 58% of language arts instruction, and 100% of social studies instruction was provided in the partner language. Spanish was the partner language in all but one school, which had Russian as the partner language. In middle school, the 50/50 one-way and 90/10 two-way models operated similarly: students received most instruction in English in both models. DLP students in grades 6 through 8 took about two classes per day in the partner language.
Students in the comparison group were randomly assigned to their neighborhood schools, which did not offer dual language programs. Instruction in these comparison schools was provided in English.
The district developed or purchased partner-language curricula for schools implementing DLPs.
In the case of multiple manuscripts that report on one study, the WWC selects one manuscript as the primary citation and lists other manuscripts that describe the study as additional sources.
Burkhauser, Susan; Steele, Jennifer L.; Li, Jennifer; Slater, Robert O.; Bacon, Michael; Miller, Trey. (2016). Partner-Language Learning Trajectories in Dual-Language Immersion: Evidence from an Urban District. Foreign Language Annals v49 n3 p415-433.
Steele, Jennifer L.; Slater, Robert O.; Li, Jennifer; Zamarro, Gema; Miller, Trey; Bacon, Michael. (2018). Dual-Language Immersion Education at Scale: An Analysis of Program Costs, Mechanisms, and Moderators. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, v40 n3 p420-445.
Reviewed: October 2017
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
English Language Classification |
Dual-language immersion programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 2 ITT;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
English Language Classification |
Dual-language immersion programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 1 ITT;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
English Language Classification |
Dual-language immersion programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 3 ITT;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
English Language Classification |
Dual-language immersion programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 4 ITT;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
English Language Classification |
Dual-language immersion programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 5 ITT;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
English Language Classification |
Dual-language immersion programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 6 ITT;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
English Language Classification |
Dual-language immersion programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 7 ITT;
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
|
|
|
English Language Classification |
Dual-language immersion programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 8 ITT;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Oregon Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) |
Dual-language immersion programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 8 ITT;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
Oregon Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) |
Dual-language immersion programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 4 ITT;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
Oregon Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) |
Dual-language immersion programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 5 ITT;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
Oregon Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) |
Dual-language immersion programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 6 ITT;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
Oregon Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) |
Dual-language immersion programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 3 ITT;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
Oregon Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) |
Dual-language immersion programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 7 ITT;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Oregon Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) |
Dual-language immersion programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 8 ITT;
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
|
|
|
Oregon Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) |
Dual-language immersion programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 5 ITT;
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
|
|
|
Oregon Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) |
Dual-language immersion programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 6 ITT;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
Oregon Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) |
Dual-language immersion programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 3 ITT;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
Oregon Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) |
Dual-language immersion programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 4 ITT;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
Oregon Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) |
Dual-language immersion programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 7 ITT;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Oregon Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) |
Dual-language immersion programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 8 ITT;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
Oregon Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) |
Dual-language immersion programs vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 5 ITT;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- |
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Asian | 14% | |
| Black | 6% | |
| White | 54% |
| Hispanic | 17% | |
| Not Hispanic or Latino | 83% |
This study took place in one large urban school district in Oregon (Portland Public Schools) and focused on at least 12 intervention schools to which students were assigned to dual-language immersion programs as compared to other district schools. Outcomes data were collected on cohorts of students enrolling between the fall term of the 2004 and 2010 school years, with outcomes collected through the 2013-14 school year.
In the analytic sample of 1,625 students, 53% were female (51% of intervention and 55% of comparison), 14% were Asian (18% of intervention and 12% of comparison), 6% were Black (5% of intervention and 6% of comparison), 17% were Hispanic (18% of intervention and 16% of comparison), and 54% were white (52% of intervention and 56% of comparison). In kindergarten, 4% were identified as special needs (5% of intervention and 3% of comparison), 4% were identified as gifted (4% in each), and 13% were identified as English learners (15% of intervention and 11% of comparison).
The study intervention is assignment to a dual-language immersion program as student's school assignment in kindergarten (regardless of which school a student actually attends). Immersion programs were provided in Spanish, Russian, Japanese, and Mandarin. Students participated in two types of dual-language immersion programs. A one-way model, for students who are mostly native English speakers, provides half of the instruction in the partner language (the non-English language) and half in English in elementary school. In middle school, students typically take two classes per day in the partner language, and in high school they take one class per day in the partner language. In a two-way model, more common for immersion languages that have a higher proportion of non-native English speakers, the percentage of the school day conducted in the partner language decreases over time (starting at about 90 percent in kindergarten and decreasing by about 10 percentage points each grade). This study examined the effect of the offer of a spot in a dual-language immersion program. Seventy-seven percent of the students in the analytic sample who were assigned to the intervention condition actually enrolled in a dual language program in kindergarten.
The comparison condition in the study was assignment to the regular instructional program in the student's default neighborhood school in kindergarten, rather than assignment to an immersion program. In spite of being assigned to the comparison condition, 27 percent of students in the analytic comparison group sample enrolled in a dual-language immersion program in kindergarten.
The study does not describe support for implementation. The dual-language immersion programs operated in the study school district since 1986.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).
Resources
Newsflash
Contact Us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube