Skip Navigation
archived information
Skip Navigation

Back to Ask A REL Archived Responses

REL Midwest Ask A REL Response

English Learners

May 2020


What research is available on the effectiveness of bilingual education teaching methodologies?


Following an established Regional Educational Laboratory (REL) Midwest protocol, we conducted a search for research reports, descriptive studies, and policy overviews on the effectiveness of bilingual education teaching methodologies. In particular, we focused on identifying resources related to the rate at which English learner students gain English proficiency and perform on state assessments. For details on the databases and sources, keywords, and selection criteria used to create this response, please see the Methods section at the end of this memo.

Below, we share a sampling of the publicly accessible resources on this topic. References are listed in alphabetical order, not necessarily in order of relevance. The search conducted is not comprehensive; other relevant references and resources may exist. For each reference, we provide an abstract, excerpt, or summary written by the study’s author or publisher. We have not evaluated the quality of these references, but provide them for your information only.

Research References

Acosta, J., Williams, J., III, & Hunt, B. (2019). Dual language program models and English language learners: An analysis of the literacy results from a 50/50 and a 90/10 model in two California schools. Journal of Educational Issues, 5(2), 1–12. Retrieved from

From the ERIC abstract: “This paper examines the literacy results of English language learners (ELLs) in two California schools following either the 50/50 or the 90/10 dual language (DL) program model. The purpose of this paper is to provide a literature review of dual language programs with an analysis of two schools’ websites and literacy assessment data in order to determine the effectiveness of each program model in establishing strong foundational literacy skills and fostering the prolonged academic success of ELLs. California provides various options for the bilingual education of its increasing immigrant population. Under the umbrella of bilingual education, dual language programs aim to provide students with instruction in two languages which will allow them to become fully bilingual and develop biliteracy skills. The intended purpose of biliteracy is for students to demonstrate reading and writing proficiency in both instructional languages. Although California implements a variety of dual language program models, this paper provides an overview and comparison of the 50/50 and 90/10 models as they are implemented in two California schools with similar demographics. This paper provides an analysis of the English Language Arts/literacy results of ELLs under both program models as depicted on the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress to determine which model is most effective in its literacy instruction of language minority students. The findings indicate that ELLs demonstrate higher levels of literacy proficiency under the 90/10 program model. These findings have implications for native language proficiency and the preservation of the mother tongue.”

August, D. (2018). Educating English language learners: A review of the latest research. American Educator, 42(3), 4–9. Retrieved from

From the ERIC abstract: “In this article, the author discusses the latest research on how to effectively teach English Language Learners (ELLs). This includes seven principles from a consensus report released by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The consensus report examines what the current research is about learning English from early childhood through high school, identifies effective practices for educators, and recommends steps policymakers can take to support high-quality educational outcomes for children and youth who are learning English. These principles and practices build on findings from previous reviews on the same topic as well as U.S. Department of Education best-evidence syntheses. While dual language programming for ELLs is effective for developing English proficiency and content-area knowledge in English—with the extra benefit of maintaining and developing students’ first language, validating their culture, and providing opportunities to enhance cross-cultural understanding—the article focuses on instruction delivered in English, an important component of dual language programs.”

August, D., & Shanahan, T. (Eds.) (2006). Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Retrieved from

From the ERIC abstract: “Teaching language-minority students to read and write well in English is an urgent challenge in the nation’s K-12 schools. Literacy in English is essential to achievement in every academic subject-and to educational and economic opportunities beyond schooling. Compounding this challenge are increasing numbers and diversity of language-minority students. Language-minority students who cannot read and write proficiently in English cannot participate fully in American schools, workplaces, or society. They face limited job opportunities and earning power. Nor are the consequences of low literacy attainment in English limited to individual impoverishment. U.S. economic competitiveness depends on workforce quality. Inadequate reading and writing proficiency in English relegates rapidly increasing language-minority populations to the sidelines, limiting the nation’s potential for economic competitiveness, innovation, productivity growth, and quality of life. The importance of this challenge led the U.S. Department of Education’s Institute of Education Sciences to create the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth. The formal charge to the panel was to identify, assess, and synthesize research on the education of language-minority children and youth with regard to literacy attainment and to produce a comprehensive report on this literature. ‘Developing Literacy in Second-Language Learners’ is the culmination of a 4-year process that began in the spring of 2002, when the Institute of Education Sciences staff selected a panel of 13 experts in second-language development, cognitive development, curriculum and instruction, assessment, and methodology to review the quantitative and qualitative research on the development of literacy in language-minority students. This national panel identified five research topics to investigate: (1) Development of literacy; (2) Cross-linguistic relationships; (3) Sociocultural contexts and literacy development; (4) Instruction and professional development; and (5) Student assessment. The National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth systematically and rigorously examined the research on acquiring literacy in a second language. Through this process, the panel learned what is known—and what is not yet known—about the complex process of learning to read and write in a second language. Policymakers and educators can use the panel’s findings to benchmark their own practices and infuse research-based instruction into literacy programs for language-minority students. Researchers can enrich this knowledge base by focusing on the specific gaps in our knowledge, which in the future will enable U.S. schools to better educate English-language learners in English literacy”

