Effects of Dual-Language Immersion Programs on Student Achievement: Evidence from Lottery Data
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
-
examining846Students, gradesK-8
IES Performance Measure
Review Details
Reviewed: October 2017
- IES Performance Measure (findings for Dual-language immersion programs)
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.
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.
Findings
|
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 |
-- |
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
13% English language learners -
Female: 53%
Male: 47% -
Urban
-
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Oregon
-
Race Asian 14% Black 6% White 54% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 17% Not Hispanic or Latino 83%
Study Details
Setting
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.
Study sample
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).
Intervention Group
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.
Comparison Group
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.
Support for implementation
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).