A Synthesis of Research on Language of Reading Instruction for English Language Learners

Abstract

This article reviews experimental studies comparing bilingual and English-only reading programs for English language learners. The review method is best-evidence synthesis, which uses a systematic literature search, quantification of outcomes as effect sizes, and extensive discussion of individual studies that meet inclusion standards. A total of 17 studies met the inclusion standards. Among 13 studies focusing on elementary reading for Spanish-dominant students, 9 favored bilingual approaches on English reading measures, and 4 found no differences, for a median effect size of +0.45. Weighted by sample size, an effect size of +0.33 was computed, which is significantly different from zero (p < .05). One of two studies of heritage languages (French and Choctaw) and two secondary studies favored bilingual approaches. The review concludes that although the number of high-quality studies is small, existing evidence favors bilingual approaches, especially paired bilingual strategies that teach reading in the native language and English at different times each day. However, further research using longitudinal, randomized designs is needed to determine how best to ensure reading success for all English language learners.

Bilingualism and bilingual educational model suggestion for Turkey

“…In the light of the results obtained in the research, it is said literacy skills with well-developed mother tongue supports development of literacy in the second language, affects learning performance in a positive way, increases devotion to class, motivation and attendance to lesson (Cummins, 2001;Slavin & Cheung, 2005). In brief, it is thought that the interaction of the individual's mother and education languages with each other supplies the individual's cognitive and affective development.…”

“…The pedagogic, cultural and social dimensions of education in one or more languages are not discussed; the advantages and disadvantages of bilingual education aren't evaluated. In many researches, it was determined that bilingual education provides a positive contribution to the academic performance of students who speak minority languages (Slavin & Cheung, 2005) and decreases social and cultural inequalities (Cummins, 1991). In this regard, while subjects as education in mother tongue or bilingual education are discussed in Turkey, they should be evaluated in terms of various dimensions.…”

Language Instruction Educational Programs and Academic Achievement of Latino English Learners: Considerations for States with Changing Demographics

“…Reviews of empirical studies have favored approaches that incorporate students' native language (August and Shanahan 2006;Rolstad et al 2005;Slavin and Cheung 2005), approaches sometimes known as additive (Lambert 1985). Nevertheless, in the late 1990s and early 2000s, California, Arizona, and Massachusetts replaced bilingual education with Structured English Immersion (SEI) after proponents of SEI promulgated its superiority to effectively transition ELs to English fluency (e.g., Crawford 1997;Rossell 2002).…”

The Effects of Two Curriculum Interventions on the Academic Achievement of English Language Learners

“…comparison or control group, unclear definitions of the treatment, small sample sizes, flawed conceptual frameworks, and researcher bias (Conger 2010;Ramirez et al, 1991;Rolstad, Mahoney &Glass, 2008;Rossell 2003;Rossell & Baker, 1995;Slavin & Cheung, 2005). Several researchers have conducted large scale studies and meta-analyses to address these weaknesses in the literature.…”

“…Analyzing both a traditional English only ESL program and a DL program will address one of the main issues cited by researchers: that ELL treatments are evaluated in isolation without either a control group or a comparison group (Conger, 2010;Ramirez, Yuen, Ramey, Pasta, &Billings, 1991;Rolstad, Mahoney, & Glass, 2005;Rossell & Baker, 1996;Slavin & Cheung, 2005). Using a pre-test/posttest design addresses another gap in the research since most studies use only summative data to compare programs or measure the effects of an instructional program (Conger, 2010;Ramirez, Yuen et al, 1991;Rolstad et al, 2005;Rossell & Baker, 1996;Slavin & Cheung, 2005).…”