Baker, S., Lesaux, N., Jayanthi, M., Dimino, J., Proctor, C. P., Morris, J., et al. (2014). Teaching academic content and literacy to English learners in elementary and middle school (NCEE 2014-4012). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Retrieved from

From the ERIC abstract: “As English learners face the double demands of building knowledge of a second language while learning complex grade-level content, teachers must find effective ways to make challenging content comprehensible for students. This updated English learner practice guide, ‘Teaching Academic Content and Literacy to English Learners in Elementary and Middle School,’ provides four recommendations for teaching complex content to English learners while simultaneously building academic language and writing and oral language proficiency. This updated practice guide builds on the work of the first practice guide on English learners, expands the grade range from K-5 to K-8, and incorporates instruction in mathematics, science, and social studies, as well as literacy. With techniques found in this guide, teachers can effectively address English learners’ content and language needs by systematically—and at times explicitly—building students’ English language and literacy, while teaching history, mathematics, science, and other disciplines. The four recommendations include concrete guidance on: (1) Teaching English learners academic vocabulary intensively within the context of an engaging piece of informational text; (2) Helping English learners make sense of the content area material; (3) Supporting English learners as they learn to generate well-organized essays that are progressively longer and more complex; and (4) Providing struggling English learners with high-quality instructional interventions in reading and English language development. Like all other practice guides, this updated practice guide is based on research that has met the rigorous standards set by the What Works Clearinghouse, capitalizing on recently conducted research on content learning and academic language. The research base for this guide was identified through a comprehensive search for studies evaluating instructional practices for teaching academic content and literacy to English learners in K-8.”

Barrow, L., & Markman-Pithers, L. (2016). Supporting young English learners in the United States. The Future of Children, 26(2), 159–183. Retrieved from

From the ERIC abstract: “Simply put, children with poor English skills are less likely to succeed in school and beyond. What’s the best way to teach English to young children who aren’t native English speakers? In this article, Lisa Barrow and Lisa Markman-Pithers examine the state of English learner education in the United States and review the evidence behind different teaching methods. Models for teaching English learner children are often characterized as either English immersion (instruction only in English) or bilingual education (instruction occurs both in English and in the students’ native language), although each type includes several broad categories. Which form of instruction is most effective is a challenging question to answer, even with the most rigorous research strategies. This uncertainty stems in part from the fact that, in a debate with political overtones, researchers and policymakers don’t share a consensus on the ultimate goal of education for English learners. Is it to help English learner students become truly bilingual or to help them become proficient in the English language as quickly as possible? On the whole, Barrow and Markman-Pithers write, it’s still hard to reach firm conclusions regarding the overall effectiveness of different forms of instruction for English learners. Although some evidence tilts toward bilingual education, recent experiments suggest that English learners achieve about the same English proficiency whether they’re placed in bilingual or English immersion programs. But beyond learning English, bilingual programs may confer other advantages—for example, students in bilingual classes do better in their native languages. And because low-quality classroom instruction is associated with poorer outcomes no matter which method of instruction is used, the authors say that in many contexts, improving classroom quality may be the best way to help young English learners succeed.”

Carlo, M. S., Barr, C. D., August, D., Calderón, M., & Artzi, L. (2014). Language of instruction as a moderator for transfer of reading comprehension skills among Spanish-speaking English language learners. Bilingual Research Journal, 37(3), 287–310. Retrieved from

From the ERIC abstract: “This three-year longitudinal study investigated the role of language of instruction in moderating the relationships between initial levels of English oral language proficiency and Spanish reading comprehension and growth in English reading comprehension. The study followed Spanish-speaking English language learners in English-only literacy instruction, an early-exit bilingual program, or a late-exit bilingual program, from third through fifth grade. Students in all groups experienced significant growth in English reading comprehension. For the English-only group, initial levels of Spanish reading comprehension were not related to growth in English reading comprehension. However, for students in the two bilingually instructed groups, those who began with stronger Spanish reading comprehension skills grew faster in English reading comprehension than students without initial strong Spanish reading comprehension skills.”

Note: REL Midwest was unable to locate a link to the full-text version of this resource. Although REL Midwest tries to provide publicly available resources whenever possible, it was determined that this resource may be of interest to you. It may be found through university or public library systems.

Cheung, A. C. K., & Slavin, R. E. (2012). Effective reading programs for Spanish-dominant English language learners (ELLs) in the elementary grades: A synthesis of research. Review of Educational Research, 82(4), 351–395. Retrieved from

From the ERIC abstract: “This review synthesizes research on English reading outcomes of all types of programs for Spanish-dominant ELLs in elementary schools. It is divided into two major sections. One focuses on studies of language of instruction, and one on reading approaches for ELLs other than bilingual education. A total of 14 qualifying studies met the inclusion criteria for language of instruction. Though the overall findings indicate a positive but modest effect (ES=+0.19) in favor of bilingual education, the largest and longest-term evaluations, including the only multiyear randomized evaluation of transition bilingual education, did not find any differences in outcomes by the end of elementary school for children who were either taught in Spanish and transitioned to English or taught only in English. The review also identified some proven and promising whole-school and whole-class interventions, including Success for All, cooperative learning, Direct Instruction, and ELLA. In addition, programs that use phonetic small group or one-to-one tutoring have also shown positive effects for struggling readers. What is in common across the most promising interventions is their use of extensive professional development, coaching, and cooperative learning. The findings support a conclusion increasingly being made by researchers and policy makers concerned with optimal outcomes for ELLs and other language minority students: Quality of instruction is more important than language of instruction.”

Garza-Reyna, G. L. (2019). The academic preparedness of Latino students in dual language and transitional bilingual education programs. Journal of Latinos and Education, 18(4), 340–348. Retrieved from

From the ERIC abstract: “This causal-comparative study analyzed the college readiness of Latino ELLs educated in two different bilingual education programs, Transitional Bilingual (TB) and Dual Language (DL), by examining science and mathematics scores on the nationally recognized college entrance exam, the ACT. A statistically significant difference was found in the performance of the participants in the areas of mathematics and science via a series of t-tests. The descriptive statistics report that DL participants had a 29.6% higher probability in science and a 15.2% higher probability in mathematics of being college ready, per the Texas Uniform Admission Policy. Overall, DL participants outperformed TB participants.”

Note: REL Midwest was unable to locate a link to the full-text version of this resource. Although REL Midwest tries to provide publicly available resources whenever possible, it was determined that this resource may be of interest to you. It may be found through university or public library systems.

Goldenberg, C. (2013). Unlocking the research on English learners: What we know—and don’t yet know—about effective instruction. American Educator, 37(2), 4–11. Retrieved from

From the ERIC abstract: “Challenges are bound to arise as the vast majority of states strive to help English learners meet the Common Core State Standards. In calling for students to read complex texts, these new standards place an even greater emphasis on content knowledge and literacy skills than prior state standards. This review of available research will help educators bolster the efforts of English learners to understand more-demanding academic content as they also learn English.”

Hong, G., Gagne, J., & West, A. (2014). What is the optimal length of an ELL program? Paper presented at the Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness Conference, Washington, DC. Retrieved from

From the ERIC abstract: “This study focuses on assessing the contribution of ELL services to Spanish-speaking students’ mathematics learning in elementary schools. ELL students tend to have lower average math achievement at school entry and throughout elementary school. The term ‘ELL services’ encompasses English-as-a-second-language (ESL) programs, bilingual education programs, and other types of specialized programs for ELL students. Such students are entitled to support in the classroom until they achieve the level of English proficiency needed for full participation. Data were collected using outcome measures from math direct assessment scores. The assessment was administered in English if a student was proficient in English and was administered in Spanish if the student was proficient in Spanish but not in English. Study results indicate four or more years of ELL services on average are necessary to enable Spanish-speaking elementary students to become proficient in academic English essential for math learning. Yet a one-size-for-all recipe is practically naïve and often wasteful. Identifying the optimal length of ELL services for subpopulations of students therefore has immediate implications for ELL resource allocation.”

Martinez-Wenzl, M., Pérez, K., & Gándara, P. (2012). Is Arizona’s approach to educating its ELs superior to other forms of instruction?. Teachers College Record, 114(9), 1–32. Retrieved from

From the ERIC abstract: “Background: In the ‘Horne v Flores’ Supreme Court decision of June 25, 2009, the Court wrote that one basis for finding Arizona in compliance with federal law regarding the education of its English learners was that the state had adopted a ‘significantly more effective’ than bilingual education instructional model for EL students—Structured English Immersion (SEI). Purpose: This paper reviews the extant research on SEI, its definitions, origins, and its effectiveness, particularly in contrast to other instructional strategies. This paper asks, Does the research bear out the Court’s conclusion? What is the evidence that Arizona’s program of SEI is really superior to other approaches, including bilingual or dual language education? How are Arizona’s EL students faring under this ‘significantly more effective’ instructional program? Research Design: Data on the relative effectiveness of SEI are drawn from a comprehensive review of the literature. Analysis of public documents, particularly records from the Arizona English Language Learners Task Force, which was charged with selecting a research-based instructional program for English learners. Drawing from a recent ethnographic study and student achievement data, we examine the impact of structured English immersion programs on English learners in Arizona thus far, beginning with achievement outcomes. Conclusions/Recommendations: There is no research basis for the Court’s statement the SEI is ‘significantly more effective;’ at best SEI is no better or no worse than other instructional strategies, particularly bilingual instruction, when they are both well implemented. However, SEI as implemented in Arizona carries serious negative consequences for EL students stemming from the excessive amount of time dedicated to a sole focus on English instruction, the de-emphasis on grade level academic curriculum, the discrete skills approach it employs, and the segregation of EL students from mainstream peers. Moreover, the paper argues that there are, in fact, strategies that can ameliorate these problems as well as provide an additive, rather than a subtractive, educational experience for English learner and mainstream students alike.”

Note: REL Midwest was unable to locate a link to the full-text version of this resource. Although REL Midwest tries to provide publicly available resources whenever possible, it was determined that this resource may be of interest to you. It may be found through university or public library systems.

Perez, M., & Kennedy, A. (2014). How do changes in the language of instruction and classroom composition affect English learners? Paper presented at the Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness Conference, Washington, DC. Retrieved from

From the ERIC abstract: “The number of students that live in families where a language other than English is spoken has risen relative to the English-only households in the United States over the last 25 years. These students face the dual challenge of mastering English while acquiring academic skills and knowledge. The education of these students has been shaped by several national- and state- level legal decisions of the past that have required schools to take action by providing services to help linguistic minority students overcome language barriers that impede their equal participation. Those services most often take the form of either an ‘English-immersion’ approach, in which students receive all instruction in English, or employ a ‘bilingual model’ where students are initially taught in some combination of English and their native language and eventually transfer to English-only classrooms. The question of which model of instruction is more ‘effective’ has been notoriously difficult to answer and remains an open and controversial debate. The authors of this article take advantage of a policy passed in California that changed the default instructional program for ELs . Prior to 1998, most ELs were placed into bilingual education. This state-level legislation forced schools to move students to move to a different instructional setting—a change that would not had been chosen otherwise—providing a natural experiment opportunity to evaluate the effect of bilingual education versus English immersion on the academic achievement of ELs. Also analyzed is how changes in the composition of the classroom affect the academic achievement of students. Findings indicate that the achievement scores of ELs declined by the switch from bilingual education to English immersion programs, with the exception of grades 2-3 reading scores. The authors also found that there is a beneficial effect of placing ELs into classrooms with more native English speakers.”

Ríos, C., & Castillón, C. (2018). Bilingual literacy development: Trends and critical issues. International Research and Review, 7(2), 85–96. Retrieved from

From the ERIC abstract: “This article, a literature review of current trends in bi-literacy development and bilingual education examines published research dedicated to exploring the literacy strengths in the primary language that immigrant children bring to the classroom, and the potential of these children for becoming bilingual and bi-literate. The focus of the review is on research concentrated on school children who are developing literacy in two languages or have become literate in Spanish before starting school in an American classroom. The article identifies gaps in the literature and areas that deserve further research.”

Tazi, Z. (2014). Ready for “la escuela”: School readiness and the languages of instruction in kindergarten. Journal of Multilingual Education Research, 5(3), 11–31. Retrieved from

From the ERIC abstract: “School readiness has captured our attention. Across the country, policymakers, politicians, advocates, educators, and community members are forging alliances to increase children’s access to the kinds of early childhood experiences that will best prepare them for success in school. At the same time, census figures indicate that the child population in the United States is changing and young Latinos account for most of that change (O’Hare, 2011). As a population, Latinos experience greater rates of poverty and other risk factors that adversely affect school readiness (Ackerman & Tazi, 2015). In addition, many Latino children enter kindergarten speaking little or no English (Gormley, 2008). Once in kindergarten, many Latinos encounter differences in the language or languages of instruction by virtue of their status as ‘English Language Learners.’ The study described in this article looked at the patterns of school readiness on the ‘Early Development Instrument’ (EDI) in one New York school district that offered both bilingual instruction (Transitional Bilingual Education and Dual Language) and English only to Spanish-speaking kindergartners. The EDI surveys kindergarten teachers’ perceptions about children’s school readiness for First Grade across five developmental domains. Children who received bilingual instruction in kindergarten (n = 84) had higher ratings in three of the five developmental domains and were nearly four times more likely to be rated as ‘Very Ready for School’ in four or more domains than the group that received English only instruction (n = 74). All the children may have benefitted from attending kindergarten, but these findings suggest that bilingual instruction for Spanish-speaking children was a more effective approach to enhance their school readiness.”

Thompson, K. D. (2017). English learners’ time to reclassification: An analysis. Educational Policy, 31(3), 330–363. Retrieved from

From the ERIC abstract: “This study uses 9 years of longitudinal, student-level data from the Los Angeles Unified School District to provide updated, empirically-based estimates of the time necessary for English learners (ELs) to become reclassified as proficient in English, as well as factors associated with variation in time to reclassification. To illustrate how different aspects of proficiency develop, estimates of the time necessary for ELs to attain six separate reclassification criteria are provided. Findings corroborate prior cross-sectional research suggesting that the development of full proficiency in a second language typically takes 4 to 7 years. However, after 9 years in the district, approximately one-fourth of students had not been reclassified. There appears to be a ‘reclassification window’ during the upper elementary grades, and students not reclassified by this point in time become less likely ever to do so. Findings illustrate the crucial role that students’ initial academic language proficiencies, both in English and their primary language, play in their likelihood of reclassification. This work has implications for the design of next-generation assessment and accountability systems, as well as for instructional practices.”

Note: REL Midwest was unable to locate a link to the full-text version of this resource. Although REL Midwest tries to provide publicly available resources whenever possible, it was determined that this resource may be of interest to you. It may be found through university or public library systems.

Umansky, I. M., & Reardon, S. F. (2014). Reclassification patterns among Latino English learner students in bilingual, dual immersion, and English immersion classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 51(5), 879–912. Retrieved from

From the ERIC abstract: “Schools are under increasing pressure to reclassify their English learner (EL) students to ‘fluent English proficient’ status as quickly as possible. This article examines timing to reclassification among Latino ELs in four distinct linguistic instructional environments: English immersion, transitional bilingual, maintenance bilingual, and dual immersion. Using hazard analysis and 12 years of data from a large school district, the study investigates whether reclassification timing, patterns, or barriers differ by linguistic program. We find that Latino EL students enrolled in two-language programs are reclassified at a slower pace in elementary school but have higher overall reclassification, English proficiency, and academic threshold passage by the end of high school. We discuss the implications of these findings for accountability policies and educational opportunities in EL programs.”

Umansky, I. M., Valentino, R. A., & Reardon, S. F. (2015). The promise of bilingual and dual immersion education (CEPA Working Paper No. 15-11). Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Education Policy Analysis. Retrieved from

From the ERIC abstract: “One in five school-age children in the U.S. speaks a language other than English at home (Zeigler & Camarota, 2014). Roughly half of these emerging bilingual students (Garcia, 2009) are classified as English learners (ELs) when they enter school, meaning they do not meet state or district criteria for English proficiency (NCES, 2015). As the fastest growing official subgroup of students, ELs are transforming schools across the country, in cities as well as suburban and rural communities; in traditional immigrant-receiving areas as well as in new immigrant destinations. Emerging bilingual students, and the subset of them that are classified as ELs, bring with them important linguistic, social, cultural, and intellectual assets that can enrich and strengthen education for all students (González, Moll & Amanti, 2013). But questions persist around how best to ensure that students who are not yet proficient in English can thrive in school, academically, linguistically, and socially. Should ELs be taught in bilingual classrooms that promote fluency in their home language while ensuring access to core academic content and developing English language skills? Or should they be taught in English immersion classrooms in order to maximize exposure to English? How do we ensure that emerging bilingual students develop both English proficiency and strong academic skills, while maintaining and developing literacy in their home language? How can schools best build on ELs’ linguistic assets and support their educational needs?”

Valentino, R. A., & Reardon, S. F. (2015). Effectiveness of four instructional programs designed to serve English learners: Variation by ethnicity and initial English proficiency. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 37(4), 612–637. Retrieved from

From the ERIC abstract: “This paper investigates the differences in academic achievement trajectories from elementary through middle school among English Learner (EL) students in four different instructional programs: English Immersion (EI), Transitional Bilingual (TB), Developmental Bilingual (DB), and Dual Immersion (DI). Comparing students with the same parental preferences but who attend different programs, we find that the English Language Arts (ELA) test scores of ELs in all bilingual programs grow at least as fast as, if not faster than, those in EI. The same is generally true of math, with the exception of DB programs, where average student scores grow more slowly than those of students in EI. Furthermore, Latino ELs perform better longitudinally in both subjects when in bilingual programs than their Chinese EL counterparts. We find no differences in program effectiveness by ELs’ initial English proficiency.”

Additional Organizations to Consult

Institute of Education Sciences, Regional Educational Laboratory Program, English Learners –

From the website: “English Learner students attend schools across the United States and RELs work in partnership with states and districts to 1) conduct original high quality research, 2) provide training, coaching, and technical support, and 3) disseminate high quality research findings about the achievement and trajectory of English Learners. A selected list of resources developed by the REL Program appears below.”


Keywords and Search Strings

The following keywords and search strings were used to search the reference databases and other sources:

  • “English language learners” “bilingual education” “instructional effectiveness”

  • “English language learners” “bilingual education” “teaching methods”

  • “English language learners” “bilingual education” “native language”

  • “English language learners” “program length”

  • “English language learners” reclassification

Databases and Search Engines

We searched ERIC for relevant resources. ERIC is a free online library of more than 1.6 million citations of education research sponsored by the Institute of Education Sciences (IES). Additionally, we searched IES and Google Scholar.

Reference Search and Selection Criteria

When we were searching and reviewing resources, we considered the following criteria:

  • Date of the publication: References and resources published over the last 15 years, from 2005 to present, were included in the search and review.

  • Search priorities of reference sources: Search priority is given to study reports, briefs, and other documents that are published or reviewed by IES and other federal or federally funded organizations.

  • Methodology: We used the following methodological priorities/considerations in the review and selection of the references: (a) study types—randomized control trials, quasi-experiments, surveys, descriptive data analyses, literature reviews, policy briefs, and so forth, generally in this order, (b) target population, samples (e.g., representativeness of the target population, sample size, volunteered or randomly selected), study duration, and so forth, and (c) limitations, generalizability of the findings and conclusions, and so forth.
This memorandum is one in a series of quick-turnaround responses to specific questions posed by educational stakeholders in the Midwest Region (Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin), which is served by the Regional Educational Laboratory (REL Midwest) at American Institutes for Research. This memorandum was prepared by REL Midwest under a contract with the U.S. Department of Education’s Institute of Education Sciences (IES), Contract ED-IES-17-C-0007, administered by American Institutes for Research. Its content does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of IES or the U.S. Department of Education nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.